Document of

The World Bank

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Report No: PAD1992

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION

PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT

ON A
PROPOSED CREDIT

IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 148.8 MILLION

(US$200 MILLION EQUIVALENT)

TO THE

FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA

FOR A
MULTI-SECTORAL CRISIS RECOVERY PROJECT FOR NORTH EASTERN NIGERIA
March 7, 2017

Social, Urban, Rural and Resilience Global Practice

Africa Region

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their
official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.
 CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS

(Exchange Rate Effective December 30, 2016)

Currency Unit = Nigerian Naira (NGN)

NGN 304.20 = US$1
US$1.3443 = SDR 1

FISCAL YEAR
January 1–December 31

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

AF Additional Financing
AfDB African Development Bank
ARAP Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan
BAY Borno, Adamawa, and Yobe
BH Boko Haram
CERC Contingent Emergency Response Component
CSDP Community and Social Development Project
CSO Civil Society Organization
DA Designated Account
DFID Department for International Development
E&S Environmental and Social
EA Environmental Assessment
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment
ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan
ESSU Environment and Social Safeguards Unit
EU European Union
FADAMA III Third National Fadama Development Project
FM Financial Management
FMBNP Federal Ministry of Budget and National Planning
FME Federal Ministry of Environment
FMoF Federal Ministry of Finance
FPFMD Federal Project Financial Management Division
FPM Financial Procedures Manual
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GIZ German Agency for International Cooperation
GoN Government of Nigeria
GPS Global Positioning System
GRM Grievance Redress Mechanism
GRS Grievance Redress Service
IDP Internally Displaced People
IFR Interim Financial Report
IRM Immediate Response Mechanism
IsDB Islamic Development Bank
ISP Implementation Support Plan
LGA Local Government Authority
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MCRP Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project
MDA Line Ministry/Department/Agency
MDB Multilateral Development Bank
MTR Midterm Review
NE North East
NEDC North East Development Commission
NEMA National Emergency Management Authority
NGO Nongovernmental Organization
NPHCDA National Primary Health Care Development Agency
NSHIP Nigeria State Health Investment Program
OAG Office of Account General
OAGF Office of Account General of the Federation
OP Operational Policy
PCNI Presidential Committee for the North East Initiative
PCU Project Coordination Unit
PDO Project Development Objective
PFMU Project Financial Management Unit
PIM Project Implementation Manual
PINE Presidential Initiative for the North East
PMC Project Management Consultancy
PP Procurement Plan
PPE Personal Protective Equipment
PPSD Project Procurement Strategy for Development
RAMP Rural Access and Mobility Project
RAP Resettlement Action Plan
RPBA Recovery and Peace Building Assessment
SAP Safeguards Action Plan
SEPIP State Education Program Investment Project
SOE State-owned Enterprise
SPARS Strategic Plans of Actions for Recovery and Stabilization
SWB State Water Board
TA Technical Assistance
ToR Terms of Reference
TPMA Third-party Monitoring Agent
UN United Nations
UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
USAID United States Agency for International Development
WASH Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene
WB World Bank
YESSO Youth Employment and Social Support Operation

Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop

Country Director: Rachid Benmessaoud
Senior Global Practice Director: Ede Jorge Ijjasz-Vasquez
Practice Manager: Meskerem Brhane
Task Team Leader(s): Ayaz Parvez, Paula Andrea Rossiasco Uscategui
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

BASIC INFORMATION

Is this a regionally tagged project? Country(ies) Lending Instrument

No Investment Project Financing

[✔] Situations of Urgent Need of Assistance or Capacity Constraints

[ ] Financial Intermediaries
[ ] Series of Projects

Approval Date Closing Date Environmental Assessment Category

20-Mar-2017 31-May-2021 B - Partial Assessment

Bank/IFC Collaboration
No

Proposed Development Objective(s)

The objectives of the Project are to: (a) support the Government of Nigeria towards rehabilitating and improving
critical service delivery infrastructure, improve the livelihood opportunities of conflict and displacement-affected
communities, and strengthen social cohesion in the North East Participating States of Borno, Yobe and Adamawa;
and (b) in the event of an Eligible Crisis or Emergency, to provide immediate and effective response to said Eligible
Crisis or Emergency.

Components

Component Name Cost (US$, millions)

Strengthening Peace Building, Stability and Social Cohesion 30.00

Infrastructure Rehabilitation and Service Delivery Restoration & Improvement 150.00

Technical Assistance and Project Management Support 20.00

Contingent Emergency Response 0.00

Page 1 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Organizations

Borrower : Federal Ministry of Finance

Implementing Agency : State Governments of Borno, Adamawa and Yobe

Safeguards Deferral OPSTABLE

Will the review of safeguards be deferred?

[✔ ] Yes [ ] No

PROJECT FINANCING DATA (IN USD MILLION)

[ ] [ ] IBRD [ ✔ ] IDA Credit [ ] IDA Grant [ ] Trust [ ]

Counterpart Funds Parallel
Funding [ ] Crisis Response [ ] Crisis Response Financing
Window Window

[ ] Regional Projects [ ] Regional Projects

Window Window

Total Project Cost: Total Financing: Financing Gap:

200.00 200.00 0.00

Of Which Bank Financing (IBRD/IDA):

200.00

Financing (in US$, millions)

Financing Source Amount

International Development Association (IDA) 200.00

Total 200.00

Page 2 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Expected Disbursements (in US$, millions)

Fiscal Year 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Annual 2.00 43.00 50.00 55.00 50.00

Cumulative 2.00 45.00 95.00 150.00 200.00

INSTITUTIONAL DATA

Practice Area (Lead)

Social, Urban, Rural and Resilience Global Practice

Contributing Practice Areas

Education
Governance
Health, Nutrition & Population
Transport & ICT
Water

Climate Change and Disaster Screening

This operation has been screened for short and long-term climate change and disaster risks

Gender Tag

Does the project plan to undertake any of the following?

a. Analysis to identify Project-relevant gaps between males and females, especially in light of country gaps identified
through SCD and CPF
Yes

b. Specific action(s) to address the gender gaps identified in (a) and/or to improve women or men's empowerment
Yes

c. Include Indicators in results framework to monitor outcomes from actions identified in (b)
Yes

SYSTEMATIC OPERATIONS RISK-RATING TOOL (SORT)

Page 3 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Risk Category Rating

1. Political and Governance  High
2. Macroeconomic  Substantial
3. Sector Strategies and Policies  Moderate
4. Technical Design of Project or Program  Substantial
5. Institutional Capacity for Implementation and Sustainability  High
6. Fiduciary  High
7. Environment and Social  Moderate
8. Stakeholders  Moderate
9. Other  High
10. Overall  High

COMPLIANCE

Policy
Does the project depart from the CPF in content or in other significant respects?
[ ] Yes [✔] No

Does the project require any waivers of Bank policies?

[ ] Yes [✔] No

Safeguard Policies Triggered by the Project Yes No

Environmental Assessment OP/BP 4.01 ✔

Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 ✔
Forests OP/BP 4.36 ✔
Pest Management OP 4.09 ✔
Physical Cultural Resources OP/BP 4.11 ✔
Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 ✔
Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP 4.12 ✔
Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37 ✔
Projects on International Waterways OP/BP 7.50 ✔

Page 4 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP 7.60 ✔

Legal Covenants

Sections and Description

Prepare Project Implementation Manual
Due Date: 18-August-2017
Description of Covenant:
No later than two (2) months after the Effective Date, the Borrower shall, and shall cause each Participating State,
to adopt the Project Implementation Manual (PIM) in form and substance satisfactory to the World Bank, and,
thereafter carry out the Project and cause each Participating State to carry out its respective activities under the
Project in accordance with the provisions of the PIM , which shall include: (a) institutional coordination and day-
to-day execution of the Project; (b) Project budgeting, disbursement and financial management; (c) procurement;
(d) environmental and social safeguard guidelines; (e) monitoring, evaluation, reporting and communication; and
(f) such other administrative, financial, technical, and organizational arrangements and procedures as shall be
required for the Project.

Sections and Description

Effect institutional arrangements
Due Date: 18-July-2017
Description of Covenant:
The Borrower shall cause each Participating State to establish, not later than one (1) month after the Effective
Date, and thereafter maintain, throughout the implementation of the Project, a state project coordination unit
(PCU) for said Participating State with functions, staffing and resources satisfactory to the World Bank. The
Borrower shall cause each Participating State to ensure that the respective PCU shall be responsible for the
administration of overall planning, coordination of the carrying out of activities under its respective activities of
the Project, the technical, fiduciary (i.e., procurement and financial management), environmental and social
safeguards compliance, monitoring, evaluation, reporting and communication of the activities under the Project in
the corresponding Participating State.

Conditions

Type Description
Disbursement Financing to Participating States
Due Date: Continuous
Description of Condition:
No withdrawal shall be made under Components (1), (2) and (3) for payments to
any Participating State until and unless: (a) the respective Participating State has
entered into a Subsidiary Agreement with the Borrower; and (b) the World Bank

Page 5 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

has received an opinion satisfactory to it establishing that said Subsidiary

Agreement has been duly authorized or ratified by the Borrower and the
respective Participating State and is legally binding upon the Borrower and the
respective Participating State in accordance with its terms.

Type Description
Disbursement Contingent Emergency Response Expenditures
Due Date: Continuous
Description of Condition:
No withdrawal shall be made under Component (4) for Emergency Expenditures
unless and until the World Bank is satisfied, and has notified the Borrower of its
satisfaction, that all of the following conditions have been met in respect of said
Emergency Expenditures:
(a) the Borrower has determined that an Eligible Crisis or Emergency has
occurred, has furnished to the World Bank a request to include said Eligible Crisis
or Emergency under Component (4) of the Project in order to respond to said
Eligible Crisis or Emergency, and the World Bank has agreed with such
determination, accepted said request and notified the Borrower thereof;
(b) the Borrower has prepared and disclosed all safeguards instruments
required for said Eligible Crisis or Emergency, and the Borrower has implemented
any actions which are required to be taken under said instruments; and
(c) the Borrower has adopted the Emergency Response Operations Manual in
form, substance and manner acceptable to the World Bank so as to be appropriate
for the inclusion and implementation of Component (4) of the Project.

PROJECT TEAM

Bank Staff
Name Role Specialization Unit
Team Leader(ADM
Ayaz Parvez GSU13
Responsible)
Paula Andrea Rossiasco
Team Leader GSU01
Uscategui
Procurement Specialist(ADM
Daniel Rikichi Kajang GGO01
Responsible)
Akinrinmola Oyenuga Financial Management
GGO25
Akinyele Specialist
Aisha Garba Mohammed Team Member GED13
Alexander Agosti Team Member GSU13

Page 6 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Amos Abu Safeguards Specialist GEN07

Ana Besarabic Bennett Team Member GHNGE
Atishay Abbhi Team Member GSU13
Chalida Chararnsuk Team Member GSU13
Christoph Pusch Team Member GSU18
Chuka J Agu Team Member AFCW2
Gerard Joseph Mataban
Team Member LEGDF
Jumamil
Joyce Chukwuma-
Team Member AFCW2
Nwachukwu
Khairy Al-Jamal Team Member GWA08
Luis M. Schwarz Team Member WFALN
Maria Angelica Sotomayor
Team Member GSU13
Araujo
Michael Gboyega Ilesanmi Safeguards Specialist GSU01
Olatunji Ahmed Team Member GTI07
Omezikam Eze Onuoha Team Member GTI01
Qingyun Shen Team Member GSU19
Robert Curle Jesse Reid Team Member GSU19
Roland Lomme Team Member GGO27
Rosa Maria Martinez Team Member GSU01
Ruth Adetola Adeleru Team Member AFCW2
Shahrzad Mobasher Fard Team Member GSU19
Tesfamichael Nahusenay
Team Member GTI07
Mitiku
Veronique Morin Team Member GSU19
Zoe Kolovou Counsel LEGAM

Extended Team
Name Title Organization Location

Page 7 of 121
The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Page 8 of 121
The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Federal Republic of Nigeria

Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. STRATEGIC CONTEXT .................................................................................................... 11

A. Country Context ............................................................................................................... 11
B. Sectoral and Institutional Context ................................................................................... 14
C. Higher-level Objectives to which the Project Contributes .............................................. 17
II. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES ............................................................................ 18
A. PDO ................................................................................................................................... 18
B. Project Beneficiaries ......................................................................................................... 18
C. PDO-level Results Indicators ............................................................................................ 19
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION.................................................................................................. 19
A. Project Components ......................................................................................................... 21
B. Project Cost and Financing ............................................................................................... 23
C. Lessons Learned and Reflected in the Project Design ..................................................... 24
IV. IMPLEMENTATION........................................................................................................ 25
A. Institutional and Implementation Arrangements ........................................................... 25
B. Results Monitoring and Evaluation ................................................................................. 27
C. Sustainability .................................................................................................................... 28
D. Role of Partners ................................................................................................................ 29
V. KEY RISKS ..................................................................................................................... 30
A. Overall Risk Rating and Explanation of Key Risks ........................................................... 30
VI. APPRAISAL SUMMARY .................................................................................................. 33
A. Economic and Financial (if applicable) Analysis .............................................................. 33
B. Technical ........................................................................................................................... 34
C. Financial Management ..................................................................................................... 35
D. Procurement ..................................................................................................................... 35
E. Social (including Safeguards) ............................................................................................ 36
F. Environment (including Safeguards) ................................................................................ 37
G. Other Safeguard Policies (if applicable) .......................................................................... 38

Page 9 of 121
The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

H. World Bank Grievance Redress ....................................................................................... 38

VII. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND MONITORING ................................................................... 39
ANNEX 1: DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION ......................................................................... 50
ANNEX 2: IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS .................................................................... 63
ANNEX 3: IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT PLAN .................................................................... 100
ANNEX 4: ECONOMIC ANALYSIS......................................................................................... 106
ANNEX 5: COMPLEMENTARITY WITH OTHER INTERVENTIONS IN NORTH EAST NIGERIA ..... 109
ANNEX 6: MAP OF THE TARGET STATES IN NIGERIA ........................................................... 121

Page 10 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

I. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

A. Country Context

1. The Buhari administration took office in May 2015 in the context of a severely weakened
economy, large infrastructure gaps, and poor service delivery that accumulated over the years. Three
major economic transitions—the slowdown and rebalancing of the global economy; the lower
commodity prices, especially the sharp drop in oil prices; and the tightening financial conditions and risk
aversion of international investors—have had a significant impact on the Nigerian economy. These
shocks have compounded an already challenging development environment. Due to declining oil
revenues, revenues declined from 10.5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2014 to 7.8 percent
of GDP—with an even more negative outlook for 2016. In 2015, the collapse of Nigeria’s terms of trade
resulted in Nigeria being for the first time in decades a net importer of savings from the rest of the
world. From generating an average current account surplus of 3.5 percent of GDP in 2012–2014, the
current account deficit reached around 3 percent in 2015. Inflation has been accelerating and reached
16.5 percent in June 2016 (year on year). In this context, GDP growth fell from 6.3 percent in 2014 to 2.7
percent in 2015 and further into negative territory in 2016. The economy is now in recession.

2. The new administration also took office in the context of pronounced security challenges. The
Boko Haram (BH) insurgency in the North East (NE) has proved a considerable challenge for the
country’s security forces and has led to the loss of more than 20,000 lives and the displacement of 2
million people and has negatively affected the livelihoods of 6 million more people. The impact of the
insurgency has transcended the geographic borders of the country, imposing economic and security
costs on neighboring countries. In parallel, the attacks by Fulani herdsmen on farmers have intensified
as they move south across Nigeria’s ‘middle belt’ as the Sahel encroaches their pastures. Other security
challenges include crime and kidnapping, particularly in urban areas; attacks on oil and gas
infrastructure; and threats of renewed militancy in the Niger Delta. There is also some simmering
discontent in Biafra in the South East. At the root of the security challenges are high levels of poverty,
joblessness, growing numbers of frustrated youth, and natural resources degradation and climate
stressors.

3. Nigeria suffers from severe subnational disparities, with the NE and North West (NW) regions
lagging behind in a number of key indicators. Compared to the wealthier southern states that benefit
from oil production, the NE and NW are heavily dependent on agriculture, with roughly 80 percent of
the population engaged in farming. Over the past two decades, the pace of development of the NE has
been slower than the rest of the country with persistently lower education levels and limited access to
healthcare and other basic services and infrastructure.

4. While the total number of the poor in the south declined by almost 6 million since 2004, it
increased by almost 7 million in the north. The number of the poor nationwide is thus the outcome of
two completely opposite trends: substantial poverty reduction in the southern zones (except for the
South East) and a substantial increase in poverty in two of the three northern zones; in North Central,
the number of the poor decreased by about a million. The number of the poor residing in the NE and
North West was 29 million in 2004, and it had risen to 37 million by 2013 (Figure 1). These additional 8
million poor people were equally split between the NE, the area most affected by the recent conflict,

Page 11 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

and the North West. Among the southern zones, the South West benefited from the lion’s share of
poverty reduction, 4 million fewer poor.

Figure 1. Poverty Incidence by Region in Nigeria

Source: World Bank. 2016. Poverty Reduction in Nigeria in the Last Decade.

5. President Buhari has acted decisively to tackle the challenges of insecurity. Steps have been
taken to build a more efficient and effective coalition with Nigeria’s neighbors against the BH. An
offensive in late 2015 drove the BH from much of the territory it held in the NE. Since then, the militants
have relied on terrorist attacks against civilians, including suicide bombings. The Government’s response
to the crisis in the NE has focused largely on security, on humanitarian support, and, to a lesser degree,
on restoring service delivery. The critical and immediate challenge facing the Government is to secure
peace and stability, following its military gains, by ensuring the welfare of internally displaced persons
(IDP), the host communities, and the population in the NE.

6. The Government of Nigeria (GoN) seeks to implement stabilization and recovery measures
addressing the medium- and long-term development agenda, while making parallel efforts to combat
corruption. The stabilization and recovery measures focus on (a) restoring macroeconomic resilience
and growth and (b) improving security in the NE and Niger Delta. Restoring macroeconomic resilience
and growth will be critical not only for Nigeria but also for West Africa as a whole, given the strong links
between Nigeria and the neighboring countries in trade and capital flows. The medium- and long-term
agenda is to promote job creation and build an economy led by a strong and responsible private sector;
provide physical and economic infrastructure; enact social policies that will increase opportunities for
the poor and vulnerable; and address climate change and other stressors.

Situation of Urgent Need of Assistance

7. Since 2009, the NE has been affected by the BH conflict and the resulting military operations,
affecting the lives of over 15 million people. The ongoing conflict takes place in a setting characterized
by deep poverty, poor social and economic conditions, lack of infrastructure and basic services, poor
governance, weak institutions, and high income inequality. All these complex and long-standing factors
contributed to the emergence of the conflict by stoking frustration and a sense of injustice among

Page 12 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

citizens. A number of incidents acted as triggers, while the abovementioned structural drivers provided
fertile ground for the emergence and rapid spread of violence. The BH conflict was characterized by
extreme levels of violence and destruction. The fighting became particularly intense in 2014, leading to
the loss of at least 20,000 lives and the displacement of 2.5 million people internally and across
international borders. About 84 percent of the forcibly displaced people have remained within the three
conflict-affected states of Borno, Adamawa, and Yobe (BAY), while 8 percent are scattered through
northern and central Nigeria, and the remaining 8 percent are in neighboring countries such as
Cameroon, Chad, and Niger.1

8. The BH conflict has triggered an acute humanitarian and forced displacement crisis, with
devastating social and economic impacts on the population, further deepening poverty and fragility in
the NE region. Across the six states of the NE—Borno, Yobe, Adamawa, Bauchi, Gombe, and Taraba—
there has been an estimated infrastructure damage of US$9.2 billion and accumulated output losses of
US$8.3 billion.2 Such extensive damage exacerbated the existing deficit in socioeconomic development
in the NE, further straining a vulnerable population already among the poorest in the country. Social
cohesion was deeply eroded, with social interaction among various social groups and ethnicities
becoming increasingly challenging in an atmosphere characterized by mistrust, property and
interpersonal disputes, and retaliation. Conflict and insecurity have also affected regular economic
activities, bringing the already weak local economies to a virtual standstill. In the most directly and
heavily affected BAY states, hundreds of thousands of households are living without access to basic
infrastructure and social services. These pressing conditions demand immediate action to be taken as a
response to recover from the damages and losses in the conflict-affected areas and to help the conflict-
affected population restore their lives.

9. In July 2015, after a series of successful military efforts that led to the recovery and
stabilization of a part of the territory once controlled by the BH, the GoN requested the World Bank’s
support in the recovery efforts in the NE. In response to this request, the World Bank in partnership
with the European Union (EU) and United Nations (UN) conducted a Recovery and Peace Building
Assessment (RPBA) from January to April 2016, which identified and measured crisis recovery needs in
the NE. The RPBA involved extensive data collection, dialogue and stakeholder consultation, and the
quantification of recovery and peace building needs across the affected states. It estimated the total
needs for recovery and peace building at US$6.7 billion across the three strategic areas of intervention—
US$150.5 million for peace building, stability, and social cohesion; US$6.0 billion for infrastructure and
social services; and US$473.5 million for economic recovery. These needs are spread across the initial
stabilization and early recovery phase (Years 1–2) and the subsequent medium-term recovery phase
(Years 3–4). The overall needs in BAY states by sector according to the RPBA are summarized in annex 1.
The GoN has also requested the support of the World Bank, EU, and UN in implementing the
recommendations provided by the RPBA, including the adoption of a programmatic approach for
stabilization and recovery. As such, a post-RPBA process has been agreed with the GoN, under which the
World Bank and other partners will provide technical assistance (TA) to strengthen the institutional and
legal frameworks for recovery, the prioritization and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) mechanisms, and
a financing strategy for the NE.

1
Lake Chad Regional Forced Displacement Assessment 2016.
2
Recovery and Peace Building Assessment for North-East Nigeria, 2016.

Page 13 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

10. The GoN has demonstrated strong commitment to address the recovery and development
challenges in the NE and requested financial support for its crisis recovery program. The initial World
Bank response, totaling US$775 million, includes (a) the development of this proposed US$200 million
Multi-Sector Crisis Recovery Project (MCRP) for NE Nigeria, which serves as a node of convergence in
supporting the overall recovery efforts in the NE, and (b) a US$575 million additional financing (AF)
program to six existing projects, already approved by the World Bank Board, to address service delivery
gaps. The World Bank program targets short- and medium-term recovery, stabilization, and peace
building through coordinated emergency transition and stabilization activities in the six NE states.

11. Now that significant portions of the territory formerly controlled by the BH are under
Government control, it is of critical importance to support the GoN to immediately secure,
consolidate, and translate these gains into developmental progress. Given the limited window of
opportunity created by improved security, combined with a high-level authorizing environment, there is
a critical need for immediate action on early recovery. The significant scale of the crisis triggered by the
conflict has overwhelmed the Government’s response systems. This, combined with the fact that the BH
heavily targeted service delivery infrastructure and government offices during the conflict, has further
limited the capacity of the Government to address the basic needs of the population. The project is
therefore being processed under paragraph 12 (Situations of Urgent Need of Assistance) of OP 10.00
(Investment Project Financing) and is being prepared using condensed procedures, including deferral of
environmental and social requirements to the project implementation phase.

B. Sectoral and Institutional Context

Dynamics of the BH Conflict and Impacts on Social Cohesion

12. Besides the socioeconomic disparities, the lagging NE states suffer from deep governance and
institutional issues that contribute to the BH conflict. The state’s limited presence has given rise to an
array of non-state institutions and actors—traditional, community, private, and sometimes criminal—
that have grown to fill the governance void in areas such as security, service provision, and justice. A
series of incidents—the most pivotal being the detention and death of the movement’s leader,
Mohammed Yusuf, while in custody in 2009—were factors that caused the violent radicalization of the
BH members. These issues combined with social and economic disparities and lack of opportunities for
the youth created conditions for the emergence and spread of the conflict.

13. The BH’s extremist ideology and its heavy reliance on tactics of indiscriminate terror,
perpetrated against a wide array of targets, have significantly affected social relations, further
dividing and polarizing an already fragmented society. The group was identified as the single deadliest
terrorist group globally in 2014.3 The repeated but unpredictable incidences of violence have created
widespread suspicion, mistrust, and apprehension, leading to fragmentation along religious, ethnic, and
other cultural fault lines and undermining the social contract between the Government and its citizens.
Traditional institutions and community-level conflict management mechanisms (such as local
government councils, local courts, and religious institutions) have been undermined by the conflict,
leaving significant gaps in the capacity of these institutions to mediate and manage conflicts.

3
Institute of Economics and Peace 2015.

Page 14 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

14. The potential for increased tension between host communities and IDPs is also a concern, as
the coping mechanisms and services in host communities are largely stretched by the influx of 2
million displaced people. The majority (81 percent) of Nigerian IDP currently live in host communities,
while the remaining 19 percent live in camps or camp-like settings,4 adding to the strain of already
overstretched service delivery systems available in urban areas. Services and livelihoods previously
available in their places of origin are also affected, limiting prospects of return.

15. The conflict has had disproportionate impacts along gender lines, making this a factor that
should be taken into account when planning and implementing recovery efforts. As in other armed
conflicts, casualties in NE Nigeria are predominantly young men. This, together with the separation of
families and the systematic migration of men toward larger and safer cities to be able to provide for
their families back home, has translated into a significant increase of ‘unconventional’ households, with
women, elders, and even youth and children as their main breadwinners. Women have also become
targets of violence during the conflict, being victims of sexual and gender-based violence and abduction,
and have been disproportionately affected by forced displacement, being overrepresented among the
most vulnerable.

The Urgent Need to Rehabilitate Basic Service Delivery Infrastructure

16. One of the furthest-reaching effects of the conflict is the vast scale of forced displacement
that it has caused, overstretching the capacity of the host communities in resources and service
delivery. Displacement has drastically affected the living conditions, poverty status, and social cohesion
of the affected population and communities. Individuals and families fled from conflict and lost all their
productive assets, homes, and possessions. In the process of displacement, families and communities
became separated, severing crucial social ties and safety nets, all of this translating into an increased
level of vulnerability, particularly on the part of unaccompanied children, women heads of households,
and older people.

17. The BH conflict has inflicted huge damages and losses on the physical infrastructure in the NE
states, and social services have been interrupted or deteriorated in many places. More than three-
quarters of the damages are in Borno (US$6.9 billion), followed by Yobe (US$1.2 billion) and Adamawa
(US$828 million). The combined impact on the physical and social sectors has been so substantial that
access to basic services has become a major issue for the residents of the conflict-affected areas.
Damages and recovery needs are the highest among some of the following key public service delivery
sectors:

(a) Transport. Roads and bridges have been damaged extensively by explosive devices and the
unprecedented movement of military vehicles, seriously affecting the mobility of goods,
services, and people. Destroyed and damaged local roads have limited residents’ access to
markets, schools, health facilities, and other community services.

(b) Education. The conflict has particularly affected the education and vocational systems,
which were heavily targeted by the BH. Schools were damaged and destroyed, teachers
were threatened and in some cases killed, and schools were transformed into shelters for

4
International Organization for Migration. 2016.

Page 15 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

IDP. Schools that are in operation across the three BAY states are overcrowded and are
largely unable to meet the needs of the host population and IDP.

(c) Health. Health facilities have also been systematically targeted, leading to damage and
destruction of hospitals, health centers, and nonpermanent facilities. As a result, the
already weak health infrastructure in these states has further deteriorated. Even in
communities where health facilities are functioning, lack of medicines and the cost of
treatment are key factors preventing IDP from accessing health services.

(d) Water and sanitation. The conflict has seriously damaged water and sanitation
infrastructure, and the increase in population due to the inflow of IDP has placed an
additional burden on already strained water and sanitation facilities. The provision of
sufficient water points and sanitation facilities is a priority need in locations where an
influx of IDP has led to overcrowding and saturation of such facilities.

(e) Public buildings. In the conflict-affected areas, nearly 700 public buildings were destroyed
or rendered dysfunctional including police stations, jails, post offices, and other state and
local administrative buildings which provided key municipal services to the residents.
Recovering these services and rehabilitating these public buildings also, therefore,
represents an urgent need and challenge for the affected states.

Institutional Context

18. The federal and state governments have formulated several initiatives and plans for recovery
and development in the NE. Historically, these have included the Presidential Initiative for the North
East (PINE) and the North East States Transformation Strategy (NESTS), and more recently, these have
galvanized in the form of the Buhari Plan for NE Interventions. The Buhari Plan is an amalgamation of a
number of plans focused on the NE, including the RPBA. At the same time, state-level prioritized
Strategic Plans of Actions for Recovery and Stabilization (SPARS) are being developed by the BAY states
to prioritize immediate needs and identify financing gaps. These are being developed based on
extensive consultations with affected communities, ensuring a bottom-up and state-driven approach, to
complement the implementation frameworks recommended in the Government’s RPBA and Buhari
Plan.

19. The Buhari Plan and the RPBA provide the analytical underpinnings for developing and
operationalizing an overall programmatic implementation framework of crisis recovery for the NE.
The GoN, World Bank, and key development partners agreed that such an implementation framework
will comprise the following five elements: (a) policy development; (b) prioritization and sequencing of
recovery; (c) institutional framework and implementation strategy; (d) recovery financing strategy; and
(e) program oversight and M&E. This approach will allow the prioritization of both the immediate and
medium-term needs identified in the RPBA, which will pave the way for incrementally addressing the
longstanding developmental deficits identified in the Buhari Plan, the PINE, and the NESTS.

20. At the federal level, the institutional landscape for the coordination and oversight of the
Government’s NE recovery program is firming up. The mandate for the Presidential Committee for the
North East Initiative (PCNI) was formalized by the Presidential Executive Order from President Buhari in
September 2016. The PCNI will serve as the primary national strategy, coordination, and advisory body

Page 16 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

in the federation for the transformational and developmental efforts in the NE to achieve peace,
stability, socioeconomic rehabilitation, reconstruction, and long-term sustainable development of the
region.5 This mandate will focus on coordination and oversight and not on implementation. According to
the Presidential Executive Order, the PCNI will have a tenure of three years, by which time, a long-term
regional development framework or entity is expected to be designed and formalized to drive the long-
term development of the NE region. In parallel, the Federal Ministry of Budget and National Planning
(FMBNP) is leading a high-level task force on the coordination of humanitarian relief efforts in the NE.

21. At the state level, multi-sector coordination forums are needed, or existing coordination
mechanisms should be strengthened to manage recovery and stabilization programs. Borno and
Adamawa already have some mechanisms in place that can provide a starting basis for the evolution of
such state-level coordinating bodies, including the establishment of a Ministry of Reconstruction,
Rehabilitation, and Resettlement in Borno and a state-level committee in Adamawa. Yobe is in the
process of setting up structures to perform these functions. These coordination bodies are expected to
play a critical role in coordinating with the World Bank and other development partner projects at the
state level.

C. Higher-level Objectives to which the Project Contributes

22. The proposed operation will contribute to the World Bank’s global twin goals of eliminating
extreme poverty and boosting shared prosperity. By rehabilitating basic service delivery infrastructure
in the affected areas and by providing support to rebuild social cohesion at the community level, the
proposed MCRP interventions aim to improve the living conditions of the residents of the affected areas,
provide the means for reducing extreme poverty, and strengthen the social platforms necessary for
them to enjoy the benefits of shared prosperity. Given that this project is supporting the BAY states in
the NE region, where the country’s highest concentration of poor population resides, the MCRP will,
through providing substantial support to rehabilitate the services and restore the lives and livelihoods,
contribute to mitigate the severe poverty situation in the NE region as well as in the country as a whole.

23. The operation is also fully aligned with the World Bank’s Country Partnership Strategy for
Nigeria. The Country Partnership Strategy for FY14–FY17 (Report No. 82501-NG) is structured around
three strategic priorities: (a) promoting diversified growth and job creation, (b) improving the quality
and efficiency of social service delivery at the state level to promote social inclusion, and (c)
strengthening governance and public sector management with gender equity and conflict sensitivity.
The proposed operation lies at the heart of the second priority in that it will significantly improve social
services in three NE states by recovering and rebuilding infrastructure and social service facilities with
the ‘building back better’ principle. It also responds to the third priority by providing technical support
to the states for social cohesion and peace building efforts while promoting gender equity and conflict
sensitivity as key guiding principles for project design and implementation.

24. The MCRP fully aligns with and is an integral part of the broader recovery strategic framework
outlined in the RPBA toward the GoN’s priority agenda of affecting sustainable and resilient crisis
recovery in the NE region. The proposed objectives of the MCRP are aligned with the four strategic
outcomes for recovery and peace building set out by the RPBA, including (a) safe, voluntary, and
dignified return resettlement of displaced populations; (b) improved human security, reconciliation, and

5
The Federal Government of Nigeria, the Presidential Committee on the North East Initiative Establishment Directives 2016.

Page 17 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

violence prevention; (c) enhanced government accountability and citizen engagement in service
delivery; and (d) increased equity in the provision of basic services and employment opportunities.

25. The MCRP has been designed in a complementary manner with the World Bank AF operations,
becoming an integral part of the World Bank response to the NE. The immediate World Bank response
includes the following Board-approved AF projects: the Community and Social Development AF-2 (CSDP
- P157898), the Youth Employment and Social Support AF (YESSO - P157899), the Additional Financing
Nigeria State Health Investment Project (NSHIP - P157977), the Additional Financing NG- Polio
Eradication Support Project (P158557), AF - State Education Program Investment Project (SEPIP -
P157890), and the Third National Fadama Development Project (FADAMA III - P096572).

26. The proposed MCRP approach is also aligned with the analytical conclusions and guidelines
provided by the recent study of forced displacement in the Lake Chad region conducted by the United
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)-World Bank.6 This entails the incorporation of the
principle of providing integral and holistic responses to forced displacement, focusing on the needs of
the displaced population and host communities in a joint and comprehensive manner, between the
Government, communities, and development partners.7

II. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES

A. PDO

27. The proposed Project Development Objective (PDO) is to (a) support the Government of Nigeria
towards rehabilitating and improving critical service delivery infrastructure, improve the livelihood
opportunities of conflict and displacement-affected communities, and strengthen social cohesion in the
North East Participating States of Borno, Yobe and Adamawa; and (b) in the event of an Eligible Crisis or
Emergency, to provide immediate and effective response to said Eligible Crisis or Emergency, through
the proposed Contingent Emergency Response Component.

B. Project Beneficiaries

28. Project beneficiaries will include forcibly displaced populations, host communities, and other
conflict-affected communities in the BAY states, across urban and rural areas. Accordingly, the project
results monitoring system will track support provided to individual beneficiaries from the IDP, host, and
other affected communities. While the project is designed to directly benefit conflict- and displacement-
affected populations in the BAY states, the total number of direct beneficiaries will depend on the
states’ annual investment plans. It is expected that, given the existing budget, approximately 150,000
people (including forcibly displaced and host community members) will benefit from interventions
supporting stabilization, social cohesion, infrastructure rehabilitation, and service delivery restoration
and improvement. The proposed operation will pay special attention to the needs of the most

6
The UNHCR, and the World Bank Group. 2016. Forced Displacement by the Boko Haram conflict in the Lake Chad Region.
7
“…The wider paradigm advocated here [Forced Displacement Assessment by the Boko Haram conflict] should encompass the
needs and priorities of host communities and people in areas of return, as well as those of the displaced, under a common
vision and planning framework. Too often, displacement proves itself to be protracted. Even where it is not, integrating
displaced populations into local planning mechanisms can bring sustained benefits to both host and the displaced.” (The
UNHCR and the World Bank Group 2016, 62)

Page 18 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

vulnerable groups, such as widows and orphans, to ensure that they benefit from the proposed
interventions.

29. In addition to the aforementioned direct beneficiaries of the project, a major proportion of the
overall crisis-affected population of the BAY states will benefit from efforts to strengthen the
Government’s capacity to respond to and manage the recovery process. The people of Nigeria in general
will also indirectly benefit from stabilized security and improved development outcomes in the NE
region.

C. PDO-level Results Indicators

30. Achievement of the intended PDO will be monitored by the following indicators:

 Number of direct project beneficiaries (percentage of which are women)

 Number of beneficiaries that have improved livelihood opportunities with project support

 Number of beneficiaries with additional or improved access to service delivery

infrastructure (percentage of which are women)

 Percentage of beneficiaries satisfied with project activities towards increased social

cohesion (percentage of which are women)

III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

31. The project bridges the gap between humanitarian and development activities. It takes a
gradual, phased, and two-pronged approach that includes: (a) a surge of high-impact, early recovery
interventions in the period of stabilization for rebuilding lives and livelihoods while humanitarian
operations continue in tandem; and (b) a gradual transition toward medium-term recovery and
resilience building through investments in social cohesion, productive capital, and social infrastructure.
The key elements of the proposed approach are the following:

(a) Respond to the immediate needs of forcibly displaced populations and host communities
to bridge the gap between humanitarian support and medium-term development in areas
that remain largely underserved. While focusing primarily on medium-term multi-sector
recovery and strengthening of social cohesion, the project will facilitate the transition from
humanitarian operations to early recovery. In this regard, the project will help scale up the
provision of basic necessity kits and livelihood assistance to vulnerable populations.

(b) Facilitate the restoration of the social fabric and the social contract between the
Government and its citizens, by bringing different groups together, and supporting
initiatives that address some of the root causes of the conflict, as well as providing
psychosocial support to those affected by the conflict.

(c) Sustainably restore and improve service delivery and economic livelihood opportunities
across sectors, through reconstruction, rehabilitation, and improvement of service delivery
infrastructure in affected areas.

Page 19 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

32. The proposed MCRP will adopt a programmatic approach to recovery and peace building as
recommended by the RPBA. Under this approach, the MCRP is seen as a subset of a larger multi-sector
and multi-partner solution to crisis recovery, addressing the service delivery and social cohesion needs
identified in the RPBA. The MCRP is intended to serve as a central node of convergence, promoting a
platform for coordinating among related interventions from the Government, development partners,
and other World Bank projects. This will help deliver mutually complementary multi-sector outcomes
while following the key guiding principles and synchronized implementation modalities described below.

33. Flexibility. The MCRP will allow flexibility in resource allocation across various project
components and various geographic locations in the BAY states. Such flexibility is necessary to avoid
risks of disruption and/or destruction of project investments because of security reasons and to avoid
overlaps and maximize complementarity with other projects as they materialize in the coming years.
Taking such a flexible approach also requires building flexibility in the project Results Framework and
other related aspects.

34. Flexibility in the project design is reflected in the following aspects: (a) the PDO allows the
selection of interventions across multiple sectors and is not confined to specific sectors; (b) the
infrastructure component retains flexibility to allocate resources across subcomponents progressively
during implementation, based on specific annual investment plans prepared by the states; and (c) about
20 percent of the project amount will remain unallocated and distributed to the three states based on
their relative implementation performance.

35. Systematic and progressive prioritization. Given the gaps between the overall needs identified
by the RPBA and the available resources from both domestic and international sources, there will be a
need for systematic, criteria-based, and progressive prioritization of needs across and within various
sectors and the affected states. Such an approach will increase the likelihood of a smoother transition
from immediate to medium-term recovery as well as ensure the deepening, consolidation, and
sustainability of the expected project impact. The proposed prioritization process comprises three
dimensions:

(a) Geographic prioritization, based on a bottom-up consultative approach led by the states
using multiple prioritization criteria and conflict-sensitive programming

(b) Sectoral and subsectoral prioritization, based on the results of a prioritization exercise
conducted together with these states and the relevant development partners (see Section
D. Role of Partners)

(c) Temporal prioritization, premised on a combination of support to address both immediate

and medium-term needs for stabilization and recovery as proposed by the RPBA

36. Conflict sensitivity. The prioritization process, along with overall project preparation and
implementation, will be conducted adopting a bottom-up approach led by the states and informed by
community consultations. Conflict sensitivity will be central to this project, ensuring proper
identification and mitigation of conflict risks, supporting conflict resilience, and addressing key drivers of
conflict.

Page 20 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

37. Maximizing complementarity and avoiding overlaps. The programmatic-framework approach

adopted by the MCRP ensures complementarity and reduces the risk of duplications across the range of
interventions proposed or undertaken by government institutions and development partners. The MCRP
has been designed based on a rigorous gap analysis, ensuring complementarity with all known
responses in the NE including the World Bank AF projects, the proposed African Development Bank
(AfDB) and Islamic Development Bank (IsDB) projects, and the EU-supported interventions (see annex 5).
Institutional strengthening will be provided to enhance the Government’s capacity to coordinate among
relevant actors in the region and ensure ongoing activities are mutually supportive (see Section IV.A -
Institutional and Implementation Arrangements for further details).

38. Selectivity and impact maximization. The project resource allocation is only a fraction of the
overall needs estimate of the RPBA. The project will only target the three most heavily and directly
affected BAY states to concentrate and deepen the project impact in fewer states rather than spreading
it thin across the six affected states. Hence, the selection of the project states, and subsequent project
resource allocation across these states, is based largely on the principles of ‘impact proportionality’ and
‘impact maximization’. The AfDB and IsDB infrastructure interventions are being spread across the six
affected states, which also allows the World Bank project to place focus on the BAY states.

39. Build-back-better principle. This principle will be adhered to, taking into account both the
drivers of conflict (as mentioned above) and climate and disaster risks. Extreme climate events could
negatively affect the project outcomes, and therefore, all assets and services financed under the project
will be designed to improved build-back-better standards, taking into account climate and disaster risks,
which will come at an added cost. It is estimated that adaptation to climate and disaster risks will add
approximately 10 percent to reconstruction costs.

A. Project Components

40. Component 1: Strengthening Peace Building, Stability, and Social Cohesion8 - SDR 22.3 million
(US$30 million equivalent). The focus is on:

(a) Transitional support toward stabilization and self-reliance by

(i) Increasing and improving the access to basic necessity kits9 and

(ii) Restoring immediate access to productive assets by providing agricultural inputs10

and livestock for farming families and trading commodities for non-farmers.

(b) Increasing community resilience and cohesion by

8
Social Cohesion describes the nature and quality of relationships across people and groups in society, including the state (The
World Bank 2013). In the context of the MCRP, strengthening social cohesion implies supporting the creation of convergence
mechanisms and platforms across groups in society that allow them to peacefully manage collective action as well as improving
their immediate living conditions.
9
This could include, but not necessarily be limited to, items necessary for the restoration of households, including kitchen sets,
mosquito nets, plastic mats, blankets, hygiene kits, and other necessities.
10
Inputs to be provided could include, but not necessarily be limited to, seeds of local staple crops (such as maize, sorghum,
beans or cowpea); fertilizers (such as nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium and urea); and manual tools. Pesticides are
excluded from support packages.

Page 21 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

(i) Setting up local peace groups that bring together local authorities (government,
traditional, and religious) and representatives of different segments of the
population;

(ii) Financing social cohesion initiatives that address the key drivers of the conflict and
the acute needs emerging from it, such as social integration of out-of-school children
and youth at risk; provision of life and soft skills for collective action; conduct of
cultural, sport, and social activities that promote common identities and intergroup
interaction; and conduct of various violence-prevention and de-stigmatization
campaigns; and

(iii) Providing community-based psychosocial support.

(c) Citizen-government relationship building for recovery by strengthening government

capacity to consult stakeholders at local and ward levels and support them in planning for
recovery and peace building.

41. Component 2: Infrastructure Rehabilitation and Service Delivery Restoration and

Improvement – SDR 111.6 million (US$150 million equivalent). This component will include the
rehabilitation of critical physical infrastructure and the sustainable restoration of service delivery.
Interventions under this component will be spread across the following sectors:

(a) Transport. Rehabilitation and improvement of critical state and local transport
infrastructure, including reconstruction and repair of damaged bridges and state and local
roads

(b) Restoration of municipal services. Reconstruction and rehabilitation of water supply

facilities, sanitation, and solid waste management infrastructure and service delivery

(c) Education. Reconstruction and repair of damaged school infrastructure such as

classrooms, offices, fences, playgrounds, latrines, labs, and other associated service
delivery interventions

(d) Health. Reconstruction or rehabilitation of health center buildings and other associated
service delivery interventions in respect of staff, furniture, and supplies

(e) Public buildings. Rehabilitation and reconstruction of damaged local government buildings
particularly those seen as critical for restoring service delivery functionality across multiple
sectors

42. Component 3: Technical Assistance and Program Management Support – SDR 14.9 million
(US$20 million equivalent). This component will include TA for (a) strengthening the institutional
capacity for the coordination of the programmatic recovery program, in line with the Buhari Plan and
the RPBA and (b) strengthening the MCRP implementation capacity. Support for overall programmatic
and policy coordination at the federal, interstate, and intrastate levels will include the provision of TA
for the development of implementation and performance management frameworks for programmatic
recovery. Project implementation support will include (a) program management costs, including the

Page 22 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

engagement of a project management firm; project M&E; contract management; financial management
(FM) and procurement; and safeguards implementation, monitoring, and management; (b) immediate
and medium-term support and capacity building for project implementation in the Project Coordination
Units (PCUs) and sectoral line agencies; and (c) setting up of citizen engagement and third-party
monitoring mechanisms.

43. Component 4: Contingent Emergency Response – SDR 0 million (US$0 million equivalent). This
contingent emergency response component (CERC) is included under the project in accordance with
OP/BP 10.00, paragraphs 12 and 13, for situations of urgent need of assistance, as a project-specific
CERC. This will allow for rapid reallocation of project funds in the event of a natural or man-made crisis
in the future, during the implementation of the project, to address eligible emergency needs under the
conditions established in its operations manual. This component will have no funding allocation initially
and will draw resources from the unallocated expenditure category in the case of activation. If an
Immediate Response Mechanism (IRM) is established, this component will serve as an IRM CERC to
allow the reallocation of uncommitted funds from the project portfolio to the IRM Designated Account
(DA) to address emergency response and recovery costs, if approved by the World Bank.

B. Project Cost and Financing

44. Project cost and implementation period. The total project cost is SDR 148.8 million (US$200
million equivalent), which will be financed by an IDA Credit. The distribution of costs across the
proposed components is provided in Table 1. The implementation period for the project is proposed to
be four years.

Table 1: Project Cost and Financing by Component

Project Cost IDA Financing

(millions) (millions)
Project Components
SDR US$ SDR US$

Component 1: Strengthening Peace Building, Stability, and Social Cohesion 22.3 30 22.3 30

Component 2: Infrastructure Rehabilitation and Service Delivery Restoration and

111.6 150 111.6 150
Improvement

Component 3: Technical Assistance and Program Management Support 14.9 20 14.9 20

Component 4: Contingent Emergency Response 0 0 0 0

Total Project Costs 148.8 200 148.8 200

45. Project funds are proposed to be apportioned to the three BAY states based on a combination
of factors including relative level of needs, implementation readiness and absorption capacity, and
prevailing and expected security levels and risks. The total current overall allocation of US$155 million
to the states includes US$65 million for Borno (32.5 percent of total project resources) and US$45
million (22.5 percent of total project resources) each for Yobe and Adamawa. The Federal Government
will receive US$5 million (2.5 percent of total project resources) in TA and project management. Each
component amount will be distributed according to the same percentages, with the possible exception
of any components that require the use of common resources such as certain types of project

Page 23 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

management costs, which will be handled through the PCNI. The Project Management Consultancy
(PMC), for example, is expected to be hired and managed by the PCNI, on behalf of the three states.

46. The remaining US$40 million will remain unallocated, and its distribution will be decided at
the project midterm stage, based on a set of agreed criteria. This is due to the very fluid situation in the
country, with regard to the security situation, the movement of displaced persons, and the available
financing from the Government’s budget and donors for specific sectors in the respective states. This
will also provide an incentive for the states to demonstrate their absorptive capacity and not delay
disbursements and will mainly affect Component 2. Criteria will, therefore, consider factors such as
implementation performance, level of support from other development partners and associated
financing gaps in the project sectors, and a reassessment of the security situation. Such allocation shall
be done through the Federal Ministry of Finance (FMoF) in consultation with the PCNI and the BAY
states. Once this allocation is decided, this remaining balance will be allocated to the respective states’
DAs.

C. Lessons Learned and Reflected in the Project Design

47. The proposed project design builds upon and has benefited from experiences and lessons
learned from similar emergency and/or crisis recovery situations nationally and internationally. These
include the 2015 Iraq Emergency Operation, the 2016 Malawi Drought Recovery and Resilience Project,
ongoing lending activities in NE Nigeria by the World Bank and other development partners, and the
Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project in the Horn of Arica. Key lessons learned
include issues related to flexibility and conflict sensitivity of the project design to adapt to the evolving
security context.

48. Holistic multi-sectoral programming and progressive prioritization are necessary for an
effective and sustainable response to crisis and displacement. The RPBA highlights that interventions
aimed at the physical reconstruction and rehabilitation of social, physical, and productive assets need to
be paired with peace building and social cohesion activities to ensure the sustainability of the recovery
efforts. In addition, a framework project resource allocation and implementation approach is necessary
in such situations as it provides room for periodic course corrections and relies on progressive
prioritization exercises throughout the project implementation period. This takes into account the need
to encourage other development partners to use the same programmatic approach and ensure
complementarity with existing initiatives.

49. Building back better and smarter through community-level activities. Based on the World
Bank’s experience in postcrisis engagement worldwide and in view of the socioeconomic situation in NE
Nigeria, a sustainable response to crisis recovery requires not only the restoration of physical,
productive, and social assets to improved standards, but also the rebuilding of the social fabric at the
local level to address the root causes of conflicts and generate inclusive benefits for the broader
population. This will require developing and implementing adequate bottom-up and participatory
community engagement mechanisms for the design and implementation of the project interventions.

50. State-led investment planning and subprojects. Given the overwhelming needs for recovery,
peace building, and reconstruction revealed by the RPBA and the available resources from both
domestic and international sources, the needs and corresponding responses should be prioritized for
actual implementation. The prioritization and sequencing of intervention activities will be led by the

Page 24 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

respective states, with involvement of key stakeholders and in consultation with local population. These
will be reflected in the preparation of state-level annual investment plans based on clear and objectively
verifiable prioritization criteria and will be aligned with the Buhari Plan and the RPBA Strategic
Framework and will also take into account ongoing and proposed projects and programs by other
development partners.

IV. IMPLEMENTATION

A. Institutional and Implementation Arrangements

51. The proposed project will build on existing institutional structures and will establish new
bodies only where needed, with specific and time-bound mandates. Given the unprecedented nature
of this conflict, new bodies for the coordination of the recovery program in the NE have been
established at the federal and state levels, including the PCNI and the Ministry of Reconstruction,
Rehabilitation, and Resettlement in Borno State. Yet, some of these institutions will evolve with time,
and possibly new and more permanent ones will emerge, including the possible creation of the North
East Development Commission (NEDC). The project is hence proposing to (a) strengthen existing
institutions such as the PCNI to perform roles such as coordination at the federal and state levels and (b)
strengthen the MCRP implementation capacity. To this end, the GoN will develop and maintain a
detailed Project Implementation Manual (PIM) to further elaborate the roles and responsibilities of the
project’s implementation apparatus as well as lay out detailed technical and operational decision-
making processes.

Recovery Program Coordination

52. The MCRP activities will align with the overall recovery and stabilization program for the NE
proposed by the RPBA and Buhari Plan, coordinated by a federal-level apex committee. According to
the Presidential mandate establishing the PCNI, this will be initially convened by the PCNI and anchored
within the Vice President’s office. The committee will include representatives from the Vice President’s
office, the PCNI, the Secretary to the Government, the FMoF, the FMBNP, and the BAY State Governors.
This committee is also envisioned to provide oversight of the recovery program activities in the NE, as
well as central policy guidance and standard-setting as required on a periodic basis to ensure effective
coordination and harmonization of recovery and peace building initiatives in the NE, supported by the
Government as well as the development partners.

53. Institutional coordination necessary at the programmatic level includes the setup of the
Nodes of Strategic and Operational Convergence for the NE Program. As explained earlier, the project
will promote coordination across various development partner programs for the NE by supporting the
establishment and activation of three critical nodes of strategic and operational convergence:

(a) Federal-level coordination will be carried out through an apex body (the PCNI and, possibly
in the future, the NEDC), facilitating the recovery program coordination between federal
government entities, development partners, and state governments, monitoring progress
toward the overall recovery and peace building plans of the GoN, and facilitating
coordination with humanitarian efforts.

Page 25 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

(b) Interstate coordination will be carried out on a regular basis by the PCNI, ensuring
consistency of recovery policy and programming across different states and regular
dialogue between the states to ensure effective policy coordination and alignment of
implementation arrangements. Interstate meetings will take place at least on a six monthly
or needs basis. The PCNI’s state officers will also pay a key role in facilitating coordination
across the states and between the states and the Federal Government.

(c) Intrastate steering committees will be in charge of the overall coordination of recovery and
peace building activities within each state and collective decision making among line
ministries, departments, and agencies (MDAs) involved in the recovery and peace building
process through the setup of a recovery and peace building steering committee. The state
steering committees will coordinate and oversee the implementation of recovery and
peace building efforts at the state level, ensuring synergies across initiatives supported by
different development partners.

54. Two additional nodes of convergence over and above the project-supported mechanisms are
envisioned for development partner coordination. This includes the North East Development
Coordination Group, currently led by the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development
(DFID), as well as an internal coordination mechanism for all World Bank initiatives in the NE.

Project Implementation

55. In line with the overall recovery program for the region, the MCRP implementation is designed
to be adaptive to the evolving situation and, therefore, will also require a high degree of multi-sectoral
coordination across all recovery and peace building initiatives.

56. State-level PCUs. The PCUs will focus on quality and process oversight, FM, procurement,
reporting, contract management, and M&E and on ensuring social and environmental safeguards
compliance. In addition to coordination upwards to ensure the project responds to the evolving
recovery needs of the state, the PCUs will also coordinate across different sectoral line agencies to
implement the multi-sectoral project activities. To develop economies of scale and a coherent state-led
crisis recovery program, the PCUs will also ensure the MCRP coordination with related infrastructure
projects supported by the IsDB and AfDB.

57. Sector-specific activities will build on existing institutional capacity and structures of the
MDAs. For Component 1, project implementation will be carried out by the state PCUs, given the
intersectoral nature of the component and that functions such as return and reintegration of forcibly
displaced population or social cohesion fall beyond the mandate of a single ministry. In this case, while
the activity implementation will be outsourced to specialized service providers (as few as possible to
ensure consistency), the state PCUs will be responsible for carrying out technical functions of site
identification, development of bidding documents, technical assurance, and other necessary oversight.
For Component 2, project implementation will be carried out by the relevant sectoral/technical MDAs in
each state. The project will finance the operating costs of the respective project teams in these MDAs to
ensure that existing capacity and organizational structures are used and enhanced where necessary. The
staff working on the project will report to the respective line agency hierarchy on a daily basis for
technical implementation and will report back to the PCUs on a regular basis on overall project
implementation progress.

Page 26 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

58. The three state PCUs will be reinforced by a PMC that will provide timely and quality support
in technical, fiduciary, and safeguards areas and will be supported by local partners for synergy of
cooperation. The PMC will provide implementation support to the PCUs on a phased basis. This will
include intensive support in the first year to build the capacity of the PCUs and then gradually phase out
over the lifetime of the project. The PMC shall be expected to provide the PCUs with intensive ‘on the
job’ training during the first phase of the project. The PMC will ensure that the management of all
aspects of the MCRP implementation, including fiduciary, safeguards, and technical, is done in
accordance with the guidelines of the World Bank and within procedures of the State Governments. A
single PMC supporting the three states could create economies of scale and enhance learning,
cooperation, and harmonization between the different states. In addition, the project will link with local
partners such as universities and civil society organizations (CSOs) to fully mobilize available resources to
improve the implementation capacity of the PCUs and to synergize cooperation from all partners under
this project as a whole.

B. Results Monitoring and Evaluation

59. The project will put in place a multitier quality oversight and control and results monitoring
mechanism entailing (a) physical quality control and supervision, (b) results M&E system, (c) social
accountability and grievance redress systems, and (d) periodic third-party performance verification and
audits by independent parties. This is shown in detail in Figure 2.1 in annex 2, which also proposes the
information flow and reporting mechanisms across multiple agencies.

60. The target values of the indicators listed in the Results Framework were estimated based on
preliminary assumptions surrounding the proposed budget allocation among the subsectors included
in the proposed project components. These targets may need to be adjusted during project
implementation, based on possible variances in actual resource distribution across these subsectors
because of the flexibilities requested under the proposed framework approach for this project. Under
the framework approach, while priority sectors have been identified for financing under the project, the
actual annual resources allocation to the sectors will depend on the results of the planned annual joint
prioritization and work programming conducted by the states for the World Bank and other
development partner projects. In addition, given the complexity of the context and project design, the
project’s Midterm Review (MTR) will be undertaken after 18 months of project implementation.

61. Outcome M&E. The state PCUs will be responsible for operationalizing the state-level Results
Frameworks and results monitoring system. The state PCU M&E reports will be centrally consolidated
and maintained by the PCNI in the form of a project-level results M&E system. The PCNI will be
responsible for the overall M&E of the project by maintaining an overall project-level results monitoring
system to issue quarterly updates on the overall project implementation to all concerned quarters and
the project’s constituent agencies at the federal and state levels.

62. Implementation support will entail both routine and ad hoc quality checks at various stages of
implementation. Periodic monitoring will include process reviews, reporting of outputs, and maintaining
of updated records. This will include the following: (a) social and environmental monitoring, (b) regular
quality supervision and certification, (c) periodic physical progress and process monitoring, (d) third-
party monitoring, and (e) results M&E. Third-party independent performance verification will be
conducted on an annual basis to complement the above internal quality oversight mechanisms,
particularly in remote locations that are difficult to reach, in addition to the World Bank’s routine

Page 27 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

implementation support, with clear guidelines for the contracting and conduct of such activities to
ensure the independence of such assessments.

63. Social accountability and community engagement mechanisms will be enhanced through
project initiatives. First, Component 1 of the project includes a foundational principle of citizen
involvement in the investment decisions. This will be done through the financing of community-based
approaches that will focus on engaging those affected by the conflict (forcibly displaced population and
host communities) and local government authorities (LGAs). Second, the project will focus on
strengthening local governance through the reconstruction and repair of buildings where local
authorities operate and the improvement of participatory mechanisms for recovery planning. Third,
citizen feedback mechanisms will be put in place to gather the feedback of beneficiaries in communities
benefiting from investments in infrastructure and service delivery (Component 2 of the project).
Feedback tools will include conflict-sensitive indicators to provide early warning of potentially negative
impacts of interventions, which may necessitate further mitigation strategies and adaptation.
Community involvement could be enhanced by including community-based mapping of results, for
example, using simple cell phone based applications. This requires the active mobilization of the
communities in NE Nigeria, presence in the field, and communication in local language. A dedicated
M&E team that works closely with the communities will therefore be required.

C. Sustainability

64. The MCRP seeks to achieve sustainability by adhering to the following principles in the design
and implementation of the project:

 Multi-sector, multi-partner, programmatic approach. Sustainable response to crisis

recovery requires not only the reconstruction, rehabilitation, and restoration of physical,
productive, and human assets to improved standards but also the rebuilding of the social
fabric at the local level to address root causes of conflicts and generate inclusive benefits
for the broader population.

 Area-based, phased approach. As the project matures, a gradual shift will be effected
toward a more area-based recovery planning approach, including through bottom-up and
participatory community-level engagement processes and civil society involvement, to
create and sustain ownership of the interventions carried out and the impacts generated
under the project.

 Build back better. All assets and services will be designed to improved, build-back-better
standards. This could entail elements such as right-sizing, right-siting, structural
improvements, improved quality control and service delivery regulation, and strengthened
operation and maintenance standards.

 Capacity building. Given the considerable capacity limitations after years of conflict,
substantial support will be provided under the project to strengthen the capacity of the
states. Hence, the project will make adequate resource allocation for project management,
capacity and skills enhancement, and TA, along with partners such as the AfDB and IsDB.

Page 28 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

D. Role of Partners

65. Given the overwhelming and urgent needs in the NE and the dozens of government and
development partners engaged in meeting those needs, the project team has put a premium on
coordination. On the government side, these include the PCNI, FMBNP, FMoF, Office of the Secretary to
the Government, Office of the Vice President, National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA), and
the representatives of the state governments of BAY. From development partners, these include the EU,
the UN, DFID, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the German Agency for
International Cooperation (GIZ), the IsDB, and the AfDB. The World Bank convened these partners at a
workshop in Abuja on August 17, 2016, to support the Government in the implementation of the
recovery and stabilization program for the NE proposed by the RPBA and Buhari Plan.

66. A number of development partners are supporting immediate humanitarian interventions and
are planning to provide assistance for stabilization and medium-term recovery. In addition to
humanitarian responses and joint efforts on physical recovery, interventions that address critical social
cohesion and service delivery needs of all affected population (including both IDP and host community
members) are key in preventing conflict relapse in areas recently secured, as well as in tackling root
causes of conflicts in a sustainable manner. Currently, over 62 partners are providing urgent multi-
sectoral humanitarian assistance to conflict-affected people in BAY. The UN has developed a US$248
million Humanitarian Response Plan for the NE supported by key bilateral donors, multilateral agencies,
and the Red Cross. Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) such as the AfDB and IsDB are also
preparing to support medium-term recovery and reconstruction in collaboration with the World Bank
and other partners.

67. Project implementation will also follow an inclusive and consultative process with key
development partners through existing donor coordination mechanisms and new coordination
mechanisms as necessary. This will help ensure close strategic harmonization and operational
coordination across the interrelated interventions under various development partner programs under
way or in the planning stages to contribute toward the broader crisis recovery program. The project
team will also continue to leverage and promote the recovery and peace building strategy agreed under
the RPBA to influence the crisis recovery planning and implementation of various development partners.

68. Alignment with the MDBs. The project team has discussed and agreed on the key elements of a
common programmatic approach with the IsDB and AfDB, which are also developing similar
infrastructure-focused recovery projects for the NE using the RPBA findings as a basis for project design.
It has been agreed that the three states will work closely with the three MDBs to ensure that their
respective projects are not designed and implemented as three separate interventions but as
independent yet synchronized parts of a common programmatic framework. The AfDB has noted that its
US$250 million project on ‘Inclusive Basic Social Service Delivery and Livelihood Improvement’ has been
realigned to the RPBA findings. The IsDB has noted that it is developing an investment package for the
NE and has agreed to align with the joint programmatic approach.

69. It was agreed that common implementation modalities and institutional arrangements will
achieve economies of scale and empower the states to coordinate a sizeable MDB investment
program for the NE. Going forward, this will entail close collaboration between the World Bank, AfDB,
and IsDB in the areas of (a) prioritization and sequencing of interventions and gap analysis to determine
how to allocate resources in key infrastructure sectors across the three projects; (b) capacity assessment

Page 29 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

of the three states to determine how to provide coordinated capacity-building support for efficient and
effective program implementation; and (c) maximizing of the use of common implementation resources,
consistent technical design processes, and harmonized FM, procurement, and safeguards compliance
processes and procedures.

V. KEY RISKS

A. Overall Risk Rating and Explanation of Key Risks

70. The overall risk for achieving the PDO is rated Substantial. The rating for each category is listed
in Table 2, with explanations underneath.

Table 2. MCRP Risk Ratings by Category

Risk Categories Rating (H, S, M, or L)
1. Political and governance H
2. Macroeconomic S
3. Sector strategies and policies M
4. Technical design of project S
5. Institutional capacity for implementation and sustainability H
6. Fiduciary H
7. Environmental and social M
8. Stakeholders M
9. Others (Security) H
Overall H

71. Political and governance risks are rated High. The unprecedented nature of the issues leading
to the emergency in the NE states poses a number of challenges for successful project implementation.
Clear government policies related to the emergency transition and stabilization phases are needed, as
well as mechanisms for federal and state government convergence of recovery and peace building
priorities. The project, therefore, proposes the provision of TA at the federal and state levels for the
formulation of consistent government policies on recovery and peace building. In light of the multi-
sectoral nature of the MCRP, there are multiple actors at the state and federal levels that need to be
involved in the recovery and stabilization efforts in the NE. The project will put a lot of emphasis on
designing effective institutional arrangements necessary to ensure effective coordination among
relevant government, civil society, and development partner stakeholders. Further, the nature of project
interventions, targeting criteria, and geographical coverage are also politically sensitive. The project will
make use of the Project Steering Committee and State Coordination Body for decision making and
criteria setting to ensure multi-sector information flow is systematic and robust. Furthermore, the
project will maximize opportunities for joint activity planning and implementation for activities that cut
across various stakeholders and development partner programs.

72. Macroeconomic risks are rated Substantial. Falling oil prices have undermined economic
growth in the country and remain a major source of risk, which may be exacerbated further by natural
disasters and climate change. With reliance on a few primary exports and a relatively undiversified
economy, Nigeria remains vulnerable to external demand and price shocks. The macroeconomic
instability is compounded by pressures from weak fiscal management. The BH conflict in the NE

Page 30 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

continues to threaten economic stability across the country, and so, the Government will need to
continue to ensure a strong security presence in the years to come to combat future BH attacks.

73. Risks related to technical design of the project are rated Substantial. This project is designed to
implement recovery interventions, which will involve multiple sectors in the three states, engaging
different levels of government. Such complexity could lead to challenges related to resource allocation,
prioritization, beneficiary targeting, and project implementation. To mitigate these risks, substantial TA
and capacity-building support will be provided in the design and implementation of the activities at the
federal and state levels to ensure these issues are considered up front. An additional technical design
risk for this project is the potential rising of social tensions between IDP and host communities due to
perceived inequalities arising from the project activities. To avoid this, activities under this project have
been designed to address the needs of both groups. Beneficiary targeting mechanisms will be publicly
disclosed, and communication and outreach strategies will be implemented to engage communities in
the planning and oversight of project activities.

74. Risks related to institutional capacity for implementation and sustainability are rated High.
The responsibility for project implementation will rely heavily on the states, whose capacity is weak,
especially in the NE. Due to the dichotomized nature of institutional capacity and investment
commitments, it is very challenging to commit large investments when the capacity of local institutions
is inadequate. One of the ways to overcome this issue is to prioritize investments that could be
implemented within the existing capacity and with adequate oversights of the state and federal program
M&E structures. Because capacity building is a time-consuming activity, it is important to initiate this as
part of the technical support subcomponent of the program in the immediate term and to streamline
the project implementation processes in the medium and long terms. Substantial support will be used to
strengthen the capacity of the PCUs. In addition to specific technical and fiduciary functions to be
supported by individual consultants, a consulting firm is also being considered to support the
Government in project management. Detailed definitions of respective roles and responsibilities of
implementing partners will be clarified in the PIM.

75. Implementation readiness of the states. While implementation readiness seems to vary across
the three targeted states, state ownership of the objectives and design of the proposed project remains
high. This is manifested by their agreement to strengthen their existing institutional capacity on an
urgent basis by setting up the PCUs agreed during appraisal. The states have also started providing their
first-year specific investment plans across multiple sectors based on the prioritization process and
criteria agreed with the World Bank team. The states will be utilizing the services of the existing Project
Financial Management Units (PFMUs) at the state level and have also begun working on developing the
project procurement strategy and plans. However, given the emergency nature of the project, the states
have agreed to engage the services of the PMC that will provide services to help the states kick-start and
maintain the project implementation momentum during the first two years of the project while their
own capacity is gradually built.

76. The project fiduciary risk is rated High. All states of the federation have a PFMU. However, with
the level of devastation in the NE, the FM Unit of the World Bank is committed to ensure that the
required support is rendered to the project units. The current FM risk ratings for projects in Adamawa,
Borno, and Yobe are Modest, Substantial, and Substantial, respectively. However, given the conflict
situation of the project areas and the overstretched capacity of the financial management and
procurement staff in the three states, it is estimated that the fiduciary risk associated with this project

Page 31 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

would be higher than regular operations in the three states. Therefore the project fiduciary risk is rated
High. Since 2003, the World Bank’s assisted projects in Nigeria have benefited immensely from the
PFMU, which is a platform of the FMoF, with assistance from the World Bank, to attend to the fiduciary
responsibilities of the project at both the state and federal levels. The staff of this unit are usually the
accountants and internal auditors seconded from the Offices of the State Accountants General or the
Office of the Accountant General of the Federation. In this way, ready capacity is available for new
projects at reduced cost and low risk. The PFMU ensures that all accounting information is properly
captured and reported on time to the stakeholders through the required reports. Because building
materials such as cement, roofing, and equipment and machinery are affected by the exchange rates,
the cost of construction and rehabilitation of facilities could experience serious cost and time overruns.
This means that physical and financial contingencies should be adequately provisioned in the investment
plans.

77. Security risks are rated High. The dynamic nature of the conflict poses significant
implementation and supervision risks for the project. All project interventions will be carried out in
moderate- to high-risk security environments, given that the BH still maintains the ability to launch
periodic attacks in some parts of Borno and Yobe. This can put both the project implementation staff
and the assets created under the project at medium to high risk. For mitigation, the use of third-party
monitors, local nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and other civil society groups for supervision
and M&E will be explored. To further mitigate this risk, the subproject selection criteria under the
strategic action planning exercise will consider security factors and avoid high-risk areas based on
periodic security assessments. Flexibility and adaptability of the project design has also been built in the
project, allowing it to adapt to the situation in case of an escalation of the conflict. Also, security
premiums have been factored into the project cost estimates, and bidders of works and services
contracts will be required to include security costs into their bid prices. Additionally, the World Bank and
other development partners will also work with the Federal Government to set up a mechanism for
receiving regular security assessments and updates. Under such a mechanism, any upcoming security
risks could be brought up by the states and the development partners and mitigation measures
accordingly agreed and put in place by the federal and respective state governments. Meanwhile, to
mitigate the security risks associated with explosive remnants which might be found in the three BAY
states, all subproject activities will only be conducted in the areas that have been declared safe and
clear of explosive remnants of war. The GoN and the governments of the three BAY states are
responsible to ensure that any area in which the Project will be implemented has been cleared, by
providing a confirmation in form and substance satisfactory to the World Bank. Detailed process and
requirements regarding this matter will be included in the PIM.

78. Climate risk. Nigeria is registering changes in its climate patterns. Average maximum
temperatures have been increasing, with maximum temperatures ranging between 31°C and 33°C.
Average precipitation per year has decreased significantly in Nigeria by 3.5 mm per month, and
desertification has been intensifying in the northern areas of Nigeria, with deserts migrating southward.
Flooding is also becoming more frequent throughout the country. Projections indicate an increase in the
number of days with ‘extreme’ rainfall.11 Extreme climate events could negatively affect resilience-
building efforts. In view of these challenges, all assets and services financed under the project will be
designed to improved, build-back-better standards that take into account climate and disaster risks.

11
The World Bank’s Climate Change Knowledge Portal.

Page 32 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

VI. APPRAISAL SUMMARY

A. Economic and Financial (if applicable) Analysis

79. The economic analysis conducted as part of the project preparation process indicates that the
proposed interventions are economically feasible. The main focus of the economic analysis was around
Component 2, because the majority of investments are dedicated to that component. The typology of
interventions is expected to lead to positive economic rates of return, largely in excess of the discount
rate of 6 percent assumed for these interventions. This assumes benefits from the following benefit
streams: (a) greater regional connectivity through bridge and road access, with ensuing benefits in
reduced cost and time of travel for individuals and businesses, and greater regional integration; (b)
better water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) services, with ensuing gains on health conditions; (c)
greater access to health care facilities, with ensuing gains in productivity and reduced health care
expenditures through preventive measures undertaken; (d) greater access to educational facilities, with
ensuing gains in productivity and social cohesion; and (e) greater capacity for LGAs to deliver projects. In
addition to the typologies identified under Component 2, the MCRP supports peace building and greater
social cohesion through a number of programs and in-kind support to vulnerable segments of society
affected by the conflict under Component 1. The details of the economic analysis performed are
presented in annex 4.

80. The sensitivity analysis performed indicates that the economic rate of return for interventions
under Component 2 remains significant even if potential downside adjustments to the economic
assumptions made were to materialize. The results of the sensitivity analysis are presented in Table 3.

Table 3. Estimated Economic Rate of Return for Component 2 under Various Assumptions
Scenario Economic Rate of Return (%)
Baseline 17.6
Costs increase by 10% 16.0
Benefits reduce by 10% 11.3
Benefits lag by two years 8.5
Source: World Bank calculations.

81. Rationale for public sector engagement. The interventions identified under the MCRP will
deliver essential services to the most vulnerable segments of the population and bear positive
externalities on the overall population through numerous direct and indirect benefits being engendered.
Furthermore, the interventions will strengthen the capacity of various levels of the public sector
administration and deliver services at the community level to support the empowerment of the most
vulnerable segments of the population affected by the conflict. These justify the rationale for public
sector engagement.

82. Value added of World Bank support. The World Bank has extensive international experience in
areas such as education, health, infrastructure, agriculture, water and sanitation, and social
development. Moreover, it has extensive knowledge of the local conditions and the key stakeholders
involved in the stabilization and recovery of NE Nigeria through its presence in the country and the
conduct of the RPBA exercise. These factors, along with its ability to leverage the contribution of other
international donors, justify the support of the World Bank in the process of stabilization and recovery
of NE Nigeria.

Page 33 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

B. Technical

83. As agreed during project preparation, the BAY states have initiated an iterative process of
prioritization based on systematic criteria to develop specific investment plans for the first year and
medium-term plans for Years 2–4, based on the findings of the RPBA and the current realities in the
respective states. The states engaged in productive discussions about their initial plans of action with
the World Bank mission team and development partners like the AfDB, IsDB, the EU, the UN, and DFID
during the August MCRP mission. These discussions allowed states to start developing their plans of
action, subsequently refined through state-level consultative workshops, engaging LGA and traditional
leaders, religious leaders, CSOs, and representatives of IDPs. As a result, the latest state-level plans of
action are the product of an intensive, iterative, and ongoing process of consultation with the
development partners and state and local stakeholders.

84. The latest drafts of the state-level plans of action prepared over September 2016 align well
with the multi-sectoral, programmatic approach embraced by the MCRP. The plans of action for
Adamawa and Yobe model the prioritized, multi-sectoral approach of the MCRP. Both plans give high
priority to the sectors included in the MCRP and show prioritization along geographic, sectoral, and
temporal lines. Adamawa proposes interventions in both the social cohesion (for example, safe and
voluntary return and resettlement of forcibly displaced population and peace building) and
infrastructure for example, education, health, public buildings, transport, and water and sanitation)
components. Yobe similarly proposes interventions in both Component 1 (for example, safe and
voluntary return and resettlement of forcibly displaced population and peace building) and Component
2 (for example, education, health, public buildings, and water and sanitation). Both plans also propose
some investments that are currently outside the scope of the MCRP such as in the agriculture, irrigation,
and energy sectors, which will be referred to other development partners and the World Bank AF
projects that are part of the larger post-RPBA framework. The Borno plan of action is still in
development and is based on the same guidance and templates for prioritization, which the MCRP team
has provided to Adamawa and Yobe.

85. Details of the prioritization process and criteria developed under the MCRP may be found in
the section on ‘Investment Prioritization and Selection Process’ in annex 2. Considering the conflict
management challenges facing NE Nigeria, the processes of infrastructure and social service sector
investment planning and project identification will initially attempt to target ‘low-hanging fruit’ for
investments that provide immediate impacts and overall benefits to the local economy. This could
include investments for scaling up of ongoing successful programs, the repair of infrastructure assets
damaged during the conflict, and efficient operation of existing facilities by enhancing their maintenance
expenditures and institutional capacity to implement such investments. However, medium-term
investment planning and prioritization under the MCRP will take into account criteria such as direct
impact on conflict- and displacement-affected communities, level of priority for states and affected
communities, labor input intensity and cost effectiveness, beneficiary and spatial targeting, potential for
growth of local economies, community welfare, and promotion of social cohesion and peace building in
conflict- and displacement-affected communities. Projects ranked by priority investments will also take
into account the institutional capacity of the local administration and organizations active on ground to
implement them within the shortest time possible and to ensure participation of local communities.

Page 34 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

C. Financial Management

86. The responsibility for establishing and maintaining acceptable FM arrangements for the
project will be handled by the existing PFMUs in the three states and the Federal Project Financial
Management Department (FPFMD) at the federal level. The Federal Treasury Circular of March 2010
established the FPFMD in the Office of the Accountant General of the Federation (OAGF) to handle the
FM responsibilities for funds provided to MDAs by donor partners. At the state level, the PFMUs are also
under the Office of the Accountant General (OAG) in each State.

87. The PFMUs and FPFMD are multi-donor and multi-project FM platforms, established in all
states and at the federal level, respectively, through the joint efforts of the World Bank and the
Government. These common FM platforms feature robust systems and controls. The PFMUs and FPFMD
are presently involved in the implementation of a number of World Bank assisted projects. The World
Bank’s recent review showed that these units have been performing satisfactorily. To strengthen the FM
system in the PFMUs and FPFMD, implementation of some action plans is required. The FM risk for this
financing is assessed as High. Annex 3 provides additional information on FM.

88. The FPFMD and the PFMUs will designate from the pool of professional accountants in the
OAGF and the OAG in each state, respectively, a project accountant, a project internal auditor, and
other supporting accounting technicians that will make for appropriate segregation of duties. The
PFMUs and FPFMD will render annual audited financial statements and periodic unaudited interim
financial reports (IFRs) in the format and frequency satisfactory to the World Bank within agreed
timelines. A computerized accounting system will be used and shall be configured in line with the
formats of the IFR and the annual financial statements. The project bank account at the federal level will
be opened with the Central Bank of Nigeria, and at the state level, the accounts will be opened with a
reputable commercial bank acceptable to IDA.

D. Procurement

89. Procurement under the MCRP will be carried out in accordance with the World Bank
Procurement Regulations for IPF Borrowers and other provisions stipulated in the Financing
Agreement. All procuring entities as well as bidders and service providers shall be expected to observe
the highest standard of ethics during the procurement and execution of contracts financed under the
project in accordance with Sections I and II of the World Bank Procurement Regulations for IPF
Borrowers of July 2016.

90. The project design will provide a window to enable the Borrower to carry out advance
contracting and retroactive financing in accordance with Section V (paragraphs 5.1 and 5.2) of the
World Bank Procurement Regulations for IPF Borrowers. The retroactive financing will be allowed up to
20 percent of the Credit covering the expenditures incurred by the project on or after May 1, 2016.

91. As part of the preparation of the project, the Borrower (with TA from the World
Bank/partners) prepared a draft Project Procurement Strategy for Development (PPSD), which
describes how procurement activities will support project operations for the achievement of the PDOs
and deliver value for money. The procurement strategy will be linked to the project implementation
strategy at both the country and the state levels ensuring proper sequencing of the activities. It will
consider institutional arrangements for procurement; roles and responsibilities; thresholds,

Page 35 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

procurement methods, and prior review; and the requirements for carrying out procurement. It will also
include a detailed assessment and description of state government capacity for carrying out
procurement and managing contract implementation, within an acceptable governance structure and
accountability framework. Other issues to be taken into account will include the behaviors, trends, and
capabilities of the market (market analysis) to respond to the Procurement Plan (PP). The MCRP
activities will also require strong technical capability to prepare proper technical specifications to avert
lack of, or inadequate, market response. This capability, or a plan to enhance it, will be described in the
strategy. Also, special arrangements like direct contracting; the use of state-owned enterprises (SOEs),
UN Agencies, third-party monitors, local NGOs, and force account; or civil servants needs, results-based
arrangements, and need for prequalification, if any, will be addressed. The strategy will include a
summary on procurement risk, mitigation action plan, and procurement implementation support and
supervision plan. The procurement management risk for this project is assessed to be Substantial. Annex
2 provides additional information on procurement management.

92. Following the situation on the ground, the strategy may trigger OP 10.00, paragraph 12, on the
use of emergency procedures. This has become necessary for the procurement systems to readily
respond to the emergency situations at hand. (Phases 1 and 2 of the procurement operation will
respond to the emergencies dealing with life-, health-, and safety-threatening conditions; restoration of
livelihood; reconstruction and so on; and to subsequently revert to normal procedures once the
emergency is stabilized.) The design of the strategy by the Borrower will be finalized by project
effectiveness and agreed with the World Bank.

E. Social (including Safeguards)

93. Safeguards Action Plan (SAP). This project is being prepared under the provisions of paragraph
12 of OP 10.00 for projects in situations of urgent need for assistance. Thus, the preparation of
safeguards instruments is proposed to be deferred to the implementation phase, and an SAP has been
prepared and is included in annex 2. The SAP explains the identification and mitigation of the
environmental and social (E&S) impacts and risks at the early stage of project implementation until the
full safeguards instruments are finalized and publicly disclosed in Nigeria and through the World Bank. It
also lays out the sequencing and tentative implementation schedule for the safeguards, the roles and
responsibilities for the safeguards preparation and implementation and monitoring, and the estimated
costs to do so.

94. The World Bank policy OP 4.12 (Involuntary Resettlement) is triggered. The reconstruction and
rehabilitation of affected basic social and physical infrastructure may in some cases entail the
reconstruction of infrastructure in new locations to reduce risk and respond to the needs of displaced
and host communities affected by the crisis in the BAY states. As such, the project could involve land
acquisition.

95. Resettlement and livelihood restoration are expected to be of moderate complexity. The
foreseen low- to medium-intensity civil work activities will include reconstruction and rehabilitation of
roads, schools, health centers, WASH infrastructure, and public buildings. The land acquired for this
purpose may lead to loss of assets, sources of income, or means of livelihoods for some households of
conflict-affected people. In case any activity or subproject leads to a loss of assets, sources of income, or
means of livelihoods, a Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) or Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan (ARAP)
will be prepared in compliance with the World Bank policy and Nigerian laws before actual

Page 36 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

implementation of the activity or subproject. Upon clearance, disclosure of the produced social
safeguards documents will be carried out locally (in local languages) and through the World Bank.

96. Due to the displacement of people, traditional authorities have been weakened, which will
make it more difficult to establish land ownership. This will have an impact on how voluntary land
donation will be established in cases of resettlement. As a result, resettlement as well due diligence for
establishing ownership of land may be challenging and needs to be well managed to prevent negative
impact. In the event of any contestation over land, ownership and user rights will be verified using the
traditional institutions at the ward/village/district and emirate levels as the case may be. In areas where
land mines could have been placed, the project will ensure that no activities are undertaken by the
project in such areas until the Government confirms that the area is cleared. Educational campaigns for
the prevention of mine and unexploded ordinance accidents in areas where the project is being
implemented will also be undertaken.

97. Some public institutions such as hospitals and schools have been converted to formal and
informal camps for accommodating persons displaced by the conflict, which will necessarily imply
relocation of already displaced people. In the event that such activities are likely to occur at the
implementation phase, the subproject will not proceed until appropriate mitigation instruments are
prepared.

F. Environment (including Safeguards)

98. The project is classified as Environmental Category B. No unprecedented or cumulative adverse

E&S risks and impacts are envisaged to result from the implementation of activities that will be financed
under the MCRP. Operational Policies OP 4.01, OP 4.04, OP 4.11, and OP 4.12 have been triggered.

99. Activities supported under the proposed project are expected to potentially cause a number
of site-specific adverse E&S impacts. Therefore, the proposed project will trigger four E&S safeguards
policies: OP 4.01 (Environmental Assessment), OP 4.04 (Natural Habitats), OP 4.11 (Physical Cultural
Resources), and OP/BP 4.12 (Involuntary Resettlement), as shown in Table 4.

100. Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIAs) will be prepared depending on the scale
and impact of the subprojects. For the expected scope of freestanding subprojects, comprehensive
ESIAs will mostly not be required, as all structures and installations will have existed before, and the
project will only finance their repair, reconstruction, or reinstatement. For some larger projects (for
example, bridge reconstruction), limited ESIAs and Environmental and Social Management Plans
(ESMPs) will be required. Site-specific environmental safeguards instruments will be prepared, consulted
upon, and disclosed both countrywide in Nigeria and at the World Bank, before the physical start of
project activities, as required. Following World Bank best practice, all safeguards instruments should be
prepared before the bidding of contracts, ensuring their adequate integration and implementation by
contractors before the commencement of any civil works.

Page 37 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Table 4: Safeguards Policies Triggered by the MCRP

Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes No
Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) X
Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) X
Forests (OP/BP 4.36) X
Pest Management (OP 4.09) X
Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) X
Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) X
Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) X
Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) X
Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) X
Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60) X

G. Other Safeguard Policies (if applicable)

101. No other safeguard policies are triggered for the project.

H. World Bank Grievance Redress

102. Communities and individuals who believe that they are adversely affected by a World Bank (WB)
supported project may submit complaints to existing project-level grievance redress mechanisms or the
WB’s Grievance Redress Service (GRS). The GRS ensures that complaints received are promptly reviewed
in order to address project-related concerns. Project affected communities and individuals may submit
their complaint to the WB’s independent Inspection Panel which determines whether harm occurred, or
could occur, as a result of WB non-compliance with its policies and procedures. Complaints may be
submitted at any time after concerns have been brought directly to the World Bank's attention, and
Bank Management has been given an opportunity to respond. For information on how to submit
complaints to the World Bank’s corporate Grievance Redress Service (GRS), please visit
http://www.worldbank.org/en/projects-operations/products-and-services/grievance-redress-service. For
information on how to submit complaints to the World Bank Inspection Panel, please visit
www.inspectionpanel.org.
.

Page 38 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

VII. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND MONITORING

Results Framework
COUNTRY : Nigeria
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria

Project Development Objectives

The objectives of the Project are to: (a) support the Government of Nigeria towards rehabilitating and improving critical service delivery infrastructure,
improve the livelihood opportunities of conflict and displacement-affected communities, and strengthen social cohesion in the North East Participating
States of Borno, Yobe and Adamawa; and (b) in the event of an Eligible Crisis or Emergency, to provide immediate and effective response to said Eligible
Crisis or Emergency.

Project Development Objective Indicators

Unit of Responsibility for

Indicator Name Core Baseline End Target Frequency Data Source/Methodology
Measure Data Collection

Name: Direct project ✔ Number 0.00 150000.00 Annual Project Monitoring Reports, PCUs, Bank M&E
beneficiaries Beneficiary Survey. The support, Survey
target value of this indicator consultancy
is tentative. The actual
number of direct project
beneficiaries will depend on
the annual investment plans
prepared by the BAY state
governments under this
project.

Percentage of direct Percentage 0.00 50.00 Annual Project Monitoring Reports, PCUs, Bank M&E

Page 39 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Unit of Responsibility for

Indicator Name Core Baseline End Target Frequency Data Source/Methodology
Measure Data Collection
project beneficiaries who Beneficiary Survey support, Survey
are female consultancy

Description: Direct beneficiaries are people or groups who directly derive benefits from an intervention (i.e., children who benefit from an immunization program;
families that have a new piped water connection). Please note that this indicator requires supplemental information. Supplemental Value: Female beneficiaries
(percentage). Based on the assessment and definition of direct project beneficiaries, specify what proportion of the direct project beneficiaries are female. This indicator
is calculated as a percentage.

Name: Number of Text 0 23000 to Annual Project Monitoring Reports, PCUs, Bank M&E
beneficiaries that have 33000 Beneficiary Survey support, Survey
improved livelihoood consultancy
opportunities with project
support

Description: This indicator measures the number of beneficiaries who have received project support to improve their livelihood opportunities through restoring
immediate access to productive assets, including farmers who have received agricultural inputs and/or livestock as well as non-farmers who are provided trading
commodities and/or skill training.

Name: Number of Text 0 120000~15 Annual Project Monitoring Reports, PCUs, Bank M&E
beneficiaries with additional 0000 Beneficiary Survey support, Survey
or improved access to service consultancy
delivery infrastructure

Percentage of beneficiaries Text 0 40% Annual Project Monitoring Reports, PCUs, Bank M&E
with additional or improved Beneficiary Survey support, Survey
access to service delivery consultancy
infrastructure who are

Page 40 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Unit of Responsibility for

Indicator Name Core Baseline End Target Frequency Data Source/Methodology
Measure Data Collection
female

Description: This indicator measures the number of people benefiting from the reconstruction/rehabilitation and/or improvement of critical infrastructure, such as roads,
bridges, water, sanitation, heath centers, schools, and/or public buildings.

Name: Percentage of Text 0 42% to 60% Twice: Mid-term and Project Monitoring Reports, PCUs, Bank M&E
beneficiaries satisfied with End-of-project Beneficiary Survey support, Survey
project activities towards consultancy
increased social cohesion

Percentage of female Text 0 42% to 60% Twice: Mid-term and Project Monitoring Reports, PCUs, Bank M&E
beneficiaries satisfied with End-of-project Beneficiary Survey support, Survey
project activities towards consultancy
increased social cohesion

Description: This indicator measures the achievements of various project activities towards increased social cohesion, including increased trust amongst communities and
between different population groups. Such activities include, but are not limited to, financing social cohesion initiatives, setup of peace groups, provision of community-
based psychosocial support, and the strengthening of existing community mobilization and engagement mechanisms.

Intermediate Results Indicators

Unit of Responsibility for

Indicator Name Core Baseline End Target Frequency Data Source/Methodology
Measure Data Collection

Name: Number of affected Text 0 21000 ~ Annual Project Monitoring Reports PCUs, Bank M&E
households that have 30000 support,
received packages of life Humanitarian

Page 41 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Unit of Responsibility for

Indicator Name Core Baseline End Target Frequency Data Source/Methodology
Measure Data Collection
support and/or basic agencies reporting
necessity assistance from systems
the project

Description: This indicator measures the total number of affected households that have received life support and/or basic necessity assistance from the project. Such
assistance includes provision of kitchen sets, mosquito nets, plastic mats, blankets, as well as hygiene kits and other essential basic life needs.

Name: Number of forcibly Text 0 21000 ~ Annual Project Monitoring Reports PCUs, Bank M&E
displaced people and host 30000 support,
community members who Humanitarian
have received support to re- agencies reporting
engage in productive systems
activities

Percentage of female Text 0 50% Annual Project Monitoring Reports PCUs, Bank M&E
beneficiaries in forcibly support,
displaced people and host Humanitarian
community members who agencies reporting
have received support to systems
re-engage in productive
activities

Description: This indicator measures the number of IDP beneficiaries who receive support from the project to regain/maintain self-reliance through restoring productive
activities or other necessary means of production.

Name: Number of people Text 0 21000 ~ Annual Project Monitoring Reports PCUs, Bank M&E
who have participated in 30000 support
social cohesion initiatives
launched or strengthened

Page 42 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Unit of Responsibility for

Indicator Name Core Baseline End Target Frequency Data Source/Methodology
Measure Data Collection
through project financing

Description: This indicator measures the number of people who actively participate in the various social cohesion initiatives funded by the project, such as basic skill
training for youth, sports for peace activities, cultural activities for promoting common identities, etc.

Name: Number of people Text 0 21000 ~ Annual Project Monitoring Reports PCUs, Bank M&E
who have participated in 30000 support
peace groups created
through the project

Percentage of vulnerable Text 0 30% Annual Project Monitoring Reports PCUs, Bank M&E
population (including support
women and forcbly
displaced persons) among
the participants of peace
groups created through the
project

Description: This indicator measures the number of people who participate in the peace groups created through the project, such as local peace platforms and other
similar activities. This indicator will also be disaggregated to measure the percentage of vulnerable population (including women and forcibly displaced persons) among
the participants.

Name: Number of trauma Text 0 3500 ~ Annual Project Monitoring Reports, PCUs, Bank M&E
victims who have received 5000 Beneficiary Survey support, Survey
psychosocial service/support consultancy
from community programs

Page 43 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Unit of Responsibility for

Indicator Name Core Baseline End Target Frequency Data Source/Methodology
Measure Data Collection
Description: This indicator measures the number of trauma victims of BH who receive community-based psychosocial support funded through the project, including
recreational, ritual and social activities, as well as provision of counseling services to groups or individuals.

Name: Percentage of Text 0 70% to Annual Project Monitoring Reports, PCUs, Bank M&E
subprojects with citizen 100% MIS, Beneficiary Survey support
engagement mechanisms

Description: This indicator measures the level of citizen engagement in the planning, budgeting and implementation of subprojects during the lifespan of the operation.
Subprojects such as creation of community-based initiatives, reconstruction/rehabilitation of critical infrastructure facilities will incorporate a selection of functional and
appropriate tools and/or mechanisms to engage citizens to the largest extent possible, including but not limited to project education and communication channels, public
notice and citizen participation mechanisms, grievance redress system, etc.

Name: Length of roads Text 0 105km ~ Annual Project Monitoring Reports PCUs, Bank M&E
reconstructed or 150km support
rehabilitated, in kilometers

Description: Number of kilometers of roads (including functioning drainage structures) reconstructed/rehabilitated with transport services restored.

Name: Number of schools Text 0 105 to 150 Annual Project Monitoring Reports PCUs, Bank M&E
reconstructed, rehabilitated, support
improved, and/or equipped

Description: Number of schools reconstructed, rehabilitated, improved, and/or supplied with equipment for restoring normal operation

Name: Number of health Text 0 105 to 150 Annual Project Monitoring Reports PCUs, Bank M&E
facilities reconstructed,

Page 44 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Unit of Responsibility for

Indicator Name Core Baseline End Target Frequency Data Source/Methodology
Measure Data Collection
rehabilitated, improved, support
and/or equipped

Description: Number of health facilities reconstructed, rehabilitated, improved, and/or supplied with medical supplies or equipment for restoring normal operation.

Name: Number of Text 0 10500 ~ Annual Project Monitoring Reports PCUs, Bank M&E
beneficiaries provided with 15000 support
access to improved water,
sanitation, and/or hygiene
facilities

Percentage of beneficiaries Text 0 50% Annual Project Monitoring Reports PCUs, Bank M&E
provided with access to support
improved water,
sanitation, and/or hygiene
facilities who are female

Description: Number of people who are provided with access to constructed or rehabilitated water, hygiene and/or sanitation facilities under the project, including water
points, boreholes, latrines, septic tanks, and/or solid waste management facilities.

Name: Number of public Text 0 28 to 40 Annual Project Monitoring Reports PCUs, Bank M&E
buildings rehabilitated or support
reconstructed

Description: Number of public buildings destroyed in BH conflict that have been reconstructed or rehabilitation for restoring normal operation.

Name: Number of Text 0 210 to 300 Annual Project Monitoring Reports PCUs, Bank M&E

Page 45 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Unit of Responsibility for

Indicator Name Core Baseline End Target Frequency Data Source/Methodology
Measure Data Collection
government officials trained support
in crisis recovery
management skills

Description: Number of federal, state, and local government officials who have received skill training related to crisis recovery management topics, such as emergency
responses, budget planning and monitoring, transparency and accountability, grievance redress mechanisms, etc.

Name: Submission of annual Yes/No N Y Annual Project Monitoring Reports PCUs, Bank M&E
investment and prioritization support
plans by each state during
the project cycle

Description: This indicator tracks the capacity of each state government and PCU to successfully prepare and submit annual investment and prioritization plans under the
project, according to acceptable templates and standards by the WB.

Page 46 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Target Values

Project Development Objective Indicators FY

Indicator Name End Target

Direct project beneficiaries 150000.00

Number of beneficiaries that have improved livelihoood opportunities with project support 23000 to 33000

Number of beneficiaries with additional or improved access to service delivery infrastructure 120000~150000

Percentage of beneficiaries satisfied with project activities towards increased social cohesion 42% to 60%

Percentage of direct project beneficiaries who are female 50.00

Percentage of beneficiaries with additional or improved access to service delivery infrastructure who are female 40%

Percentage of female beneficiaries satisfied with project activities towards increased social cohesion 42% to 60%

Intermediate Results Indicators FY

Indicator Name Baseline End Target

Number of affected households that have received packages of life support and/or basic
0 21000 ~ 30000
necessity assistance from the project

Number of forcibly displaced people and host community members who have received
0 21000 ~ 30000
support to re-engage in productive activities

Page 47 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Indicator Name Baseline End Target

Number of people who have participated in social cohesion initiatives launched or

0 21000 ~ 30000
strengthened through project financing

Number of people who have participated in peace groups created through the project 0 21000 ~ 30000

Number of trauma victims who have received psychosocial service/support from community
0 3500 ~ 5000
programs

Percentage of subprojects with citizen engagement mechanisms 0 70% to 100%

Length of roads reconstructed or rehabilitated, in kilometers 0 105km ~ 150km

Number of schools reconstructed, rehabilitated, improved, and/or equipped 0 105 to 150

Number of health facilities reconstructed, rehabilitated, improved, and/or equipped 0 105 to 150

Number of beneficiaries provided with access to improved water, sanitation, and/or hygiene
0 10500 ~ 15000
facilities

Number of public buildings rehabilitated or reconstructed 0 28 to 40

Number of government officials trained in crisis recovery management skills 0 210 to 300

Submission of annual investment and prioritization plans by each state during the project
N Y
cycle

Percentage of female beneficiaries in forcibly displaced people and host community

0 50%
members who have received support to re-engage in productive activities

Percentage of vulnerable population (including women and forcbly displaced persons) among 0 30%

Page 48 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Indicator Name Baseline End Target

the participants of peace groups created through the project

Percentage of beneficiaries provided with access to improved water, sanitation, and/or

0 50%
hygiene facilities who are female

Page 49 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

ANNEX 1: DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION

COUNTRY: Nigeria
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria
Introduction

1. This annex provides a detailed description of the project design approach, proposed project
components, and resource allocation across these components.

Project Design Approach

2. The design of the MCRP is guided by the programmatic-framework approach to crisis recovery
that the World Bank and development partners have jointly developed and implemented in various
countries successfully. Under this approach, the MCRP is seen as a subset of a larger multi-sector and
multi-partner solution to crisis recovery toward addressing the service delivery and social cohesion
needs identified under the RPBA. Making use of the World Bank’s leadership and comparative
advantage in this area, the MCRP is intended to serve as a central node of convergence for coordinating
the related interventions from the Government, development partners, and other World Bank projects.
This will help deliver mutually complementary multi-sector outcomes while following the key guiding
principles and synchronized implementation modalities described below.

3. Flexibility. Despite the Government’s military success in regaining territory and restricting
insurgency operations to a few pockets of resistance, the BH retains the ability to periodically stage
attacks, marking a transition to a more asymmetric conflict. This means that while the return of forcibly
displaced population and reconstruction is possible in some areas, displacement is likely to continue;
reconstruction outcomes will remain at risk; and there will be limited scope for reconciliation in some
areas. Urban centers are likely to remain more secure than large swathes of rural territory. Given these
circumstances, the proposed framework will allow room for midcourse adjustments and flexibility
during the project implementation in the selection of specific subprojects across the project
components that spread over multiple sectors. It will also allow flexibility in resource allocation across
various project components, as well as in the distribution of project funds across three targeted states
under the project. This is also necessary given the uncertainty on what other development partners will
be funding over the next few years, so as to avoid overlaps and/or gaps. However, taking such a flexible
approach also requires building flexibility in the project Results Framework and other related aspects.

4. Systematic and progressive prioritization. Given the gaps between the overall needs identified
by the RPBA and the available resources from both domestic and international sources, there will be a
need for systematic, criteria-based, and progressive prioritization of needs across and within various
sectors and the six affected states. This process of prioritization has been commenced by the GoN and is
informed by the Buhari Plan and the RPBA Strategic Framework and factors in the existing and planned
programs by the GoN and other development partners. This has manifested in the prioritization of the
MCRP resources along the following lines:

(a) Geographical prioritization. The MCRP has been designed to respond to critical needs in
the three most affected BAY states only. Within these states also, the selection of specific
interventions will be based on a bottom-up consultative approach led by the states. Such

Page 50 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

selection shall be a function of multiple prioritization criteria and conflict-sensitive

programming conducted together by the states and development partners.

(b) Sectoral and subsectoral prioritization. Similarly, the MCRP is limited to interventions in
elected critical sectors, based on the results of preliminary post-RPBA prioritization
exercises conducted together with these states and the relevant development partners.
The project will use similar prioritization criteria and inclusive processes for developing
specific investment plans and distributing project resources within and across various
project components and subcomponents during the course of implementation.

(c) Temporal prioritization. The MCRP is premised on a multi-phased engagement with the
GoN that entails providing a combination of support for both immediate and medium-term
conflict recovery and resilience building. Such an approach will increase the likelihood of a
smoother transition from immediate to medium-term recovery as well as ensure the
deepening, consolidation, and sustainability of the intended project impact.

5. Conflict sensitivity. The prioritization process, along with overall project preparation and
implementation, is being conducted adopting a bottom-up approach led by the states and informed by
community consultations. Conflict sensitivity will be central to this project, ensuring proper
identification and mitigation of conflict risks, supporting conflict resilience, and addressing key drivers of
conflict.

6. Maximizing complementarity and avoiding overlaps. A key rationale for taking the
programmatic-framework design approach for the MCRP is to ensure complementarity and avoid
duplications across the range of relevant infrastructure restoration and social cohesion building
interventions currently on the anvil by a range of government institutions and development partners.
Annex 5 provides a list of the currently known and/or proposed interventions in the NE relevant to the
project. These have been, and will continue to be, taken into consideration to ensure that the MCRP
builds synergies and complementarities with these projects. This is, however, not a one-off process and
will require the institution of a rigorous institutional decision-making process toward filling sectoral and
geographic gaps where possible and necessarily avoiding overlaps where necessary.

7. Concentration and consolidation of intended project impact. Given that project resource
allocation is only a fraction of the overall needs estimate of the RPBA, the project will only target the
three most heavily and directly affected BAY states to concentrate and deepen the project impact in
fewer states rather than spreading it thin across the six affected states. Hence, the selection of the
constituent project states, and subsequent project resource allocation across these states, is based
largely on the principles of ‘impact proportionality’ and ‘impact maximization’. The AfDB and IsDB
infrastructure interventions are being spread across the three other largely displacement-affected
states, which also allows the World Bank project to place focus on the BAY states.

Proposed Resource Allocation across Project Components and Subcomponents

8. To achieve the aforementioned objectives, it is proposed to take a programmatic and multi-

sector approach to recovery and peace building as recommended by the RPBA. Accordingly, at this
stage, the MCRP will be implemented through the following three components. These components are
proposed to be subsets of the corresponding and larger program-level needs identified in the RPBA. The

Page 51 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

project design is based on providing a programmatic, multi-sector, and multi-partner solution to crisis
recovery in the three BAY states.

Table 1.1. Project Costing by Component

World Bank Financing
Project Components SDR,
US$, millions
millions
Component 1: Strengthening Peace Building, Stability, and Social Cohesion 22.3 30
Component 2: Infrastructure Rehabilitation and Service Delivery Restoration and 111.6 150
Improvement
Component 3: Technical Assistance and Program Management Support 14.9 20
Component 4: Contingent Emergency Response 0 0
Total Costs 148.8 200

Detailed Description of Proposed Components

Component 1: Strengthening Peace Building, Stability, and Social Cohesion - SDR 22.3 million (US$30
million equivalent)

9. The component draws upon, and is a subset of, the peace building and social cohesion needs
and strategy developed under the RPBA. The needs identified under the RPBA in this respect are to the
tune of US$150 million and can be categorized as follows: (a) safe and voluntary return of forcibly
displaced population; (b) reconciliation, peace building, and community cohesion; (c) local governance
and citizen engagement; and (d) community security, justice, human rights, mine action, and small arms
control.

10. Among the needs identified by the RPBA, the MCRP prioritizes interventions that (a) mitigate
the effects of the conflict on forcibly displaced population and host communities, (b) prevent the
eruption of further conflict by addressing both the root causes of violence as well as the proximate
sources of continued social tensions and conflicts, and (c) strengthen the institutional systems and
capacities for recovery and peace building.

11. Overall needs for the safe and voluntary return of forcibly displaced population. Over 2.3
million people remain forcibly displaced because of the BH insurgency. Displacement in the NE has
exacerbated existing vulnerabilities causing nearly 800,000 individuals to lose their income.12 Food,
shelter, and water have been identified as the main short-term needs for people who were forcibly
displaced and in the host communities, while the restoring of livelihoods, communities, and social
networks remains a priority in the medium to long term. The loss of traditional livelihoods, productive
assets, homes, and possessions has forced most individuals and families into extreme poverty, causing
widespread dependency on external support for basic needs. Access to basic services previously
available in places of origin has also been severely affected. Although a majority of displaced people
express a desire to return, security, economic opportunities, and access to basic services remain the
primary impediment. As the forcibly displaced begin to return, there is a critical need to ensure that the
basic living and livelihoods needs of these returnees are adequately met.

12
The Joint World Bank-UNHCR Lake Chad Forced Displacement Assessment, 2016.

Page 52 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

12. Overall needs on reconciliation, peace building, and social cohesion. Drawing from the RPBA,
this subcomponent will aim to restore and strengthen the social fabric in the NE to prevent and resolve
conflict and increase cohesion. Priorities will differ between insecure areas where populations remain
displaced and areas where return occurs. In some areas, the priority will be toward addressing tensions
between IDP and hosts, and in others, it will be to target processes of reintegration or reconciliation by
bridging gaps along specific social faults that have been hardened as a result of the conflict.

13. Overall needs on local governance and citizen engagement under the RPBA. The conflict has
significantly diminished public administration capacities because of the destroyed public administration
offices, equipment, and systems and the loss of personnel due to displacement, injury, or death. The
cadre of local government civil servants, therefore, needs to be supported; the return of those displaced
(wherever feasible) needs to be planned, organized, and funded. Capacities of LGAs in areas hosting IDP
should be buttressed financially as well as administratively, including in the areas of revenue generation
and tax administration. There is also the urgent need to support mechanisms that enable local
communities, including the forcibly displaced, to voice their needs and engage in the recovery process.
These include channels for grievance redress and conflict resolution for addressing perceptions of
inequitable access to support and services during the recovery process. This is particularly crucial in
areas where competition between IDP and host communities over services and livelihood opportunities
is causing friction and where tensions along sectarian lines persist. Reducing further political exclusion
will require initiatives to strengthen existing community engagement mechanisms such as traditional
leaders, extended family networks, and local associations.

14. Overall needs on community security and justice. The BH attacks and violence have targeted
both public buildings and court buildings, decimating service delivery, including effective access to
justice, and harming the legitimacy of the institutions responsible for delivering these services during
and after the crisis. As such, restoring the rule-of-law services in the NE, starting with services and
initiatives at the community level, will be needed to ensure that justice providers are available,
accessible, accountable, and making quality decisions in the interests of their entire community and
ensure that the rights of women, children, and forcibly displaced population are respected—all of which
are key to reestablishing community safety. The conflict has also exacerbated the plight that women and
girls in NE Nigeria historically face. Sexual and gender-based violence, including among displaced
communities, has risen, making it necessary to address such dynamics through both mitigating and
preventive interventions.

15. RPBA strategy. The RPBA identified needs of around US$48.7 million to facilitate the safe,
dignified, and voluntary return and reintegration of forcibly displaced population.13 Apart from the
scaling up of existing humanitarian support, the RPBA identifies the need for more durable and medium-
term initiatives that facilitate the transition of forcibly displaced population in the processes of return
and reintegration by addressing their basic living and livelihood needs. This is considered key toward
improving social cohesion by alleviating immediate tensions over access to employment between
affected, host, and displaced communities and individuals. In spite of the significant support provided by
the GoN and the international community, significant gaps remain, particularly in the provision of
sustainable early to medium-term solutions and the institutionalization of processes for safe and
voluntary return and/or reintegration of forcibly displaced population. On reconciliation and peace
building, the core RPBA strategy is to develop community-level platforms, either new ones or building

13
Excluding the infrastructure, service delivery, and livelihoods needs covered by other RPBA components.

Page 53 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

upon existing ones, for promoting dialogue and supporting interaction among various segments of
society around activities that facilitate the restoration of social relationships. Finally, the strategy will
aim to facilitate cohesion by enhancing capacity to recover from trauma through the provision of
psychosocial support. On local governance and citizen engagement, the core RPBA strategy is the
strengthening of government capacities to perform their functions and the restoration of relationships
between citizens and the Government.

16. Interventions planned under MCRP. This component will focus on three main types of activities:

 Transitional support toward stabilization and self-reliance. Aimed at facilitating

communities, households, and individuals transition from an acute humanitarian crisis into
early recovery, stabilization, and self-reliance by

(a) Increasing and improving the access of vulnerable host and forcibly displaced families
to basic living amenities through the provision of life-support packages and basic
necessity kits to newly displaced families and returnees whose houses have been
damaged and vulnerable host community members, allowing them to restore their
households in the short term;14 and

(b) Restoring immediate access to productive assets by providing agricultural inputs and
livestock for farming families and trading commodities for non-farmers. Inputs to be
provided could include, but not necessarily be limited to, seeds of local staple crops
(that is, maize, sorghum, beans, or cowpea); fertilizers (that is, nitrogen, phosphorus,
and potassium and urea); and manual tools. Pesticides are excluded from agricultural
support inputs. Activities under this component will target forcibly displaced
populations and host populations highly dependent on humanitarian support in areas
of return, host communities, and areas recently liberated, providing alternatives
toward self-reliance.

 Community resilience and social cohesion. Aimed at making communities more resilient
and cohesive through the strengthening of peaceful interaction and community
participation by

(a) Setting up local peace groups that bring together local authorities (government,
traditional, and religious) and representatives of different segments of the
population. These groups will be in charge of assessing social cohesion and peace
building needs at the community level and facilitating the identification of priority
activities, excluding direct cash transfer, to address these needs in a participatory
manner;

(b) Financing social cohesion activities prioritized by local peace groups in a participatory
manner throughout the duration of the project. Activities financed will be
implemented by specialized service providers and will address key drivers of the
conflict and acute needs emerging in the conflict and postconflict periods, such as

14
This could include, but not necessarily be limited to, kitchen sets, mosquito nets, plastic mats, blankets, hygiene kits, and
other necessities.

Page 54 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

(but not limited to) social integration of out-of-school children and youth at risk;
provision of life and soft skills for collective action; conduct of cultural, sport, and
social activities that promote common identities and intergroup interaction; and
conduct of various violence-prevention and de-stigmatization campaigns. All
community contributions will be provided in kind only, recognizing their valuable
participation and ensuring community ownership. Local communities will provide
performance oversight and decision-making authority of the activities; and

(c) Providing community-based psychosocial support through group-based therapy;

recreational, ritual, and socializing activities; and peer support, as well as specialized
services to victims of violence and population that present high risk factors for
violence (such as substance abuse).

 Citizen-government relationship building for recovery. Activities that aim to build the
government capacity and support them in planning for recovery and peace building
interventions, including

(a) Training of government officials in peace building and conflict sensitiveness and

(b) Strengthening the capacities of state and local institutions to plan for the complex
recovery process; addressing the return and reintegration of forcibly displaced people
through participatory and area-based planning; preparing and implementing
community safety plans to prevent violence and insecurity; and mainstreaming
recovery needs into government planning and budgeting. Plans prepared under this
activity will constitute the basis for the formulation of annual investment plans under
the MCRP after the first year, moving from an emergency to an area-based approach
to recovery.

17. Complementarities with other World Bank projects. The proposed interventions align well with
activities supported under the FADAMA III investments on food security and livelihoods support by
meeting the immediate needs of IDP and host communities in respect of basic amenities and livelihoods
through the provision of non-food items necessary for return and reintegration. Efforts to restore long-
term livelihoods by FADAMA III and YESSO through community-driven development grants for
agricultural projects and conditional cash transfers will also be complemented by this component, by
focusing on the necessary means of production immediately after spontaneous or planned return.
Similarly, sustainable livelihoods interventions have been excluded as they are the central objective of
interventions such as FADAMA III and YESSO AF. The local level investments for psychosocial support
proposed under this subcomponent at the community level will supplement investments on capacity
strengthening of national actors in response to the psychosocial needs of the affected population
supported by the NSHIP and SEPIP. However, assistance provided under this component will be closely
coordinated with that offered by YESSO and CSDP, including avoiding geographical overlaps and
ensuring compatible service standards.

18. Complementarities with initiatives by other development partners. International partners’

support is largely focused on meeting the most pressing humanitarian needs emerging from forced
displacement. The UN system, USAID, DFID, International Committee of the Red Cross, and the Japanese
and Canadian governments have contributed humanitarian relief and provide emergency shelter,

Page 55 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

health, nutrition, WASH, and child protection assistance to affected populations. In addition to this, the
EU GIZ IDP program includes community reconciliation and confidence-building activities, mostly
focusing on the preparation of community-based development plans. USAID is implementing a small
grants initiatives to counter violent extremism and for youth de-radicalization. Program activities
supported by the MCRP adequately complement these efforts by focusing on bridging the gap between
humanitarian and developmental needs and in the institutionalization of processes for durable solutions
for the safe and voluntary return and reintegration of the forcibly displaced. Coordination with these
agencies will be maintained to ensure that overlaps are avoided, gaps are minimized, and strategies and
operational modalities across these interventions are duly synchronized.

Component 2: Infrastructure Rehabilitation and Service Delivery Restoration and Improvement - SDR
111.6 million (US$150 million equivalent)

19. This component will include the rehabilitation of critical physical infrastructure and the
sustainable restoration of service delivery in targeted LGAs in the three affected BAY states. This will
include (a) rehabilitation of damaged state and local roads and bridges; (b) restoration of municipal
services including water supply, sanitation, and solid waste management; (c) rehabilitation of social
infrastructure, including schools and health facilities; and (d) rehabilitation of public buildings and other
important community infrastructure. Seizing the opportunity provided by the crisis, all assets and
services financed under the project will be designed to be rebuilt or rehabilitated to improved build-
back-better standards. This could entail elements such as right-sizing, right-siting, structural
improvements, improved quality control and service delivery regulation, and strengthened operations
and maintenance standards.

20. Complementarity with World Bank AF. The only other AF project that will support
infrastructure is the CSDP; however, the scale of infrastructure will be different. While the CSDP focuses
on the empowerment of communities to develop, implement, and monitor micro social infrastructure
projects including natural resource management interventions, the MCRP will support larger-scale
infrastructure projects, such as roads, bridges, schools, health centers, and public buildings, to restore
basic service delivery needs, managed by the state governments. WASH facilities could be one area
where some overlap could exist, and efforts will be made to ensure that activities are well coordinated.

Rehabilitation of Damaged State and Local Roads and Bridges

21. Overall needs and recovery strategy for the transport sector under the RPBA. Roads and
bridges in the NE have suffered extensive damage by explosive devices, while the movement of military
vehicles has damaged many roads. As a result, the mobility of goods, services, and people has been
seriously affected. At the local level, damaged or destroyed local roads have limited residents’ access to
markets, schools, health facilities, and other community services. The RPBA estimated total needs for
recovery in the sector equivalent to US$538 million. The recovery strategy for the transport sector aims
to promote the mobility of goods, services, and people. The reconstruction of critical infrastructure will
be given priority, in particular, state and local roads and bridges that are key to restoring access to
productive and social facilities. The estimates of these needs in the RPBA are presented in Table 1.2:

Table 1.2. Needs Overview for Transport Sector (US$)

Needs by Activity Adamawa Borno Yobe Total
Reconstruct/repair damaged bridges 17,820,000 2,189,824 7,920,000 27,929,824

Page 56 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Needs by Activity Adamawa Borno Yobe Total

Repair damaged federal roads 32,300,000 84,898,000 60,588,000 177,786,000
Project management and contingencies 14,061,000 77,889,847 29,241,150 121,191,997
Recover public transport services — 22,425,000 13,422,500 35,847,500
Repair damaged state/LGA roads 10,350,000 150,120,000 15,540,000 176,010,000
Sector total 74,531,000 337,522,671 126,711,650 538,765,321

22. Interventions planned under the MCRP. This component will support the restoration and
improvement of critical state and local transport infrastructure, by supporting the following types of
interventions: (a) reconstruction and repair of damaged bridges and (b) repair of damaged state and
local roads. For the first year of the project, roads and bridges that are urgently needed for
rehabilitation and restoration of services will be identified by each of the three BAY states under the
Specific Investment Planning process that has been initiated under the project. For subsequent years,
specific prioritization criteria will be developed for the selection of transport subprojects, based on
conflict recovery considerations and by bringing in experiences from projects such as the World Bank
funded Nigeria Rural Access and Mobility Project (RAMP).

23. Complementarity with other World Bank projects. The World Bank funded RAMP has been
restoring rural roads since 2008 and is currently in its second phase (RAMP2). Based on the lessons
learned from RAMP and, in particular, the experience and capacity developed since 2012 in Adamawa,
there are strong possibilities for collaboration and synergy with the MCRP, particularly in the areas of
prioritization criteria, innovative approaches to implementation, and institutional and implementation
arrangements. One such key consideration will be the promotion and adaptation of the ‘network
approach’ to the MCRP that will focus not only on larger-scale infrastructure (state roads) but also on
tertiary infrastructure critical for improving agricultural connectivity.

24. Complementarity with other development partners. Neither the IsDB nor the AfDB is currently
planning interventions in the transport sector in the NE, and hence, this project subcomponent will be
addressing key unmet and unfunded needs in this sector.

Restoration of Municipal Services Including WASH and Solid Waste Management

25. Needs and recovery strategy for WASH under the RPBA. Water and sanitation recovery needs
entail construction, repair, and rehabilitation of damaged water supply and sewage infrastructure;
increase in the capacity of water supply and sanitation systems to accommodate forcibly displaced
population; and institutional support and capacity development support to state institutions in charge of
providing water. Preconflict WASH conditions in the three states were generally poor in both urban and
rural areas. The different actors responsible for water management at the policy level (Federal Ministry
of Water Resources) and river basin level as well as urban state water agencies and rural and small town
water supply and sanitation agencies need to come together to effectively restore the water supply and
provide sanitation facilities in the affected areas. Needs in these sectors as estimated by the RPBA are
presented in Table 1.3.

Page 57 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Table 1.3. Needs Overview in WASH Sector (Unit: US$)

Needs by Activity Adamawa Borno Yobe Total
Reconstruct/repair water and sanitation infrastructure in
850,748 7,282,947 683,116 8,816,811
public places
Sanitation and hygiene promotion in IDP return areas, host
1,782,870 24,061,148 1,492,440 27,336,458
communities, and institutions
Reconstruct/repair sanitation infrastructure in institutions
3,978,563 9,166,700 1,512,150 14,657,413
and public buildings
Recover damages to institutional sanitation infrastructure 8,300,000 10,100,000 7,100,000 25,500,000
Reconstruct/repair water infrastructure for host
3,402,994 29,131,787 2,732,463 35,267,244
communities and provision for IDP return areas
Reconstruct/repair water infrastructure in communities,
7,575,379 35,580,479 3,691,800 46,847,658
institutions, and public buildings
Solid waste management 3,977,053 20,677,399 3,294,764 27,949,216
Sector total 29,867,607 136,000,460 20,506,733 186,374,800
Source: RPBA 2016.

26. Interventions planned. This subcomponent will finance WASH activities in areas hosting IDP as
well as those experiencing IDP returns. This will include the reconstruction and repair of selected water
supply, sanitation, and solid waste management infrastructure and the corresponding service delivery
restoration. Project WASH investments are expected to concentrate on urban and peri-urban service
areas, including IDP settlements, amenable to permanent or temporary utility service. The project will
make provisions for operational maintenance budget to ensure the sustainability of the operations after
reconstruction and rehabilitation of water infrastructure.

27. Complementarity with other World Bank AF. WASH facilities could be one area where some
overlap could exist between the MCRP and the CSDP that supports the empowerment of communities
to develop, implement, and monitor micro social infrastructure projects. Efforts will be made to ensure
that activities are well coordinated across these projects while avoiding both gaps and overlaps.

28. Complementarity with other development partners. The AfDB is planning to provide US$137
million to finance rural water and sanitation services recovery and development, including the
reconstruction and rehabilitation of water and sanitation infrastructure in 6,872 communities;
rehabilitation and reconstruction of water and sanitation infrastructure in 817 schools and 172 health
facilities; construction of 10 multipurpose mini dams to serve as sources of water supply/irrigation;
recovery of sanitation facilities in public spaces (70 markets and motor parks); and capacity-building
activities to WASH units at the LGA level; setting up of Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene Committees;
training of artisans; and establishment of supply chains. Coordination with the AfDB will ensure that the
design and implementation of water and sanitation interventions as part of the MCRP will be
coordinated to avoid overlap of activities and maximize comparative advantages in the sector between
these two institutions. By the same token, earlier consultations with the IsDB have revealed that the
IsDB is also interested in financing the recovery of WASH sectors in the NE in their future project(s).
Hence, adequate coordination and complementarity between the MCRP and IsDB operations will be
ensured to avoid gaps and overlaps.

Rehabilitation of Schools and Education Service Delivery

29. Needs and recovery strategy for the education sector under the RPBA. The BH conflict has had
a particularly high impact on the education and vocational training systems. Schools were damaged and

Page 58 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

destroyed, teachers were threatened and in some cases killed, and schools were transformed into
shelters for IDP. For the reconstruction and recovery of the education sector to occur as efficiently as
possible, a concerted effort across federal, state, and local government actors will be necessary. The
total needs for the education sector in the three states estimated by the RPBA are listed in Table 1.4:

Table 1.4. Needs Overview in Education Sector (US$)

Needs by Activity Adamawa Borno Yobe Total
Reconstruct/repair 6-classroom block 20,775,848 65,875,000 20,625,000 107,275,848
Classroom rehabilitation 3,248,310 — 2,937,352 6,185,662
Reconstruct/repair office blocks 4,469,163 9,854,599 3,085,406 17,409,168
Reconstruct/repair latrines in schools (2 blocks, each 3 2,800,000 6,587,500 2,062,500 11,450,000
compartments)
Reconstruct/repair hand pump boreholes in schools 560,000 1,317,500 412,500 2,290,000
Reconstruct/repair motorized boreholes/overhead 2,222,500 4,611,250 1,443,750 8,277,500
tanks in schools
Build/repair school perimeter fences 22,738,914 50,139,781 15,698,414 88,577,109
Provision of tables and chairs for teachers 91,560 609,116 82,795 783,471
Provision of seats for pupils 1,069,500 4,806,240 982,400 6,858,140
Capital investment on IDP education services 19,971,000 295,285,500 23,775,000 339,031,500
Recurrent costs for IDP education services 5,040,000 74,520,000 6,000,000 85,560,000
Education sector total 82,986,795 513,606,486 77,105,117 673,698,398

30. Interventions planned under the MCRP. Despite all the undergoing interventions by the
Government, CSOs, and development partners, the gaps in meeting the recovery needs in education in
the BAY states are still huge. Starting from the needs identified in the RPBA while taking into account
other ongoing efforts, the MCRP has narrowed down its planned interventions for the restoration of
education services into three categories, after close consultations with the BAY states for intervention
selection and prioritization. These will include the following: (a) reconstruction and repair of damaged
school infrastructure, including classrooms, offices, fences, playgrounds, latrines, water
pumps/boreholes, and so on; (b) operational service delivery support to rehabilitated schools that are
not covered by SEPIP, including provision of learning materials and supplies for students and teaching
equipment, supplies, and psychosocial/pedagogical training for teachers; and (c) provision of education
services to IDP children, including funding of both the associated capital investment and recurrent costs.
As a guiding principle, all reconstruction and rehabilitation will be done on a ‘build-back-better’ basis to
ensure the quality and sustainability of the project investments.

31. Complementarity with other interventions undergoing in the education sector in the BAY
states. The proposed MCRP education sector interventions are complementary to, and do not overlap
with, the World Bank’s US$100 million credit to provide AF to the SEPIP for its coverage in the six NE
states, including the three targeted states of the MCRP. The MCRP focus is on rehabilitation of major
physical infrastructure and education service delivery restoration where SEPIP is not covering, while the
proposed AF credit of SEPIP will be used in the six NE states toward minor rehabilitation of schools, such
as small repairs and painting, window fixing, as well as providing instructional materials and addressing
teacher needs. The two operations will use the same institutional arrangements and will be in close
collaboration to ensure that there will not be gaps or overlaps in coverage.

Page 59 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Rehabilitation of Health Facilities and Health-related Service Delivery

32. Recovery needs and strategy for the health sector under the RPBA. Health facilities were
systematically targeted by the BH, leading to damage and destruction of 628 facilities in the BAY states,
of which 475 were destroyed, including 9 hospitals, 250 health centers, and 215 nonpermanent
facilities. As a result, the already weak health infrastructure in these states further deteriorated. In 2014,
the NE states recorded more than 35,000 cholera cases. Even in communities where health facilities are
functioning, lack of medicines and the cost of treatment became the key factors that prevented IDP
from accessing health services. The total needs estimate for recovery in the sector is equivalent to
US$618 million. The recovery strategy for the health sector is composed of two complementary
approaches: ensuring access to essential health and nutrition services for target groups and restoring
critical health system functions.

Table 1.5. Needs Overview in Health Sector (US$)

Needs by activity Adamawa Borno Yobe Total
Establish governance and early warning systems (capital) 378,000 5,589,000 450,000 6,417,000
Operational support to governance and early warning 882,000 13,041,000 1,050,000 14,973,000
systems (operational)
Reconstruct/rehabilitate health care facilities/infrastructure 22,916,400 71,830,400 53,168,000 147,914,800
and equipment
Health system restoration (capacity building) 352,800 5,216,400 420,000 5,989,200
Health system restoration (operational) 529,200 7,824,600 630,000 8,983,800
Risk mitigation (capital) 75,600 1,117,800 90,000 1,283,400
Risk mitigation (operational) 302,400 4,471,200 360,000 5,133,600
Service provision (capital) 3,024,000 44,712,000 3,600,000 51,336,000
Service provision (operational) 22,176,000 327,888,000 26,400,000 376,464,000
Health Sector Total 50,636,400 481,690,400 86,168,000 618,494,800

33. Interventions planned under the MCRP. The main focus of investments under the MCRP will be
the reconstruction of health centers that have been severely damaged or destroyed by the crisis. This
will include the rehabilitation/reconstruction of the physical health center buildings and associated
accommodation for medical staff on call and all the necessary investments surrounding the health
center to make it operational, including up-front investments in staff, furniture, and supplies. The
average cost for the reconstruction of a fully destroyed health care facility, including equipment but not
staff, is approximately US$215,000. Combined with the start-up costs for staffing and supplies, each
facility will require an up-front investment of US$300,000.

34. Complementarity with World Bank AF. The proposed interventions under the MCRP will align
well with the NSHIP, which will focus on restoring and strengthening health care service delivery using
an outsourced and performance-based implementation model, while the MCRP will focus mainly on the
restoration of physical infrastructure and public sector service delivery capacity. NSHIP will only finance
small repairs to health centers, while the MCRP will focus more on health centers that are severely
damaged or destroyed. With regard to geographic focus, the project proposes to align with the
approach taken by the NSHIP, by targeting LGAs that (a) were severely affected by the crisis, (b) have a
stable security environment, (c) have a high population density of IDP and conflict-affected people, and
(d) align with other World Bank projects. This way, the infrastructure reconstructed under the MCRP can
then be sustained and strengthened further by the performance-based grants from the NSHIP.

Page 60 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

35. Complementarity with other development partners. The AfDB is planning to provide US$11.5
million to finance primary health care services recovery spread across the reconstruction of 30 primary
health care centers, strengthening of the referral and outreach services to remote communities and
routine immunization services, and training programs on integrated health service delivery. This
multidimensional focus of the AfDB project allows the MCRP to concentrate on physical restoration of
health centers without risking overlaps. However, at the same time, the geographical distribution,
designs, and quality standards of interventions proposed under the MCRP and AfDB will be closely
coordinated and synchronized under the joint programming and complementary implementation
arrangements being worked out between the World Bank and AfDB.

Rehabilitation of Public Buildings

36. Recovery needs and strategy for public buildings under the RPBA. Nearly 700 public buildings
were affected by the conflict, of which 94 percent were destroyed or rendered dysfunctional otherwise.
These damaged public buildings include police stations, jails, post offices, and, most importantly, local
administrative buildings, which provided key municipal services to the residents. The rehabilitation and
restoration of local government offices is a key physical precondition to strengthening the recovery
efforts and institutional capacity at the local level and is essential for the restoration and improvement
of social contract between the affected population and the LGAs. The estimated needs regarding the
rehabilitation of the local government buildings in the RPBA are summarized in Table 1.6.

Table 1.6. Needs Overview for Public Buildings (US$)

Needs by Activity Adamawa Borno Yobe Total
Local government building 5,610,000 157,080,000 7,012,500 169,702,500
Total 5,610,000 157,080,000 7,012,500 169,702,500

37. Interventions planned under the MCRP. This subcomponent will finance the rehabilitation and
reconstruction of damaged local government buildings, selected through a prioritization exercise led by
the states and the LGAs. The first-year interventions will be determined based on the urgent needs
identified by each state under the Specific Investment Planning exercise. Importantly, the project-
funded buildings will include designated spaces for community assembly, town hall meetings, and other
community activities to maximize the capacities and functions of local government buildings for social
accountability and community reconciliation.

38. Complementarity with World Bank’s AF projects and other development partner programs.
There are no known or expected overlaps between this project subcomponent and any of the AF
projects of the World Bank or the AfDB project that is under preparation. The rehabilitation of local
government buildings will actually complement all of these projects by providing a physical foundation
for LGA to function more effectively and efficiently.

Component 3: Technical Assistance and Program Management Support - SDR 14.9 million (US$20
million equivalent)

39. This component will include TA for (a) strengthening the institutional capacity for the
coordination of the programmatic recovery program, in line with the Buhari Plan and the RPBA and (b)
strengthening the MCRP implementation capacity. Support for overall programmatic and policy
coordination at the federal, interstate, and intrastate levels will include the provision of TA for the

Page 61 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

development of implementation and performance management frameworks for programmatic

recovery. Project implementation support will include (a) program management costs, including the
engagement of a PMC; project M&E; contract management; FM and procurement; and safeguards
implementation, monitoring, and management; (b) immediate and medium-term support and capacity
building for project implementation in the PCUs and sectoral line agencies; and (c) setting up of citizen
engagement and third-party monitoring mechanisms. It is envisaged that the PMC would be hired by the
PCNI on behalf of the states. Other development partners could be invited to provide financial support
to the PMC if needed, instead of every partner engaging the PMCs separately.

Component 4: Contingent Emergency Response - SDR 0 million (US$0 million equivalent)

40. This CERC is included under the project in accordance with OP/BP 10.00, paragraphs 12 and 13,
for situations of urgent need of assistance, as a project-specific CERC. This will allow for rapid
reallocation of project proceeds in the event of a natural or man-made disaster or crisis that has caused
or is likely to imminently cause a major adverse economic and/or social impact to address eligible
emergency needs under the conditions established in its operations manual.

41. This component will have no funding allocation initially and will be used to draw resources from
the uncommitted expenditure category in case of activation and World Bank approval. To trigger this
component, the Government needs to declare an emergency or provide a statement of fact justifying
the request for the activation of the use of emergency funding. To allocate funds to this component, the
Government may request the World Bank to reallocate project funds to support response and
reconstruction.

42. If an IRM is established, this component will serve as an IRM CERC to allow the reallocation of
uncommitted funds from the project portfolio to the IRM DA to address emergency response and
recovery costs, if approved by the World Bank. This component could also be used to channel additional
funds should they become available as a result of an emergency.

43. Disbursements will be made against a positive list of critical goods or the procurement of works
and consultant services required to support the immediate response and recovery needs. A specific
Emergency Response Operations Manual will apply to this component, detailing FM, procurement,
safeguards, and any other necessary implementation arrangements.

Page 62 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

ANNEX 2: IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS

COUNTRY: Nigeria
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria

Project Institutional and Implementation Arrangements

1. The MCRP makes up a subset of a broader ongoing multi-sectoral recovery and stabilization
program in the NE. In this context, there are multiple stakeholders that need to be engaged in different
functions and sectors to ensure strong ownership. Key players that need to be considered in the design
of a functioning institutional arrangement include:

 FMoF. This ministry is the main counterpart for the World Bank for financial allocation and
disbursements and oversight of compliance with the newly introduced fiscal sustainability
plan to which state governments are committed:

Table 2.1. Commitments from State Governments under the Fiscal Sustainability Plan
Actions Deadline
Publish state budget online annually. March 2017
Publish budget implementation performance report online quarterly. March 2017
Publish audited annual financial statements within 6 months of financial year-end. December
Implement a centralized Treasury Single Account in each state. 2016
Introduce a system of continuous audit (internal audit).
Provide introduction and ensure compliance with the International Public Sector Accounting Standards.
Create a fixed asset and liability register. June 2017
Carry out biometric capture of all states’ civil servants to eliminate payroll fraud. December
2016

 Vice President’s office. The Vice President, as the second in command in the Government,
spearheaded the implementation of the RPBA to ensure that government counterparts
were fully involved throughout the process. The Vice President’s office will continue to use
its convening power to ensure the project remains fully anchored and coordinated among
the respective line ministries at the federal and state levels. It will coordinate the
implementation of the recovery and stabilization with a Strategic Action Plan by chairing
the PCNI.

 PCNI. The PCNI was recently established by a Presidential Executive Order from President
Buhari in September 2016, to serve as a special-purpose vehicle for the implementation of
the Buhari Plan with responsibility for direct oversight coordination and monitoring of all
interventions in the NE region. While the PCNI will not be implementing recovery projects,
it will approve, monitor, evaluate, coordinate, and guide the implementation of all NE
intervention efforts under the Buhari Plan, including those of the Government,
development partners, NGOs, and relevant MDAs. The Vice President will oversee the
activities of the PCNI and will be responsible for accountability, budgetary oversight, and
legislative advocacy. The PCNI will also take over the responsibilities and budgets of PINE
and the Safe Schools Initiative. The PCNI will have a tenure of three years, by which time a

Page 63 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

long-term regional development framework or entity is expected to be legislated to drive

the long-term development of the NE region.

 FMBNP. This ministry is responsible for (among other things) formulating national
development plans; coordinating such plans at the federal, state, and local government
levels; and monitoring projects and progress relating to plan implementation. The ministry
has representatives reporting to it in each state government that could also play a role in
project planning and oversight at the state level.

 NEDC. The GoN contemplates the establishment of a new executive agency within three
years, modelled on the Niger Delta Development Commission, to support regional
development. The operational specifics of the NEDC are to be enacted in an establishment
act.

 State governments of the NE. Each headed by a State Governor, the states will be
responsible for project implementation. Prioritized strategic plans of action are being
developed and consulted on by the states to identify immediate needs and financing gaps.
This will ensure a bottom-up and state-driven approach. This complements the top-down
policy guidance and coordination provided by the Strategic Action Plan for the NE.

 Governors Forums. There are numerous Governors Forums that are responsible for policy
dialogue and could be used to ensure effective coordination and emulation through peer
learning and review. These forums include the Northern Governors Forum, the North East
Governors Forum, and so on. Policy coordination and oversight could be considered
through these forums to ensure widespread state government ownership.

2. The proposed project will build on existing institutional structures and will establish new
bodies only where needed, with specific and time-bound mandates. Being in a conflict without
precedent, the institutional landscape in Nigeria has been evolving and adapting to respond to the
challenges posed by this crisis. New bodies for the recovery of the NE have been established at the
federal and state levels, including the PCNI and the Ministry of Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and
Resettlement in Borno State. Yet, some of these institutions will evolve with time, and possibly new and
more permanent ones will emerge, including the possible creation of the NEDC. The project is hence
proposing to build and strengthen existing institutions to perform roles such as interagency coordination
at the federal and state levels and intergovernmental coordination across the three tiers of the
Government. To this end, the GoN will develop and maintain a detailed PIM to further elaborate the
roles and responsibilities of various segments and tiers of the project’s implementation apparatus as
well as lay out detailed technical and operational decision-making processes.

Recovery Program Coordination

3. The MCRP activities will align with the overall recovery and stabilization Strategic Action Plan
for the NE, coordinated by a federal-level apex committee. This will likely be initially convened by the
PCNI, anchored within the Vice President’s office. The committee includes representatives from the Vice
President’s office, the PCNI, the Secretary to the Government, the FMoF, the FMBNP, and the BAY State
Governors. This committee is also envisioned to provide oversight of the recovery program activities in
the NE, as well as central policy guidance and standard-setting, as required on a periodic basis, to ensure

Page 64 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

effective coordination and harmonization of recovery and peace building initiatives in the NE. Within
three years, the GoN contemplates the establishment of a NEDC to coordinate all interventions under
the Buhari plan.

4. Interstate coordination. Coordination will be carried out on a regular basis, ensuring

consistency of recovery policy and programming across different states and regular dialogue between
the states to ensure effective policy coordination and alignment of implementation arrangements.
Interstate meetings will take place at least on a six-monthly basis. These will be facilitated by the PCNI,
including the PCNI state officers.

5. Intrastate coordination through state steering committees. At the state level, the project will
support the coordination and collective decision making among MDAs involved in the recovery and
peace building process through the setup of a recovery and peace building steering committee. The
state steering committees will coordinate and oversee the implementation of recovery and peace
building efforts at the state level, ensuring synergies across initiatives supported by different
development partners.

Project Implementation

6. State-level PCUs. A state-level coordination mechanism in each of the states will be established
to ensure effective multi-sectoral coordination across all recovery and peace building initiatives. State
PCUs will ensure technical, M&E, fiduciary, and safeguards oversight. The PCUs will focus on quality and
process oversight, FM, procurement, reporting, contract management, and M&E and on ensuring social
and environmental safeguards compliance. For Component 1, the PCUs will also be in charge of
implementation functions given its cross-sectoral and cross-cutting nature. For Components 2 and 3, the
implementation functions and responsibilities will be assigned to the relevant state line departments,
where there is capacity. To develop economies of scale and a coherent state-led crisis recovery program,
the PCUs will also ensure the MCRP’s coordination with related infrastructure projects supported by the
IsDB and AfDB.

7. For Component 1, project implementation will be carried out by the state PCUs, taking into
account the intersectoral nature of the component and that functions such as return and reintegration
of forcibly displaced population or social cohesion fall beyond the mandate of a single ministry. In this
case, the PCUs will be responsible for carrying out technical functions of site identification, development
of bidding documents, and technical assurance and oversight. For Component 2, project implementation
will be carried out by the relevant sectoral/technical MDAs in each state. The project will finance the
operating costs of the respective project teams in these MDAs to ensure that existing capacity and
organizational structures are used and enhanced where necessary. The staff working on the project will
report to the respective line agency hierarchy on a daily basis for technical implementation and will
report back to the PCUs on a regular basis for overall project implementation progress. Component 3
will be implemented by both the federal and state coordination units.

Page 65 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Figure 2.1. State-level Coordinating Structure

Note: IFI = International Financial Institution.

Proposed Capacity Building for Program Implementation under the MCRP

8. The MCRP will strengthen the capacity of the federal and state governments to implement the
recovery and stabilization Strategic Action Plan, produced based on the RPBA findings, by mobilizing
project implementation and management tools, which will feed into and support the overall
implementation framework as it evolves. For instance, to ensure adequate planning and execution of
the projects funded by the MCRP, the World Bank will build state government capacity for public
investment and asset management across the board. To ensure effective monitoring of the MCRP
implementation at the federal, state, and local levels, the World Bank will promote the use of shared
management information systems by the three tiers of government and across public agencies as well as
public disclosure of information, feeding policy dialogue, and strengthening social accountability across
the board. TA provided by the project will aim at mainstreaming the use of and leveraging of the project
implementation tools for the implementation of the recovery and stabilization Strategic Action Plan as a
whole.

9. TA will be provided at the federal and state levels to strengthen the implementation of the
overall recovery and stabilization Strategic Action Plan. It will focus on the following areas: planning,
budgeting, FM, M&E, procurement, social and environmental safeguards, and social accountability.

10. At the federal level, given the evolving institutional framework for the implementation of the
Buhari Plan (with the PCNI yet to be operationalized and the establishment of a new ad hoc executive
agency, the NEDC, under way), the project will help strengthen interagency coordination between all
relevant line ministries and parastatals and the leveraging of their respective roles and responsibility to
ensure adequate implementation of the Buhari Plan. TA to the PCNI will aim at ensuring that it can
successfully leverage all the critical functions exercised by other nodal government entities, namely the
FMBNP for the monitoring of expenditure, and so on. Accordingly, it will aim at strengthening the
institutional environment, which will allow the PCNI to operate effectively. Not all listed functions need

Page 66 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

to be internalized by the PCNI, but all need to be leveraged by it. Accordingly, the project will ensure
that all relevant information generated under different government entities on the stabilization and
recovery of the NE will be made available to the PCNI.

Table 2.2. Strengthening the Institutional Framework at the Federal Level for the Implementation of the Buhari Plan
Functions Stakeholders Entry Points for TA
Planning FMBNP  Factoring in the recovery and stabilization plan into national
macrofiscal planning (including the Medium-term Expenditure
Relevant line ministries and Framework)
parastatals (education, health, and so  Factoring in the Buhari Plan into budget planning, in relevant multi-
on) tiered systems of support (education, health, and so on)
 Alignment of sector resource allocation with the Buhari Plan
Financing FMoF  Monitoring BAY states’ compliance with the fiscal sustainability plan
 M&E of physical outputs of the Universal Basic Education
UBEC for the construction of school
Intervention Fund
facilities
NPHCDA
Monitoring FMBNP (Capex M&E framework)  Feeding in the project M&E system into the Capex M&E framework
 TA by the National Bureau of Statistics to state bureaus of statistics
National Bureau of Statistics
Coordination Vice President’s office (National  Strengthening capacity of the Vice President’s office for interagency
Economic Council) coordination
 Strengthening interstate policy coordination through peer learning
National Governors’ Forum
and review
secretariat (in preparation of
National Economic Council meetings)
Note: NPHCDA = National Primary Health Care Development Agency; UBEC = Universal Basic Education Commission.

11. At the state level, the implementation of MCRP will synergize with other relevant World Bank
and other donors’ operations to maximize the impact on service delivery of activities. This will
essentially focus on the reconstruction of public facilities funded under the MCRP, that is, strengthening
the link between physical outputs and development outcomes. Such coordination will strengthen the
link between the rebuilding of public infrastructure under the project and access to quality service
delivery; for example, school facilities rebuilt under the MCRP will be provided with qualified teachers,
educational material, and adequate management capacity (school principal, school-based management
committees, and oversight of school performance) so that pupils enrollment effectively increases.

12. The project Results Framework is also designed to align with those of these other World Bank
projects to provide the BAY state governments with an M&E tool for the whole delivery chain in the
relevant sectors, from financial inputs to service delivery outcomes through physical outputs. For that
purpose, all state-level project management units should coordinate under the aegis of the MCRP state-
level coordinating units and share information on common challenges and results.

Table 2.3. Synergizing the MCRP with Other World Bank Operations in the NE
World Bank
Thematic Areas Projects to Complementarities to Build on
Synergize with

Page 67 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

World Bank
Thematic Areas Projects to Complementarities to Build on
Synergize with
Local governance SLOGOR  TA to state Ministries of Local Governments on accounting, auditing, budgeting,
PSGRD procurement, tax administration, community-level planning, and M&E
CSDP  TA to state auditor general for local governments
FADAMA III  Social accountability mechanisms including in planning, budgeting, and public
procurement
FM SLOGOR  Public procurement
PSGRD  Budget execution
 External audit
 Capacity building for FM in line ministries
Education SEPIP AF  Teacher management and deployment
 School management
Health NSHIP AF  Increased coverage and quality of child and maternal health care
 Free pediatric and obstetric care
Agriculture FADAMA III AF  Generation of community-owned infrastructure projects
 Institutionalization of users groups
Note: PSGRD = ; SLOGOR =.

13. The following functions will be strengthened for project implementation:

14. Overall oversight and coordination. At the federal level, a dedicated team of experts will be
needed to carry out the day-to-day coordination between federal government entities as well as with
state governments, policy analysis, reporting on implementation, and analytical work. This role will be
played by the PCNI as the apex body (and, possibly in the future, by the NEDC) in the exercise of its
overall central oversight, coordination, M&E, and project progress reporting responsibilities and
functions. As part of this process, the PCNI will consolidate state-level M&E reports at the federal level
and furnish the same for the review and information of the federal government, the World Bank, and
possibly other development partners. Also, the project will strengthen the coordinating capacity of the
PCNI for the implementation of the recovery and stabilization Strategic Action Plan including by ensuring
that it avails shared information to inform collective decision making.

15. Interstate coordination. The project will facilitate peer learning, exchange of experience and
emulation across the BAY state governments as well as with non-beneficiary state governments, and
leveraging peer pressure (including through the peer review mechanism of the National Governors’
Forum).

16. State PCUs will be reinforced by a PMC that will provide timely and quality support in areas
related to technical, fiduciary, and safeguards. The PMC will provide implementation support to the
PCUs on a phased basis. This will include intensive support in the first year to build the capacity of the
PCUs and then gradually phase out over the lifetime of the project. The PMC shall be expected to
provide the PCUs with intensive ‘on-the-job’ training during the first phase of the project. The PMC will
ensure that the management of all aspects of the MCRP implementation including fiduciary, safeguards,
and technical is done in accordance with the guidelines of the World Bank and within the procedures of
the state governments. The PMC will be mandated to help state governments internalize its managerial
inputs so as to enhance the sustainability of the MCRP results.

 On technical aspects, the PMC will support the PCUs and line departments in the definition
of the design brief and consultants’ terms of reference (ToR) for feasibility studies and

Page 68 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

detailed design and advice on monitoring the project with emphasis on the quality, cost,
and progress of construction.

 On fiduciary matters, the PMC will support the preparation of the PPs, project work plans,
and procurement schedules for goods and works as well as bidding document for various
packages contained in the PP according to agreed timelines. In addition, the PMC will
support the yearly budget preparation according to the work plan and assist in the FM
according to the World Bank requirements.

 On safeguards, the PMC will assist in ensuring that subprojects are implemented in
accordance with best practices and guidelines set out by the SAP and will draft the relevant
consultants’ ToR for the preparation and implementation of site-specific ESMPs and/or
ESIAs and RAPs/ARAPs.

Detailed Component-level Implementation Arrangements

17. For Component 1, project implementation will be carried out by the state PCUs. Taking into
account the intersectoral nature of the component and that functions such as return and reintegration
of IDP or social cohesion fall beyond the mandate of a single ministry, the PCUs will be responsible for
carrying out technical functions of site identification, development of bidding documents, and technical
assurance and oversight. Currently, there is no multi-sector implementing agency in all states in charge
of peace building, reconciliation, and return and reintegration of forcibly displaced persons, given that
these are relatively new issues in the states. The Ministries of Women Affairs and Social Development,
Youth and Sports, Local Government, and Chieftaincy Affairs and agencies such as NEMA and State
Emergency Management Agencies perform some technical functions on different areas covered by the
component. Yet, capacity in some sectoral ministries is limited, translating into significant administrative
delays and poor coordination among existing government institutions, which will affect the timely and
effective implementation of the project. Institutional mandates on the activities covered by the
component are also mixed and, in some cases, unclear. To facilitate implementation, the PCUs will
coordinate the provision of inputs of these key ministries in relevant issues through the project steering
committee and will provide periodic reports of the project’s physical and financial activities

18. For Component 2, project implementation will be carried out by the relevant
sectoral/technical MDAs in each state. The project will finance the operating costs of the respective
project teams in these MDAs to ensure that existing capacity and organizational structures are used and
enhanced where necessary. The staff working on the project will report to the respective line agency
hierarchy on a daily basis for technical implementation and report back to the PCUs on a regular basis
for overall project implementation progress.

(a) Transport. Transport interventions will be aligned with each state’s rural development
policies and will be implemented by the state ministry in charge of rural roads (for
example, state Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development or state Ministry of Public
Works, depending on the state). Given the capacity limitations, these state-level entities
will need strengthening for effective project implementation. Toward that end, the MCRP
will look to profit from the lessons learned from and the capacity developed by the World
Bank’s RAMP. The RAMP implementation units are already staffed with key operational
professionals including civil servants and consultants (for example, road engineers,

Page 69 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

procurement specialist, accountant, M&E specialist, and environmentalist) and led by a

state coordinator. The key responsibilities of the implementation units include

(i) Management of the project activities during the implementation phase;

(ii) Ensuring the sustainability of the project’s rural transport investments through
designing, implementing, and promoting sound road maintenance practices, in
coordination with LGAs, whenever appropriate;

(iii) Ensuring the alignment of the project activities with the state’s rural development
policies and contributing to the design and implementation of sound rural transport
policies at the state level; and

(iv) Periodic reporting and documentation of the status of the project implementation.

(b) Water and sanitation. State governments in Nigeria, through agencies such as water
supply authorities, State Water Boards (SWBs), and the Small Towns Water and Sanitation
Agency are responsible for the “establishment, operation, quality control, and
maintenance of urban and semi-urban water supply systems and in some cases for rural
supply. They are also responsible for licensing and monitoring private water suppliers,
monitoring the quality of water supplied to the public, and providing TA to LGAs.”15
However, in the NE, the supply of water has been hampered by capacity issues at the state
level and more recently by the effects of the conflict. As such and considering the minimal
presence of the World Bank in the water sector in the NE, implementation of the MCRP
will be supported by a PMC for procurement, FM, contract management, coordination, and
M&E. In addition, three design and construction supervision consultants, one for each
state, will be responsible for the works design and construction supervision. The PMC is
expected to coordinate with the SWBs in the BAY states to ensure capacity building and a
smooth handover of provision of services and to be consistent with the sector reforms
framework that has been developed under the previous World Bank water projects.

(c) Education. The implementation arrangements will follow a similar structure as proposed in
SEPIP, which builds on the existing government administrative structures. As the project
will be implemented at the state level or below, the responsibility for the implementation
of the proposed schemes for the education sector will lie within the State Ministry of
Education in each of the BAY states. Given the weakness in capacity and the challenging
postconflict context in the BAY states, there is likely a need to strengthen the
implementation capacity through assistance provided by other partners such as NGOs,
CSOs, and community-based organizations. To closely monitor results and collect evidence
of progress, M&E units in each State Ministry of Education will take the responsibility of
monitoring and reporting, with overall monitoring by the UBEC on behalf of the Federal
Ministry of Education at the federal level and third-party validation by CSOs at the
community/school level.

15
Macheve, Berta, Alexander Danilenko, Roohi Abdullah, Abel Bove, and L. Joe Moffitt. 2015. State Water Agencies in Nigeria: A
Performance Assessment.

Page 70 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

(d) Health. The State Primary Health Care Development Agencies are responsible for primary
health care service provision, as well as the construction of primary care centers, but their
capacity is limited and will need strengthening for effective project implementation. Local
primary health care centers are the responsibility of LGAs, while hospitals are the
responsibility of the states.

(e) Public buildings and other community infrastructure. Reconstruction of local government
offices and branches at the ward level as well as area courts will be overseen by the State
Ministry of Public Works, in line with relevant building codes and standards.

19. Component 3 will be implemented by both the federal and state coordination units. It is
envisaged that the PMC will be hired by the PCNI on behalf of the states. Other development partners
could be invited to provide financial support to the PMC if needed, instead of every partner engaging
the PMCs separately.

20. The MCRP will build on existing sectoral policy coordination and standard-setting mechanisms
already in place. Because this is a multi-sector project, different sectors of intervention will be
addressed. Activities in each respective sector will align with existing mechanisms to coordinate and
harmonize standards and policies. Below is a list of sectoral coordination mechanisms already in place
that the project will ensure consistency with:

(a) Transport (road and bridge reconstruction). Given the importance of coordination at the
federal level in transport projects, the proposed project will coordinate with the Federal
Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources. Nigeria’s constitution assigns important
independent responsibility for roads to all three levels of government—the 774 LGAs, the
36 states, and the Federal Government. Each state is responsible for planning, budgeting,
financing, and executing construction and maintenance of the roads under its jurisdiction.
Many rural roads in the past were built by federal agencies such as the Directorate of Food,
Roads, and Rural Infrastructure, but, with the winding up of those programs or diminution
of financial allocations, responsibility has effectively devolved to the state governments
and particularly local governments.

(b) Water and sanitation. The Federal Ministry of Water Resources’ 2000 National Water
Supply and Sanitation Policy defined the roles of the different tiers of government in
Nigeria regarding water and sanitation (federal, state, and local). The project will ensure
complementarity with the World Bank funded Third National Urban Water Sector Reform
Project for the development of sector reform action plans in the BAY states.

(c) Education (school reconstruction). The Federal Ministry of Education will be the sectoral
authority and will undertake overall oversight and coordination at the federal level, mainly
through the UBEC. Given the security concerns in the project states and the Build-Back-
Better principle set for the MCRP, federal-level coordination and supervision will also be
required to monitor and evaluate the compliance of each scheme toward the federal
standards to ensure the quality of construction and procurement of teaching and learning
equipment and materials.

Page 71 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

(d) Health (health center reconstruction). The NPHCDA has the overall mandate for primary
health care oversight and policy coordination. A national primary health care bill was
passed in 2015, ‘Primary Health Care under One Roof’, pertaining to budgeting human
resource and FM. There are no standard guidelines at the national level for health facility
construction or design.

21. Table 2.4 lays out the responsibilities of the PCU and the respective sectoral MDA for the
respective sector and subcomponent of intervention:

Table 2.4. Responsibilities of the PCU and MDA by Sector

Activity PCU MDA

1.1. Support to safe  Quality and process oversight  Clearance of interventions and schemes
and voluntary return  Procurement of goods and services  Clearance of designs
and/or reintegration  Seeking of World Bank no-objections  Clearance of bidding documents
of displaced persons:  Contract management oversight and controls  Quality assurance
Ministries of Women  Financial reporting
Affairs, Chieftaincy  M&E
Affairs, Youth and  Certification of progress reports
Sports, and Local  Identification and preparation of interventions
Government through and schemes
the Project Steering  Preparation of designs
Committee  Preparation of bidding documents
 Procurement of contractors and supervision
consultants
 Site supervision and technical quality assurance
 Contract management
 Certification and payment
1.2. Strengthening of  Quality and process oversight  Clearance of interventions and schemes
reconciliation, peace  Procurement of goods and services  Clearance of designs
building, and  Seeking of World Bank no-objections  Clearance of bidding documents
community cohesion:  Contract management oversight and controls  Quality assurance
Ministries of Women  Financial reporting
Affairs, Chieftaincy  M&E
Affairs, Youth and  Certification of progress reports
Sports, and Local  Identification and preparation of interventions
Government through and schemes
the Project Steering  Preparation of designs
Committee  Preparation of bidding documents
 Procurement of contractors and supervision
consultants
 Site supervision and technical quality assurance
 Contract management
 Certification and payment

Page 72 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Activity PCU MDA

1.3. Strengthening of  Quality and process oversight  Clearance of interventions and schemes
local governance and  Procurement of goods and services  Clearance of designs
citizen engagement:  Seeking of World Bank no-objections  Clearance of bidding documents
Ministries of Women  Contract management oversight and controls  Quality assurance
Affairs, Chieftaincy  Financial reporting
Affairs, Youth and  M&E
Sports, and Local  Certification of progress reports
Government through  Identification and preparation of interventions
the Project Steering and schemes
Committee  Preparation of designs
 Preparation of bidding documents
 Procurement of contractors and supervision
consultants
 Site supervision and technical quality assurance
 Contract management
 Certification and payment
2.1. Roads and  Quality and process oversight  Identification of roads
bridges:  Procurement of goods and services  Preparation of designs
 Seeking of World Bank no-objections  Preparation of bid documents
State Ministry of
Agriculture and Rural  Contract management oversight and controls  Procurement of contractors and
Development or State  Financial reporting supervision consultants
Ministry of Public  M&E  Site supervision and technical quality
Works (depending on  Certification of progress reports assurance
the state)  Contract management
 Operations and maintenance
 Certification and payment of works
2.2. Water and  Quality and process oversight  Identification of sites in need of upgraded
sanitation:  Procurement of goods and services WASH facilities
 Seeking of World Bank no-objections  Preparation of designs
SWBs and the Small
 Contract management oversight and controls  Preparation of bid documents
Towns Water and
Sanitation Agency  Financial reporting  Procurement of contractors and
 M&E supervision consultants
 Certification of progress reports  Site supervision and technical quality
assurance
 Contract management
 Operations and maintenance
 Certification and payment of works
2.3. Education:  Quality and process oversight  Identification of schools
 Procurement of goods and services  Preparation of designs
State Ministry of
 Seeking of World Bank no-objections  Preparation of bid documents
Education
 Contract management oversight and controls  Procurement of contractors and
 Financial reporting supervision consultants
 M&E  Site supervision and technical quality
 Certification of progress reports assurance
 Contract management
 Operations and maintenance
 Certification and payment of works

Page 73 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Activity PCU MDA

2.4. Health:  Quality and process oversight  Identification of primary health facilitates
 Procurement of goods and services  Preparation of designs
State Primary Health
 Seeking of World Bank no-objections  Preparation of bid documents
Care Development
Agencies  Contract management oversight and controls  Procurement of contractors and
 Financial reporting supervision consultants
 M&E  Site supervision and technical quality
 Certification of progress reports assurance
 Contract management
 Operations and maintenance
 Certification and payment of works
2.5. Public buildings:  Quality and process oversight  Identification of public buildings
 Procurement of goods and services  Preparation of designs
State Ministry of Public
 Seeking of World Bank no-objections  Preparation of bid documents
Works
 Contract management oversight and controls  Participation in procurement of works,
 Financial reporting goods, and services
 M&E  Site supervision and technical quality
 Certification of progress reports assurance
 Contract management
 Certification and payment of works
3.1. Institutional  Quality and process oversight  Identification and preparation of
capacity building:  Procurement of services interventions and schemes
 Seeking of World Bank no-objections  Preparation of designs
State governments and
 Financial reporting  Preparation of bid documents
the PCNI
 M&E  Procurement of contractors and
supervision consultants
 Site supervision and technical quality
assurance
 Contract management
 Operations and maintenance
 Certification and payment
3.2. Program  Quality and process oversight n.a.
management support  Procurement of services
 Seeking of World Bank no-objections
 Financial reporting
 M&E
 Identification and preparation of interventions
and schemes
 Procurement and supervision of consultants
 Certification and payment

Investment Planning Principles

22. The proposed project is aligned with and contributes to the four strategic outcomes for
recovery and peace building set out by the RPBA, including (a) safe, voluntary, and dignified return and
resettlement of displaced populations; (b) improved human security, reconciliation, and violence
prevention; (c) enhanced government accountability and citizen engagement in service delivery; and (d)
increased equity in the provision of basic services and employment opportunities.

23. Following the recovery framework outlined in the RPBA, achieving these outcomes will
require four areas of intervention, including (a) peace building and social cohesion activities to
integrate the forcibly displaced into local planning and strengthen integration between forcibly
displaced population and host communities; (b) rapid infrastructure rehabilitation and service delivery

Page 74 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

restoration and improvement; (c) quick injection of short-term employment opportunities, followed by
sustainable restoration of livelihoods; and (d) a conflict-sensitive and inclusive approach to
programming and implementation of programmatic responses. The principles outlined in the RPBA of
building back better and do no harm have been integrated into the preparation and will continue to
guide the implementation of the project.

24. The suggested project design is based on providing a programmatic, multi-sector, and multi-
partner solution to crisis recovery in the three BAY states. Informed by area-based crisis recovery
experiences, the proposed activities will be built on a three-component integrated approach of social,
economic, and infrastructure/service delivery restoration and recovery. Livelihood restoration is
proposed to be a cross-cutting consideration that is folded into the design and implementation of all
components of the project. This will include exploring opportunities to adopt labor-intensive approaches
for reconstruction, engaging the affected communities. Sustainable restoration of livelihoods will also be
considered under the social cohesion component, particularly targeting IDP.

25. Infrastructure and social service delivery investments can act as a catalyst for peace and
stability. Infrastructure development and equitable and sustainable provision of critical social services
(education and health are recognized in conflict situations) promote growth of local economies and
social cohesion among their people. Economic deprivation, inequitable distribution of economic growth,
and perceived neglect of the NE are some of the causal factors that contributed to the conflicts in the
region. The project is therefore addressing these needs recognizing that infrastructure and social service
sector investments could provide the much-required stimulus to promote livelihoods for local
populations, economic growth of local economies, and greater cohesion among its people. In the
current socioeconomic and political contexts of the NE, these sectors are important levers to promote
peace and economic prosperity in these regions.

26. Guided by the programmatic approach of recovery responses, the MCRP will respond to the
most urgent needs in the three most affected BAY states. The World Bank aims to provide a multi-
sector and multi-partner solution to crisis recovery, with the key objective to address service delivery
gaps and social cohesion issues created by the protracted BH conflict. Using several guiding principles,
the World Bank MCRP team will coordinate with other World Bank project teams, government
counterparts, and development partners to support a synchronized programmatic approach with
common outcomes (in line with the RPBA).

27. Flexibility. Despite the Government’s military success in regaining territory once held by the BH
and restricting insurgency operations to a few pockets of resistance, the BH retains the ability to
periodically stage attacks in the NE and occasionally further south. This transition to a more asymmetric
conflict means that while the return of forcibly displaced people and reconstruction is possible in some
areas, the threat and reality of local attacks continue to undermine the revival of agriculture and
economic life and the establishment of stable peace. Given current conditions, displacement is likely to
endure, and there will be limited scope for reconciliation in some areas. Urban areas are likely to be
more secure than rural ones, despite the likelihood of continued attacks. As a result, the uncertain
security situation in the NE will require a flexible, adaptable, and nuanced approach to project design
and implementation to minimize and mitigate the impact of such unpredictable threats.

28. Prioritization and conflict sensitivity. Given the overwhelming needs for recovery, peace
building, and reconstruction revealed by the RPBA and the available resources from both domestic and

Page 75 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

international sources, there will necessarily have to be a prioritization of needs and resulting
interventions. This prioritization will be led by the GoN and informed by the RPBA’s Strategic Framework
for Recovery and Peace Building and existing and planned programs by the GoN and other development
partners. The prioritization process, along with overall project preparation and implementation, will be
conducted adopting a bottom-up approach led by the states and informed by community consultations.
Conflict sensitivity will be central to this project, ensuring proper identification and mitigation of conflict
risks.

29. Complementarity. In light of the existing and planned recovery strategies and programs by the
GoN and development partners, including the World Bank, it is important that the Nigeria MCRP
endeavors to be complementary to those strategies and programs, avoiding overlaps and gaps. For
example, the MCRP will not cover social protection and livelihood support programs as two AF projects16
are addressing these needs. Annex 5 provides a list of all current or proposed interventions in the NE,
which the team used as a reference for complementarity considerations in project design.

30. Use of geospatial data for geographic targeting. Geospatial analytics can support systematic
and criteria-based targeting of implementation areas according to the principles of ‘impact
proportionality’ and ‘impact maximization’. For instance, correlating geographic data layers on the
concentration of displaced populations with socioeconomic indicators and the locations and state of
service infrastructure can help determine priority areas for specific needs related to individual
interventions. Moreover, relevant contextual information that can feed into geospatial analysis related
to the project includes among others (a) IDP concentration by administrative areas; (b) locations of
service delivery infrastructure such as schools, hospitals, or roads; (c) socioeconomic indicators by
administrative areas, such as poverty, unemployment, and market access; (d) security-related
information, such as conflict incidents and road security; (e) aggregated survey data; and (f) information
on environmental conditions and so on. The project can partly build upon an existing data management
system that has been established for the RPBA, while further data sets are available through open
source channels or partners on the ground. Additional data can be provided through remote sensing and
analysis of high- and low-resolution satellite imagery. Multispectral imagery can, for instance, be used to
establish baseline data for the locations and physical conditions of infrastructure, such as roads,
hospitals, and school, where not covered by the RPBA data. The use of such remote sensing solutions
can be explored to complement publicly available geographic data sets.

Investment Prioritization and Selection Process

31. The selection and prioritization of interventions is based on consultation by the states, taking
into account a set of criteria. It is agreed that the state investment plan preparation will follow a four-
stage approach. In the first stage, based on key criteria agreed with the states at the sector level,
interventions will be classified into high, medium, and low priorities, correspondingly representing
urgent and immediate investment needs and medium- and long-term investment needs.17 The criteria
used are listed below:

(a) Spatial coverage

16
These two AF projects are the CSDP and YESSO.
17
The various templates and the process flow charts and detailed in the Excel file,‘infrastructure and social service sector
project investment costing’.

Page 76 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

(i) Interventions in LGAs/wards of displacement

(ii) Interventions in LGAs/wards of return

(b) Beneficiary coverage

(i) Addressing needs of communities in places of displacement

(ii) Addressing needs of communities in places of origin

(iii) Addressing specific needs of vulnerable groups

(c) Linkages with ongoing development assistance programs

(i) Ongoing government programs

(ii) Buhari Plan interventions

(iii) Linkages with ongoing development partner assistance programs

(d) Institutional capacity of the state governments to implement program interventions

(e) Contribution of the intervention to achieve strategic outcomes

(i) Contributing to the safe, voluntary, and dignified return and resettlement of
displaced populations

(ii) Improving human security, reconciliation, and violence prevention

(iii) Enhancing government accountability and citizen engagement in service delivery

(iv) Increasing equity in the provision of basic services and employment opportunities

32. Although the sector intervention prioritization process followed a simple normative approach of
ticking Yes (Y) or No (N) for the criteria listed above, state governments are asked to explain the
rationale for stating Y or N in the template to make the prioritization process transparent and objective.
Based on this process, sector interventions are classified into high, medium, and low priorities. All the
listed interventions will be included in the SPARS as to enable the donor partners and government
agencies to structure their respective investment plans.

33. The second stage in the investment planning process is to break down the identified
interventions into projects and rank them based on a set of development indicators. The criteria used
for ranking projects are based on input intensity, spatial and beneficiary coverage, and impacts on
development outcomes of the program. Based on a score of 1 to 3 (1 for low rank and 3 for high rank),
identified projects are given scores for ranking. Projects getting highest total scores are ranked as high
priority and thus are listed as the most urgent and needy projects for implementation. The criteria used
for the project ranking process are listed below:

Page 77 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

(a) Input intensity

(i) Job creation/labor use

(ii) Availability of land

(iii) Use of local materials

(b) Spatial coverage

(i) Projects located in place of displacement

(ii) Projects located in place of origin

(c) Beneficiary target

(i) Displaced population benefited

(ii) Population in place of origin benefited

(d) Impacts on development outcomes

(i) Contributing to economic growth of local communities

(ii) Contributing to welfare of displaced populations

(iii) Promoting social cohesion

(iv) Promoting security and peace building

(v) Protecting environment

34. The third stage in the process is to cost the various projects using locally relevant unit costs. In
the absence of detailed cost tables, it is suggested to follow a two-stage costing approach: (a) to cost the
various projects using unit cost methods, cost per square meter or cost per person as the case may be,
and (b) to subsequently refine the costs using the detailed costing method discussed in the template.

35. The fourth stage is to pool together those projects that are identified as the most urgent and
needy based on the project ranking and consistent with prioritization of interventions into investment
plans. The investment needs estimated during the third stage will be vetted against the compatible
projects being implemented by the various humanitarian and development institutions in the same
locations, largely covering the same beneficiaries. Based on this funding gap analysis, the net investment
requirements for the remaining key investment needs to be met will be estimated.

36. It is quite possible that the net funding gap for the key interventions could be much larger than
the potentially available funds under the MCRP. Under this circumstance, it is suggested to follow an
MCRP funding appropriation mechanism across various states and sectors based on the damage
intensity, infrastructure rehabilitation needs, project feasibility, and replicability of projects. The

Page 78 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

appropriated state-level available fund thus could be taken as the basis for estimating the funds for
various key priority projects based on implementation viability of projects.

37. The investment phasing into first year (immediate term) and the medium and long terms (2–5
years) could be based on technical feasibility and institutional capacity of projects. Those investments
that could be implemented immediately within the prevailing capacity and those that would show
tangible benefits on the grounds could be targets for first-year investments. Needless to state, if an
urgent need is to build the capacity of government functionaries and social mobilization of local
communities for effective participation of local stakeholders, then those project activities will be
initiated during the first year. The project work plans thus arrived will provide a list of viable and urgent
project activity packages for the immediate term and medium and long terms with measurable
deliverables and timelines.

38. Capacity and accessibility constrains the responsiveness of LGAs and communities when
effective recovery and peace building needs mobilization down to the village or settlement level. The NE
has only 112 LGAs for an estimated population of 19 million people and a landmass of 276,000 km 2. On
average, each LGA is supposed to cater to the needs of a few hundred thousand people spread over an
area of close to 50,000 km2 on average and in rural areas scattered across small villages often far from
the LGA headquarters. Due to a lack of local elections, local communities are not represented at the LGA
level—as they would be if local councilors were elected at the ward level.

39. This may call for the mobilization of local communities down to the village or settlement level.
Informal institutions, such as village heads and community organizations, can be leveraged for that
purpose by institutionalizing their participation in decision making in the implementation of the
recovery strategy (for example, for local planning and monitoring). Stakeholders’ representation and
participation in local institutions at the community level could also help restore public trust in the
Government and its responsiveness to public demands, needs, and expectations.

40. At the community level, both formal and informal institutions may need to be mobilized to
respond to the people’s needs. The justice system, with the lowest courts operating at the district level
at best, needs to be supported and complemented by informal conflict resolution mechanisms at the
community level to address personal and collective grievances generated by the conflict situation,
including population displacement and return, loss of property, and so on.

Financial Management

41. An FM assessment of the implementing entities in line with the Financial Management Manual
(March 1, 2010) and the AFTFM Financial Management Assessment and Risk Rating Principles (October
2010) was conducted in August 2016. The objective is to determine whether the implementing entities
have acceptable FM arrangements, which will ensure (a) that all transactions and balances relating to
the project are recorded correctly and completely; (b) the preparation of regular, timely, and reliable
financial statements; (c) safeguarding of the entity’s assets; and (d) the existence of auditing
arrangements acceptable to the World Bank.

42. The overall FM risk for the project is assessed as High at the preparation phase. This is mainly
because of the inherent risks and the multiple implementing levels and not because of the control risks
associated with the basic elements of the project FM arrangement. However, these inherent risks are

Page 79 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

well mitigated by the use of the PFMUs and FPFMD, which feature robust controls (internal and
external). Also, the PFMUs have obtained adequate experience in managing financial flows to multiple
levels from other projects in the portfolio, and they will be given additional training. With the mitigation
measures, the residual FM risk is High. The mitigation measures include the use of professionally
qualified and experienced FM staff and independent and effective internal audit and risk management
functions. The Financial Procedures Manual (FPM) will detail an adequate internal controls framework,
which will include enhanced accountability framework over soft expenditures that will apply to the
project. Regular reporting arrangements and Implementation Support Plan (ISP) will also ensure that the
implementation of the project is closely monitored and that appropriate remedial actions are taken
expeditiously. The FM risks will be reviewed during project implementation and updated as appropriate.

43. The PFMUs and FPFMD are established in all states and federal level, respectively, through the
joint efforts of the Government and the World Bank. These units are presently involved in the
implementation of a number of World Bank assisted projects. The PFMUs and FPFMD feature, among
other things, the following: (a) all the key elements of FM, including budgeting, funds flow, accounting,
internal control, reporting, and audit; (b) computerized system and robust FM procedures manual; (c)
qualified staff who are well trained in relevant World Bank procedures and requirements, including
procurement; (d) robust segregation of functions/duties; (e) a strong control environment, which is
required to mitigate fiduciary risks; (f) highly independent and well-trained internal auditors; and (g) full
alignment with the Government’s own FM system but with some important enhancements and controls.
The World Bank’s recent reviews showed that the PFMUs and FPFMD are performing satisfactorily.

44. The key issues noted within the PFMUs and FPFMD are unretired advances and inadequate
documentation for incurred eligible expenditures. To mitigate the risks of unretired travel advances and
provision of inappropriate/fraudulent documentation to acquit the travel advances and unjustifiable
claims for travel not undertaken, the project will implement an enhanced accountability framework,
which is aimed at arresting such eventuality. The details of the enhanced accountability framework will
be elaborated in the FPM.

45. Planning and budgeting. On an annual basis, the project accountant at the federal level and the
state PCUs in consultation with key members of the implementing unit will prepare the budget for the
fiscal year based on the work program. The budget will be submitted to the task team leader at least
two months before the beginning of the project fiscal year. Detailed procedures for planning and
budgeting will be documented in the FPM.

46. Funds flow. Project funding will consist mainly of IDA Credit. All project funds will be used in line
with the Financing Agreement and the World Bank FM procedures. IDA will disburse the Credit through
a DA opened with the Central Bank of Nigeria, which will be managed by the PCNI/FPFMD, and DAs for
the respective PCUs, opened with reputable commercial banks acceptable to IDA, which will be
managed by the PCU/PFMU. The specific banking arrangements are as follows:

(a) For the PCNI. A U.S. dollar DA to which initial deposit and replenishments from IDA will be
lodged. In addition, one current (drawdown) account in naira to which drawdowns from
the DA will be credited in respect of incurred eligible expenditures, after payments for
incurred eligible expenditures, having a balance not exceeding three months’ forecast
expenditures.

Page 80 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

(b) For the state PCUs. A U.S. dollar DA to which initial deposit and replenishments from IDA
will be lodged. One current (drawdown) account in naira to which drawdowns from the DA
will be credited in respect of incurred eligible expenditures, maintaining balances on this
account as close to zero as possible after payments.

47. Accounting. IDA funds will be accounted for by the project on a cash basis. A computerized
accounting system will be used. Annual financial statements will be prepared in accordance with the
relevant International Public Sector Accounting Standards. All accounting and control procedures will be
documented in the FPM, a living document that will be subject to review as appropriate.

48. Financial reporting. Calendar semester IFRs will be prepared by the federal entity and the PCUs.
The IFRs will be submitted to IDA within 45 days after the end of the calendar semester. The formats of
the IFRs were agreed at project negotiations. Annual project financial statements will be prepared and
audited. The audit report will be submitted to IDA within six months from the end of the fiscal year by
the FPFMD and PCUs. Regular periodic returns will be made to the federal and state Accountants
General for consolidation in the government accounts.

49. Internal control. Adequate internal controls are in place at both the PFMUs and FPFMD but will
be strengthened further. The control features at both the PFMUs and FPFMD include robust FM
procedures manual; relevantly qualified staff who are well trained in relevant World Bank procedures
and requirements, including procurement; robust segregation of functions/duties; and highly
independent and well-trained internal auditors. The FM staff are appointed by each state Accountant
General and the Accountant General for the federation. The internal auditor at the PCUs and FPFMD will
prepare quarterly internal audit reports and submit to IDA within 45 days of the end of each quarter.
Additional controls in the form of an enhanced accountability framework will be implemented to
mitigate the risk of misuse of funds for soft expenditures (travels, workshops, study tours, and so on).
The enhanced accountability framework will be elaborated in the FPM.

50. The annual financial statements of the project will be audited by an independent external
auditor appointed on the basis of ToR acceptable to IDA. The auditor will express an opinion on the
annual financial statements in compliance with International Standards on Auditing and will provide a
special opinion on the expenditures incurred on training/workshop/study tours, and so on, identifying
any expenditure that is considered ineligible based on established policy. In addition to the audit report,
the external auditors will prepare a Management Letter. Copy of the audited financial statements along
with the Management Letter will be submitted to IDA not later than six months after the end of each
financial year.

FM Action Plan

51. Actions to be taken for the project to further strengthen its FM system are listed in Table 2.5:

Table 2.5. FM Action Plan

No. Action Due Date Responsible Entity
1 Agreement of format of IFR, annual financial Completed PCNI/FPFMD and PCU/PFMU
statements, and external auditors’ ToR with support and guidance of
IDA task team
2 Train designated PFMU and FPFMD staff in World Before effectiveness PCNI/FPFMD and PCU/PFMU
Bank FM procedures and disbursement guidelines.

Page 81 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

No. Action Due Date Responsible Entity

3 Appoint external auditor Within 90 days after effectiveness PCNI/FPFMD and PCU/PFMU
4 Designate project accountant project internal auditor, Within 60 days after negotiations PCNI/FPFMD and PCU/PFMU
and supporting accounting technicians
5 Agreement on memorandum of financial services and Within 60 days after negotiations PCNI/FPFMD and PCU/PFMU
service standards
6 Update computerized accounting system at the PCNI Within 90 days after effectiveness PCNI/FPFMD and PCU/PFMU
and PCUs

Disbursements

52. The project will use transaction-based disbursement procedures and not report-based
disbursements at effectiveness. Disbursements to the various implementing units will be flexible, based
on the approved work plan. Details of the disbursement arrangement have been specified in the
Disbursement Letter, which has been agreed upon at negotiations. Table 2.6 sets out the expenditure
components and percentages to be financed out of the credit proceeds.

Table 2.6. Allocation of Credit Proceeds to Be Financed for Eligible Expenditures in Each Category
Amount of the Credit
Percentage of Expenditures to
Categories Allocated (Expressed in
Be Financed (Inclusive of Taxes)
US$)
1. Strengthening Peace Building, Stability, and Social Cohesion 30,000,000 100
2. Infrastructure Rehabilitation and Service Delivery Restoration 110,000,000 100
and Improvement
3. Technical Assistance and Program Management Support 20,000,000 100
4. Contingent Emergency Response 0 100
5. Unallocated Amount 40,000,000 100
TOTAL AMOUNT 200,000,000 100

53. Project funds are proposed to be apportioned to the three BAY states, according to the resource
allocation in Table 2.6. This is based on a combination of factors, including relative level of needs,
implementation readiness and absorption capacity, and prevailing and expected security levels and
risks. The current distribution is based on total current overall allocation of US$155 million to the states,
including US$65 million for Borno (32.5 percent of total project resources) and US$45 million (22.5
percent of total project resources) each for Yobe and Adamawa. The Federal Government will receive
2.5 percent of project resources in TA and project management. Each component amount will be
distributed according to the same percentages, with the possible exception of any components that
require the use of common resources such as certain types of project management costs, which could
be handled through the PCNI. The PMC, for example, is expected to be hired and managed by the PCNI,
on behalf of the three states.

54. The remaining US$40 million will remain unallocated, and its distribution will only be decided at
the project midterm stage, based on a set of criteria. This is due to the very fluid situation in the
country, with regard to the security situation, the movement of displaced persons, and the available
financing from the Government’s budget and donors for specific sectors in the respective states. This
will also provide an incentive for the states to demonstrate their absorptive capacity and not delay
disbursements and will mainly affect Component 2. Criteria will, therefore, consider factors such as
implementation performance, level of support from other development partners and relative unmet
needs in the project sectors, and a reassessment of the security situation. Such allocation shall be done

Page 82 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

through the FMoF in consultation with the PCNI and the BAY states. Once this allocation is decided, this
remaining balance will be allocated to the respective states’ DAs.

Table 2.7. Project Resource Distribution across States

State % Allocation Proposed Allocation (US$, millions)
Borno 32.5 65
Yobe 22.5 45
Adamawa 22.5 45
Federal Government (PCNI) 2.5 5
Unallocated 20 40
Total 200

55. Retroactive financing could be considered under the credit in line with the following World Bank
requirements: (a) the activities financed by retroactive financing are related to the development
objectives and are included in the project description; (b) the payments are for items procured in
accordance with the applicable World Bank procurement rules; (c) the aggregate amount of retroactive
financing shall not exceed 20 percent of the loan amount (SDR 29.7 million, or US$ 40 million
equivalent); and (d) the payments are made by the Borrower on or after May 1, 2016 for eligible
expenditures under Components 1, 2, or 3.

Procurement

56. Procurement procedures. With regard to operational context, procurement under the proposed
MCRP will be carried out in accordance with the World Bank Procurement Regulations for IPF Borrowers
of July 2016; the ‘Guidelines on Preventing and Combating Fraud and Corruption in Projects Financed by
IBRD Loans and IDA Credits and Grants’, dated October 15, 2006 and revised in January 2011 and as of
July 1, 2016; and other provisions stipulated in the Financing Agreement. All procuring entities as well as
bidders and service providers, that is, suppliers, contractors, and consultants, shall be expected to
observe the highest standard of ethics during the procurement and execution of contracts financed
under the project in accordance with Section I and II of the World Bank Procurement Regulations for IPF
Borrowers of July 2016. The project design has provided a window for the Borrower to carry out
advance contracting and retroactive financing in accordance with Section V (Paragraphs 5.1 and 5.2) of
the World Bank Procurement Regulations for IPF Borrowers of July 2016. The retroactive financing will
be allowed up to 20 percent of the credit covering the expenditures incurred by the project with effect
from September 2016 before the signing of the Credit Agreement under the activities agreed with the
World Bank.

57. Preparation of the PPSD. A draft PPSD has been prepared and discussed between the Borrower
and the World Bank prior to negotiations and will be finalized and be in place for operationalization by
the Borrower before project effectiveness. The PPSD describes how procurement activities will support
project operations for the achievement of the PDOs and deliver value for money. The PPSD is linked to
the overall project implementation strategy at both the country- and the state-level operations by
ensuring proper sequencing of procurement activities. It also provides information regarding:
institutional arrangements for procurement; roles and responsibilities; thresholds, procurement
methods, and prior reviews; and other requirements needed for carrying out procurement shall be
elaborated in detail in the strategy. The PPSD also includes a detailed description of the procurement
capacity needed by the executing agencies/sectors for carrying procurement with specific focus on
managing contract implementation, governance structure, and accountability framework. Other aspects

Page 83 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

to be captured are behavior and capabilities of the market (that is, market analysis or sounding) to
respond to the PP. The MCRP activities will require strong technical capability by the executing agencies
for the preparation of proper technical specifications to avert lack of or inadequate market response.
The capacity or a plan to enhance the capability of the client will be further described in the final PPSD.
Also, special arrangements like direct contracting; the use of SOEs, UN Agencies, third-party monitors,
local NGOs, and force account; or civil servants needs, results-based arrangements, and need for
prequalification, if any, will be described in the final PPSD. The final PPSD will also include a summary on
procurement risk, mitigation action plan, and procurement implementation support and supervision
plan.

58. The key features of the New Procurement Framework that have been triggered and included in
the MCRP PPSD are advance contracting and retroactive financing; national procurement procedures;
fragility, conflict, and violence/emergency situations; contract management; use of UN Agencies; hands-
on and expanded implementation support and use of NGOs; and other aspects including post
procurement review (third-party audit), request for proposal, sustainable procurement, community-
driven development, reverse missions, and so on. Following the situation on the ground, the strategy
will trigger OP 10.00, paragraph 12 on the use of emergency procedures. This has become necessary so
that the procurement systems and strategy can readily respond to the emergency situations at hand.
Phases 1 and 2 of the procurement operation will respond to the emergencies dealing with life-, health-,
and safety-threatening conditions; restoration of livelihood; reconstruction; and so on, and will
subsequently revert to normal procedures once the emergency is stabilized.

59. The MCRP will build on existing sectoral policy coordination and standard-setting mechanisms
already in place. Because this is a multi-sector project, different sectors of intervention will be
addressed. Activities in each respective executing agency and/or sector will align with existing
mechanisms to coordinate and harmonize standards and policies. At the federal level, the coordinating
agency or body will ensure that procurement management of all aspects of the MCRP implementation is
carried out by the executing agencies at the state level in accordance with the procurement regulations
of the World Bank and within the procedures of the state governments. The coordinating secretariat at
the federal level will also help provide procurement TA to the states and consolidate procurement
monitoring and reports from the states for reporting on project progress to the Federal Government and
the World Bank.

60. At the state level, the PCU in each of the states will be responsible for coordination of
procurement management across the sectors in each of the states. The PCU will focus on quality and
process oversight, centralized procurement, reporting, and contract management and ensure that the
procurement functions assigned to the relevant state line departments are done in accordance with the
procurement regulations of the World Bank and within the procedures of the state governments as
defined in the PPSD.

61. The MCRP PPSD will provide the basis for procurement planning, which will include the
description of procurement activities, procurement risk, approach to market, and selection methods. It
will also include information on the timing of the procurement activity and the level of research and
analysis, supervision, and implementation support appropriate for the activities. Other important
elements to be provided in the PPSD will include information regarding procurement objectives and key
performance indicators.

Page 84 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Table 2.8. Project Procurement Risk Factors and Mitigation Measures

Risk Factor Mitigation Measure
Record keeping and  All implementing agencies will maintain all procurement records duly catalogued and
documentation indexed that will facilitate easy access to information.
Fiduciary Risk relating to main  Position experienced procurement staff/consultant to guide implementing agencies.
principles of the World Bank  Conduct training on World Bank procurement procedures.
Procurement Guidelines  Conduct training on new World Bank procurement procedures.
 Provide regular supervision support and monitoring.
Inefficiencies and delays in  Regular monitoring through the PP
procurement process
Insufficient competition in  Aggregation of smaller contract packages wherever feasible
procurement
Contract management  Disclosure of all contract awards or prior contracts and post review contracts in local
newspapers and government website
Probability of staff handling  Continue dialogue with the Government to retain trained staff.
procurements being transferred
Fraud and corruption risks  Disclosure of the PP
(including collusion and outside  Disclosure of contract awards
interference) in contracting  Creating awareness on effects of fraud and corruption
process  Regular reviews such as PPR, internal audit, external audit, and so on
Weak complaint redress system  Disclosure of complaint redress procedure through ODPP.
 Biannual report of all complaints received and action taken

Table 2.9. Procurement Action Plan

No. Action Date Due by Responsible Entity
1 Preparation of MCRP PPSD: A draft PPSD in place at Negotiations Completed Borrower/World
Bank/Partners
2 Cleared MCRP PPSD in place for operationalization by the Before project World Bank/Borrower
Borrower effectiveness
3 Designate Procurement focal staff at the Federal and State Completed, and to be Borrower/World Bank
(Agencies and Sectors) continuously updated
18
4 Train designated Procurement Officers and PCU staff in World STEP training World Bank/Partners
Procurement Regulations for Borrowers. completed on
February 17th, 2017.
Training on
Procurement
Regulations for
Borrowers to be given
on a continuous basis.
5 Agreement on Memorandum of procurement services and Immediately and will Borrower/World
service standards as part of PPSD and modalities for advance be reviewed on a Bank/Partners
contracting and retroactive financing continuous basis
where necessary

Environmental and Social (including Safeguards)

62. Application of the World Bank safeguards policies. The reconstruction and rehabilitation of
affected basic social and physical infrastructure anticipates the construction of new infrastructure to
improve existing living conditions in BAY states and improve conditions before the conflict. As such, the

18
Systematic Tracking of Exchanges in Procurement

Page 85 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

project could involve land acquisition, and based on this condition, the World Bank policy on Involuntary
Resettlement (OP 4.12) is triggered.

Safeguards Action Plan

63. Objective. The objective of this SAP is to ensure that the planned project activities and related
E&S assessment and management instruments and processes will be in compliance with the national
legislation of Nigeria as well as the World Bank’s operational safeguards policies and are duly and
diligently implemented in a logical sequence with the environmentally and socially relevant project
activities. This means that, as a general principle, E&S assessments and instruments should be
completed, disclosed, and consulted on (a) before project-funded activities with relevant E&S footprints
may commence and (b) in case of more complex/large-scale activities, before designs are finalized and
contracts are awarded.

64. This SAP was prepared by the task team under OP 10.00, paragraph 12, for projects in
situations of urgent need for assistance, and additional Operational Policies - OP 4.01, OP 4.04, OP
4.11, and OP 4.12 have been triggered. As such, this SAP is subject to public disclosure as part of the
Project Appraisal Document. In addition, it will be disclosed both in-country (in the appropriate
communication channels, concerned sector ministries, and other public places of project intervention
areas) as well as through the World Bank before project effectiveness.

Environment

65. The components under the MCRP that would trigger environmental safeguard polices are
Component 1: Peace Building and Community Cohesion (rehabilitation and reconstruction of public
buildings and community areas) and Component 2: Infrastructure Rehabilitation and Reconstruction.
The MCRP is being prepared under the provisions of paragraph 12 of OP 10.00 for projects in situations
of urgent need for assistance. Thus, the preparation of safeguards instruments is proposed to be
deferred to the implementation phase. The four environmental safeguard policies that will be triggered
are OP 4.01 (Environmental Assessment), OP 4.04 (Natural Habitats), OP 4.11 (Physical Cultural
Resources), and OP 4.12 (Involuntary Resettlement). The project is classified as Environmental Category
B as no unprecedented or cumulative adverse E&S risks and impacts are envisaged to result from the
implementation of activities that will be financed by the World Bank under the MCRP. The project is
expected to have overall positive E&S impacts through its support to the rehabilitation of conflict-
damaged infrastructure and natural resources, including forested lands. Table 2.10 depicts the policies
and the rationale for their application to the MCRP.

Table 2.10. World Bank Safeguards Policies Triggered

Safeguard Policies Triggered Explanation

Environmental Yes The nature of the proposed project activities triggers includes the rehabilitation of existing
Assessment - infrastructure, which could result in adverse E&S impacts, thereby triggering OP/BP 4.01.
OP/BP 4.01 Considering the limited scale and magnitude of rehabilitation and improvement works as well
as the confinement of activities to existing footprints, the proposed operation is classified as
category ‘B’. At this point in time, the locations of the activities that will be financed by the
project is not known in sufficient detail. Site-specific safeguards instruments such as ESIAs,
stand-alone ESMPs, RAPs, and audits, when needed, will be prepared, consulted upon, and
disclosed by the proponents before the commencement of civil works and the relevant
measures including E&S clauses will be clearly incorporated in contracts.

Page 86 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Safeguard Policies Triggered Explanation

Natural Habitats - Yes This policy is triggered because of activities of reconstruction and rehabilitation of social and
OP/BP 4.04 physical infrastructure that might be located in or around areas recognized for biodiversity
richness. No large-scale conversion of biodiversity-rich sites is envisaged. Mitigation
measures will be part of the EA process of this project.
Forests OP/BP - No n.a.
4.36
Pest Management No n.a.
- OP 4.09
Physical Cultural Yes This policy was triggered because physical cultural resources could be affected at one or
Resources - OP/BP more sites. These may include religious sites such as mosques, churches, and shrines as well
4.11 as potential chance finds from civil works related excavation.

In the event that a known/above-ground cultural heritage is to be rehabilitated or lost, a

physical cultural heritage management plan and/or compensation plan will be prepared and
implemented by the project proponent. Also, the GoN will prepare chance find procedures
for contractors to guide them in the proper management of physical cultural properties in
case they are found.
Indigenous No n.a.
Peoples - OP/BP
4.10
Involuntary Yes The need for involuntary resettlement or land acquisition in specific subproject areas will
Resettlement - only be known during project implementation, when site-specific plans are available.
OP/BP 4.12 Therefore, subprojects will be screened for applicability of the resettlement policy, and any
subprojects involving involuntary resettlement or land acquisition will only be approved after
preparation of a resettlement plan acceptable to the World Bank. Several issues will increase
the complexity of land acquisition. For example, the lack of reliable land record systems and
the inability of people losing land to either document ownership or be physically present to
make their claims for eligibility. Such situations can increase due to the situation of forced
displacement in the NE as well as the weakened local authorities who can mediate in land
ownership conflicts. Site-specific resettlement plans will, therefore, include procedures for
identifying eligible project-affected people, calculating and delivering compensation, and
mechanisms for land dispute grievance redress.
Safety of Dams - No n.a.
OP/BP 4.37
Projects on No n.a.
International
Waterways -
OP/BP 7.50
Projects in No n.a.
Disputed Areas -
OP/BP 7.60

66. Project activities that would trigger environmental impacts include rehabilitation and
construction works of schools, hospitals, water intake and sanitation structures, public buildings, and
community structures. Construction-related negative environmental impacts would include clearance of
trees, noise nuisance, soil erosion, dust emissions, debris, solid and liquid wastes, and pollution of
surface and ground water resources among others. It is also important to recognize the practice of
HIV/AIDS prevention and sensitization on non-tolerance of inappropriate contacts with underage girls in

Page 87 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

communities to help ensure a healthy migrant labor force of contractors and communities for civil works
during construction periods.

67. Potential negative E&S impacts. The potentially significant adverse impacts that would result
from the project are expected to be site-specific, noncumulative, and relatively easy to mitigate to
acceptable levels. Some of the activities, potential adverse impacts, and generic mitigation measures are
depicted in the table.

Table 2.11. Typical Impacts and Mitigation Measures from Rehabilitation of Damaged Infrastructures
Project
Activities/Environm Potential and Associated Impacts Mitigation Measures
ental Aspects
Direct or indirect  Maintain effective two-way dialogue through
impacts on Social unrest, potential conflict with transparency and disclosure, full and frequent
conditions in the NE local communities, disruption of work, information to the public and concerned NGOs, and
(applies to all and risks to personnel because of the established arrangement for community liaison and for
project history of the conflict in the NE handling complaints and grievances.
components)  Maximize employment opportunities.
Workplace health and safety risks are
not being adequately managed.  Develop and/or implement Environmental Management
Effluent, emission, and noise standards Plan and Health, Safety, and Environment Plan.
Environmental are not being complied with. Ambient  Correct substandard conditions requiring urgent
Management Plan conditions in the area exceed attention.
and Health and standards.  Develop and implement an action plan to correct other
Safety Plan do not Solid waste management is deficiencies.
exist or are not substandard, with abandoned  Identify and empower (or recruit) responsible individuals
being implemented. equipment and accumulations of trash to manage health, safety, and environment at the
and litter widespread. facility.
Spills and leaks have contaminated soil,  Start or restart awareness training.
structures, and possibly groundwater.
No database by which to judge  Formulate and/or implement monitoring plans.
Environmental and
compliance with standards in the
health and safety  Repair or obtain monitoring equipment.
workplace or in effluent and emissions.
monitoring is not  Identify and empower (or recruit) responsible individuals
No database to discern effects on
being conducted. to manage monitoring program.
ambient conditions.
Workers are exposed to hazardous
substances such as asbestos and  Restrict access and provide protective equipment until
polychlorinated biphenyl condition is abated.
contamination.
Immediate and Workers are exposed to high noise
severe health and  Correct conditions.
levels, poor ventilation or lighting, and
safety risks exist in  Enforce use of personal protective equipment (PPE).
so on.
the workplace.  Post warning signs and restrict access until condition can
Workers are exposed to risk of
electrocution because of old or poorly be abated.
maintained equipment and lack of  Institute or reinstate ‘lock-out and tag-out’ and similar
safety procedures. procedures.
Workers are exposed to risk.  Obtain expert advice in developing a remediation plan.
 Implement the plan.
Hazardous
Contamination has or may spread off-  In the interim, contain the contamination and restrict
substance
site through air, surface, or access to contaminated areas.
contamination
groundwater or improper disposal.  Test local water supplies and, if affected, provide
alternative sources.

Page 88 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Project
Activities/Environm Potential and Associated Impacts Mitigation Measures
ental Aspects
Social conflict between the facility and  Establish effective, ongoing community relations
the surrounding community program.
Inadequate security Vandalism or sabotage  Install fences and other security features around all
provisions for the
dangerous or vulnerable facilities.
facility. Risk of electrocution or injury from
 Post warning signs.
contact with high-voltage equipment
 Employ adequate number of security personnel.

68. Environmental safeguards preparation, review, and approval procedure. Environmental

safeguards preparation, review, and approval procedure to be followed under this project shall be
consistent with the requirements from the Federal Ministry of Environment (FME) of Nigeria as specified
in the Environmental Impact Assessment Act (Decree No. 86 of 1992, hereinafter the EIA Act) and the
World Bank’s OP 4.01. Compliance with this procedure will constitute part of the evaluation
methodology for the proposed subprojects before approval for the MCRP support. The steps in the
process are project screening, environmental studies and document preparation, ESIA review and
approval, and oversight of implementation. Stakeholder consultation is an integral part of the
preparation process, and public disclosure and comment are necessary before the decision to accept or
reject a proposed subproject on the basis of E&S information.

69. Screening. The screening decision has three parts: the assignment of the EA category, the
determination of the safeguards instrument(s) that should be prepared, and the identification of
specific/additional World Bank safeguards policies requirements.

70. In Screening Step 1, the proponent should propose the category, using the criteria discussed
below. The Environment and Social Safeguards Unit (ESSU) of the PCU, in conjunction with the FME, will
review and confirm or modify the category, based on the description of the proposed activity and
findings from field visits. All subprojects in the MCRP are going to be EA Category B and Category C, and
GoN Category II, requiring partial assessments and ESMPs. The MCRP will not support any subprojects
classified as Category A and GoN Category I, requiring full ESIAs.

71. For Screening Step 2, the decision on safeguards instrument likely to be needed for each type of
subproject shall depend on the scale and location of the project. The proponent of a subproject is
encouraged to propose the safeguards instrument, but the ESSU will review and confirm. The FME and
the World Bank should be consulted when there are questions of EA category or appropriate safeguards
instrument. Rehabilitation of existing facilities will require environmental audits. Screening Step 3 is to
determine which of the World Bank’s safeguards policies may be triggered by the particular subproject
and what is required to comply with each triggered policy. This determination is subject to review by the
ESSU and the World Bank.

72. Preparation of safeguards instruments. Preparation of the applicable safeguards instrument is

the responsibility of the subproject proponent/borrower. In line with Environmental Assessment OP
4.01 and Nigeria’s EIA Act of 1992, once the proposed investment location is known, site-specific
safeguards instruments, such as ESIA, ESMP, MWMP, and audit, when necessary, and so on, will be
prepared by the proponent, consulted upon, and disclosed before commencement of civil works.

Page 89 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Table 2.12. Timeline for the Delivery of Critical Safeguards Millstones

Milestone Responsibility Timeline
Establishment of the ESSU at the PCUs Borrower December 30, 2016
Recruitment of Environment and Social Safeguards Officers Borrower January 20, 2017
at the PCUs
Preparation of the ToRs for ESIA and RAP Borrower January 30, 2017
Screening and preparation of site-specific safeguards Borrower/Proponent As soon as the exact locations and
instruments (ESIA, ESMP, MWMP, RAP, audit, and so on) details of the subprojects are known
and before the commencement of
civil works

73. Where an ESIA is being required for a subproject, its proponents should take note of Article 2(4)
of the EIA Act that requires direct liaison with the FME: “All agencies, institutions (whether public or
private) except exempted pursuant to this Decree, shall before embarking on the proposed project
apply in writing to the Agency, so that subject activities can be quickly and surely identified and
environmental assessment applied as the activities are being planned.” ESIAs and ESMPs must cover the
minimum content specified in Article 4 of the ESIA Act as well as in Annex 4 and/or Annex 5 of OP 4.01.
It constitutes best practice to prepare the necessary site-specific safeguards instruments before any
bidding for works or service provision takes place, ensuring the integration of these instruments into the
bidding documentation and clearly defining roles and responsibilities for their implementation. Civil
works will commence before the implementation of the different safeguards instruments.

74. Public disclosure and consultation. The procedure for consultations on subprojects should
conform to OP 4.01 and the EIA Act. OP 4.01 requires consultation with stakeholders. For the MCRP,
safeguards work on subprojects entails an initial consultation of affected populations and interested
NGOs as well as relevant agencies of federal, state, and local governments to inform them about the
proposed activity and solicit recommendations, questions, and concerns to be addressed in the E&S
assessment. Once drafts of safeguards documents are completed, they must be disclosed. Both Nigeria
and the World Bank require public disclosure of ESIAs, Environmental Management Plans, and RAPs. The
World Bank’s requirements are the most detailed and, to comply with them, safeguards documents for
the MCRP subprojects will be disclosed at public locations in the area affected by the project as well as
in appropriate state and federal agencies and at the World Bank Headquarters in Washington, following
a period adequate for the review of those documents, which for the MCRP is defined as 30 calendar
days for Category B. It is a policy of the World Bank that consultations and disclosure should be in form
and language accessible to the stakeholders and that consultation should continue throughout project
implementation.

75. Safeguards review and approval. No proposed subproject can be approved for the MCRP
support until the required ESMP study has been approved by the cognizant agency. Specifically, the
review process for subprojects that only require ESMPs may not involve the FME. The first reviewer will
be the PCU, through the ESSU. The World Bank will review a representative number of ESMPs for EA
Category B. Subprojects will also have to be reviewed and cleared by the World Bank to ensure
compliance with its safeguards policies. World Bank prior review will be suspended if the initial ESMPs
are of good quality, and the World Bank will thereafter review the implementation of completed ESMPs
as part of project supervision.

76. The task team will also review ToRs (if required) as well as the ESMPs and limited ESIAs or
RAPs/ARAPs if needed to ensure that their scope and quality are satisfactory to the World Bank, will

Page 90 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

review tender documents and construction contracts regarding due consideration of the safeguards
instruments, and will review the inclusion of effective and enforceable contractual clauses. Finally, the
task team will also monitor the implementation of the different prepared instruments through regular
supervision missions (which will include an environmental and/or social specialist) during which
document reviews, site visits, and spot-checks will be conducted. Depending on the circumstances
(especially the security situation), third-party monitoring will also be used for supervision and
monitoring and will thus complement the efforts of the task team.

Social

77. The components triggering OP 4.12 are Component 1: Peace Building and Community Cohesion
(rehabilitation and reconstruction of public buildings and community areas) and Component 2:
Infrastructure Rehabilitation and Reconstruction.

78. The conflict in the NE has resulted in a humanitarian and forced displacement crisis with acute
social and economic impacts. Across the six states of the NE, Borno, Yobe, Adamawa, Bauchi, Gombe,
and Taraba, there has been estimated infrastructure damage of US$9.2 billion and accumulated output
losses of US$8.3 billion (NE Nigeria RPBA, 2016). Beyond the estimated damages, the violent action of
the BH has resulted in nearly 1.9 million IDP, the majority of which (77 percent; 1.4 million) originate
from Borno State (International Organization for Migration Displacement Tracking Matrix XI August 30,
2016). Most of the displaced population lives in host communities, while only 19 percent lives in camps
or camp-like settings. Such situation has resulted in additional stresses to already overstretched
resources and services. Project activities will be implemented in the states most affected by the conflict
in the NE (BAY states), and as such, social safeguards policies triggered and corresponding mitigating
measures will address impacts on conflict-affected population, mostly IDP, refugees, and host
communities and among the vulnerable populations (women, children, elderly, and physically
challenged people).

79. Forced displacement in the NE adds additional complexities to comply with OP 4.12. Massive
displacement as well as weakened traditional authority and other community verification mechanisms
make it difficult to ascertain land ownership and use rights in many communities. As a result,
resettlement as well as due diligence for establishing ownership of land in instance of voluntary land
donation may be challenging and need to be well managed to prevent negative impact. In the event of
any contestation over land, ownership and user rights will be verified following the traditional
institutions at the ward/village/district and emirate levels as the case may be.

80. Also, in some communities in the NE, public institutions such as hospitals and schools have been
converted to formal and informal camps for accommodating persons displaced by the conflict. As such,
rehabilitation and reestablishment of such facilities may require relocating IDP quartered in such
facilities. In the event that such activities are likely to occur at the implementation phase, the subproject
will not proceed until appropriate mitigation instruments are prepared.

81. In case any activity or subproject involves land acquisition, an RAP or ARAP will be prepared in
compliance with the World Bank policy and Nigerian laws before actual implementation of the activity
or subproject. The RAP will identify the full range of people affected by the project and specify the
procedures that will be followed and the actions to be taken by the GoN to properly resettle and
compensate affected people and communities The RAP will outline eligibility criteria for affected parties,

Page 91 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

establish rates of compensation for lost assets, and describe levels of assistance for relocation and
reconstruction of affected households.

82. Resettlement screening process. The screening process consists of four steps: (a) screening of
the subprojects and sites; (b) assignment of resettlement categories and preparation of an RAP; (c)
review and approval of the RAP; and (d) payment of compensations.

83. Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM). A multilevel arrangement for registering and addressing
grievances and complaints from project-affected people will be developed and adopted at the early
stage of project implementation. The primary purpose of the project’s GRM is to provide clear and
accountable means for affected persons to raise complaints and seek remedies when they believe they
have been harmed by the project. An effective and responsive GRM also facilitates project progress by
reducing the risk that unaddressed complaints eventually lead to construction delays, lengthy court
procedures, or adverse public attention. Beside the project-specific GRM, communities and individuals
may submit complaints to the World Bank’s GRS.

84. Third-party monitoring. The monitoring of safeguards compliance during project implantation,
especially during and after construction works, is challenged by the currently poor security situation and
severe access restriction. To this end, safeguards monitoring will be included into the ToR for a third-
party monitoring consultant, who will be responsible for ensuring compliance. The ToR for the
consultant will have strong field presence through local agents and will cover key areas and construction
activities. The ToR will further specify a detailed methodology and approach for safeguards monitoring,
recording, and reporting as well as measures for rectification in case of noncompliance.

85. Gender. Women comprise a sizeable percentage of the population living in the project areas. To
address the differentiated needs of women and men throughout the project implementation,
consultations will be carried out in a gender-sensitive approach and gender-responsive measures will be
reflected in the design and evaluation of the project. Gender-responsive measures include quantitative
and qualitative instruments through the implementation of sex-disaggregated surveys and gender focus
groups, respectively. Overall, the project’s outcomes—improved utility delivery and access to public
services—are expected to provide proportionally higher benefits to women, as they are more likely to
be tasked with the management of households and the associated chores.

Safeguards Implementation and Monitoring

86. The World Bank. The World Bank shall review and clear ToR that will be prepared by the client.
The World Bank shall review and clear the report of the screening and scoping exercise, including the
confirmation of the EA category, the safeguard policies triggered, and the choice of the most
appropriate safeguards instrument that will be prepared by the client. The World Bank shall review and
clear site-specific safeguards instruments (ESIA, ESMP, RAP, and audit). The World Bank task team will
provide technical guidance and supervision as needed.

87. The borrower. The Borrower will be responsible for ensuring that the World Bank safeguards
policies and the extant EIA laws in Nigeria are complied with. Specifically, the responsibility for the
implementation of the above-described safeguards instruments and processes will be with the ESSU of
the overall PCU that will be responsible for compliance with Nigeria’s environmental regulations, as well
as the World Bank’s E&S safeguards policies.

Page 92 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

88. The PCU. The PCU in each state is the de facto proponent of the MCRP. The PCUs shall ensure
that the project complies with the World Bank safeguards policies and the existing EIA laws of Nigeria.
The PCUs will ensure that no contracts for works that have a physical impact are signed and no
reconstruction or rehabilitation of the proposed activities start without the required safeguards
instruments in place.

89. The ESSU of the PCU. The ESSU of the PCU shall be the anchor of all safeguards activities and
repository of all safeguards documents of the project. The ESSU will be responsible for ensuring the
timely commencement of the preparation of ESMPs and, as the case may be, the limited ESIAs or
RAPs/ARAPs as needed. To this end, the unit shall have one suitably qualified Environmental Officer and
one Social Safeguards Officer who will be assisted by support staff as needed. The Environmental and
Social Safeguard Offices shall ensure that safeguards-related activities are included in the annual work
plan and PP of the project. These officers shall prepare ToRs; carry out the screening and scoping of the
proposed project activities; carry out supervision missions; and build capacities on contractors, workers,
and the client as needed. They shall prepare and/or supervise the preparation of site-specific safeguards
instruments before the commencement of civil works. These officers shall ensure adequate reporting on
safeguards issues in the quarterly and/or statutory reports of the PCU on the project. The ESSU will be
responsible for the implementation of the GRM of the project. Specifically, the ESSU shall keep log
books for documenting complaints and ensure timely acknowledgement and resolution of these
complaints.

90. The M&E Unit of the PCU. The M&E officers of the PCU, in close coordination with the
safeguards units of the PCU, shall ensure that safeguards activities, including the implementation of
ESIAs, ESMPs, RAPs, and audits, are monitored and included in the progress report of the project.

91. The contractor. The contractor shall ensure that the contract execution is consistent with the
provisions of the World Bank safeguards policies and the extant EIA laws in Nigeria. The contractor shall
employ suitably qualified staff (supervisor/foreman) who will ensure safeguards compliance on-site. The
contractor shall also procure adequate PPEs and shall be responsible for the health and safety of their
staff.

92. The contractor’s supervisor. The supervisor/foreman shall be responsible for ensuring that the
World Bank safeguards policies and the extant environment laws in Nigeria are complied with on site.
For instance, the supervisor shall ensure the implementation of site-specific safeguards instruments,
consistent use of PPEs by workers, and adequate record keeping of safeguards-related events such as
accidents, injuries, spillages, and near misses.

93. Project beneficiaries. The beneficiaries of the MCRP shall comply with the agreed safeguards
mitigation measures. Beneficiaries shall also work closely with the contractors and workers to ensure
the implementation of E&S safeguards and mitigation plans. Beneficiaries shall participate in
consultations and provide feedback to project proponents and the World Bank. Beneficiaries shall log in
complaints through the project’s GRM and/or directly to the World Bank.

Page 93 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Estimated Costs for Safeguards Preparation and Implementation Process

94. The cost of preparing the required safeguards instruments is estimated to be US$1 million for
the site-specific safeguards instruments (assuming about 100 checklists for ESMPs at US$5,000 and 25
more extensive ESMPs at US$20,000).

95. The implementation of the ESMPs is expected to cost only a small fraction of design and
construction cost, as most of the anticipated significant adverse impacts are likely to be site-specific,
noncumulative, and typical category B type of impacts. Assuming a proportion of about 0.5 percent, for
every US$1 million spent on cleanup and reconstruction, US$5,000 would be spent for environmental
mitigation and management measures.

Quality Control, Oversight, and Results Monitoring and Evaluation

96. Outcome M&E. The State PCUs will be responsible for operationalizing the state-level Results
Frameworks and results monitoring system. The state PCU M&E reports will be centrally consolidated
and maintained by the PCNI in the form of a project-level results M&E system. The PCNI will be
responsible for the overall M&E of the project, by maintaining an overall project-level results monitoring
system to issue quarterly updates on the overall project implementation to all concerned quarters and
the project’s constituent agencies at the federal and state levels.

97. Data collection. The state PCUs shall establish a data collection system to obtain data from the
relevant line departments and carry out community-level surveys on a periodic basis to record baseline
data in line with indicators included in the project Results Framework. The data collected shall be used
for updating baselines, presenting and targeting indicator values for all subcomponents, and results
reporting to the PCNI and the World Bank on a routine basis.

98. Physical, financial, and quality monitoring. In parallel, there will be component-, subcomponent
and subproject-level implementation M&E that will involve the various state- and local-level
implementing organizations. Supervision and monitoring roles will be divided according to the work
performed and specific results being achieved and then relayed to the PCU for consolidation.
Implementation monitoring will also form the basis for the payment system for contractors for work
completed.

99. Implementation support will generally entail both routine and ad hoc quality checks at various
stages of implementation. Periodic monitoring will include process reviews/audits, reporting of outputs,
and maintaining updated records. This will include the following: (a) social and environmental
monitoring, (b) regular quality supervision and certification, (c) periodic physical progress and process
monitoring and third-party quality audits, and (d) results M&E.

100. Procurement monitoring. All procurement activities at the component, subcomponent, and
subproject levels will also be closely monitored by the procurement specialists in the PCU.

101. Accordingly, the implementation of the project requires both the mobilization of existing M&E
systems across sectors of interventions and the triangulation of information from different sources
(including surveys of beneficiaries and third-party monitoring). Given the limited capacity of the GoN in
the M&E of public action, the M&E system will require that administrative data from the Government be

Page 94 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

complemented and triangulated with other sources of information (provided by surveys and third
parties). The Results Framework will be publicly disclosed and made accessible to the local communities
benefiting from the MCRP. The M&E-related data and information should be geo-coded, to the extent
possible, and made available in an open source and open data management system. Every effort should
be made to disclose information that is accessible to and comprehensible by the local population.

102. Geospatial M&E solutions. Given the prevailing logistical and security challenges in the BAY
states that limit effective on-the-ground access in some project areas, solutions in the field of remote
sensing and geospatial analytics will be leveraged for M&E purposes wherever feasible. To leverage
these tools most effectively, geospatial capabilities will be integrated and applied to various elements of
project implementation, including (a) geographic targeting, (b) dynamic security monitoring and
progressive prioritization, and (c) implementation supervision and coordination with partners. To this
end, geographic information related to the implementation of the project as well as a variety of
contextual factors will be gathered through a data management system and used for geospatial analysis
and implementation support. Summaries of potential application areas of geospatial data are provided
below.

103. Dynamic security monitoring and progressive prioritization. A major principle of the project is
flexibility and adaptability with regard to geographic resource allocation to avoid risks of disruption
and/or destruction of project investments because of security reasons. Given all project interventions
will be carried out in moderate- to high-risk security environments, a dynamic monitoring of the
project’s security environment is crucial to allow for quick responses to changing conditions and to help
make rapid adjustments of geographic project foci if necessary. While conflict sensitivity will be provided
by adopting a bottom-up approach led by the states and informed by community consultations, this can
be complemented by top-down geographic information system based remote tracking of security-
related data, which is partly publicly available. Moreover, remote monitoring of displacement trends,
socioeconomic indicators, and environmental factors can support the progressive prioritization of the
project implementation steps, while assessing geo-referenced data on security dynamics and transport
infrastructure can help determine the state of accessibility of specific areas and thus the feasibility of
project activities. In cases where nongovernmental entities, such as third-party monitors, local NGOs,
and CSOs, or the private sector are resorted to for supervision, implementation, or M&E, the use of
straightforward global positioning system (GPS) tools can help remotely monitor the progress of such
third-party agents. The same tools can be used for routine and ad hoc quality checks as part of
implementation support provided by the task team and the implementing and M&E agencies, including
for regular quality supervision and certification, periodic physical progress and process monitoring, and
third-party quality audits.

104. Over time, changes in the nature of the crisis as well as progress in the implementation of the
program or other issues might require a review of the Results Framework. As certain interventions prove
to be successful or less successful, the MCRP implementation should be adapted accordingly. In this
regard, the project’s intermediate results could be reviewed every 12 months. The overall review will be
conducted by the PCNI, together with the state PCUs with the communities and beneficiaries.

105. Implementation supervision and coordination with partners. Most of the interventions carried
out through the MCRP will be implemented at a specific location, which can be geo-tagged by relatively
straightforward means, through simple GPS devices and smart phones. This includes, among other
things, the following intervention types: (a) Transport: geographic footprints of targeted roads and

Page 95 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

bridges; (b) Municipal services: locations of targeted water supply, sanitation, and solid waste facilities;
(c) Education: locations of targeted education infrastructure; (d) Health: locations of targeted health
facilities; and (e) Public buildings: locations of targeted local government buildings. Training and capacity
building will be provided to the PCUs and third-party monitors on using GPS devices and related tools for
geo-tagging. A systematic recording and monitoring of the geographic footprint of the project will serve
to facilitate the coordination with development partners and to take into account potential geographic
overlaps with ongoing and proposed projects and programs by partners. In turn, the geographic
database can also feed into the gap analysis and help ensure that the project complements the World
Bank AF projects in the most efficient way.

106. Social accountability and community engagement mechanisms will be enhanced through project
initiatives. The MCRP will enhance social accountability and citizen engagement by introducing citizen
feedback mechanisms in some of the interventions planned (that is, Subcomponent 2.3) and through
the project as a mechanism of M&E. Such feedback mechanisms will enhance citizen engagement in
decision making and will ensure that citizen feedback is taken into account in the project design and
implementation. Also, the project will emphasize the dissemination of project-related information to
project beneficiaries and will also open mechanisms to address their grievances and complaints through
established GRMs. The results of these exercises could also be reported to any existing state-level citizen
oversight committees or such similar mechanisms set up under the project.

107. Social accountability mechanisms, such as grievance redress, will also be mobilized to help
monitor the impact of the operation. Conflict-sensitive indicators will provide early warning of
potentially negative impacts of interventions, which may necessitate further mitigation strategies and
adaptation. Community involvement could include community-based mapping of results, for example,
using simple cell phone based applications that provide location-based information and photos from the
progress (for example, areas where roads have been constructed, houses have been completed, or cash-
for-work programs have been implemented).

108. In summary, the project will put in place a multitier quality oversight and control and results
monitoring mechanism entailing (a) physical quality control and supervision; (b) results M&E system; (c)
social accountability and grievance redress systems; and (d) third-party performance verification and
audits. This is shown in the schematic diagram in Figure 2.2, which also proposes the information flow
and reporting mechanisms across multiple agencies.

Page 96 of 121
The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Figure 2.2. MCRP Results Monitoring and Reporting and Quality Assurance Mechanism

Page 97 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Role of Partners

109. The project is based on the principle of providing a multi-sector, multi-partner, programmatic
solution to crisis recovery, with the project components proposed as subsets of the larger, program-
level needs identified in the RPBA. As a result, the role of partners is fundamental to the success of both
the project and the overall program of recovery and peace building in the NE.

110. Given the overwhelming and urgent needs in the NE and the dozens of government and
development partners engaged in meeting those needs, the project team has put a premium on
coordination. On the government side, these include the PCNI, the FMBNP, the FMoF, the Office of the
Secretary to the Government, the Office of the Vice President, the NEMA, and the representatives of the
state governments of BAY. From development partners, these include the EU, the UN, DFID, USAID, GIZ,
IsDB, and AfDB. The World Bank convened these partners at a workshop in Abuja on August 17, 2016, to
agree on a coordinated, forward-looking Strategic Action Plan for the NE that builds on the foundations
that the Buhari Plan and the RPBA collectively provide.

111. The project has been designed through a rigorous multi-stakeholder and multi-partner process
spanning nearly a year. The RPBA, led by the Government and supported by the World Bank, the UN,
and the EU, afforded many opportunities for close collaboration with key development partners. In the
aftermath of the RPBA, the project team continued to work closely with a range of government and
development partners to ensure close coordination in the critical post-RPBA phase and to establish the
strategic parameters and operational principles that underpin the proposed design and approach of the
project.

112. Project implementation will also follow an inclusive and consultative process with key
development partners through existing donor coordination mechanisms (for example, the NE Donors
Group chaired by DFID) and new coordination mechanisms as necessary. This will help ensure close
strategic harmonization and operational coordination across the interrelated interventions under
various development partner programs under way or in the planning stages to contribute toward the
broader crisis recovery program. The project team will also continue to leverage and promote the
recovery and peace building strategy agreed under the RPBA to influence the crisis recovery planning
and implementation of various development partners.

113. Alignment with the MDBs. The project team has discussed and agreed on the key elements of a
common programmatic approach with the IsDB and AfDB, which are also developing similar
infrastructure-focused recovery projects for the NE using the RPBA findings as a basis for project design.
It has been agreed that the three states will work closely with the three MDBs to ensure that their
respective projects are not designed and implemented as three separate interventions but as
independent yet synchronized parts of a common programmatic framework. The AfDB has noted that its
US$250 million project on ‘Inclusive Basic Social Service Delivery and Livelihood Improvement’ has been
realigned to the RPBA findings. The IsDB has noted that it is developing an investment package for the
NE and has agreed to align with the joint programmatic approach.

114. It was agreed that common implementation modalities and institutional arrangements will
achieve economies of scale and empower the states to coordinate a sizeable MDB investment program
for the NE. Going forward, this will entail close collaboration between the World Bank, AfDB, and IsDB in
the areas of (a) prioritization and sequencing of interventions and gap analysis to determine how to

Page 98 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

allocate resources in key infrastructure sectors across the three projects; (b) capacity assessment of the
three states to determine how to provide coordinated capacity-building support for efficient and
effective program implementation; and (c) maximizing the use of common implementation resources;
consistent technical design processes; and harmonized FM, procurement, and safeguards compliance
processes and procedures.

Page 99 of 121
 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

ANNEX 3: IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT PLAN

COUNTRY : Nigeria
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria

Strategy and Approach for Implementation Support

1. The World Bank’s implementation support strategy for the proposed project has been
developed based on the nature of the project, its risk profile, the capacity of the implementing agencies
and partners, and the lessons learned from the past World Bank operations. The Systematic Operations
Risk Rating Tool (SORT) rates the overall implementation risk as High, with the following elements of risk
considered to be high: (a) Political and Governance, (b) Institutional Capacity for Implementation and
Sustainability, and (c) Fiduciary. The risks result from the fluidity of the security situation, the sensitive
nature of the project interventions, the targeting criteria and geographical coverage, and the need to
develop institutional coordination across various implementing entities.

2. Institutional coordination between state focal persons and various line departments remains
weak, especially in Yobe and Adamawa. The states have faced financial difficulties in mobilizing funding
for activities to prepare grounds for the project, including prioritization and consultations on the SPARS.
Borno faces less of these challenges because the structure of the Ministry of Rehabilitation,
Reconstruction, and Resettlement has a working system in place to engage consultants to undertake
SPARS-related activities. Support is being provided to the teams to overcome these challenges, including
through support from trust funds.

3. Implementation support will be provided by the World Bank team (to the extent possible,
regionally based) consisting of staff with relevant competencies in operations, procurement, finance,
and safeguards. The World Bank team will undertake periodic field missions throughout the project’s
implementation as required and allowed by the security situation. Experience under previous
emergency operations has shown that, given the sensitive and challenging nature of such projects,
specific World Bank responsibilities require higher-than-normal supervision and support requirements
including the transfer of knowledge that the World Bank has gained over the past decade in similar
operations.

4. The World Bank will contract a neutral third-party monitoring agent (TPMA)19 to enable the
World Bank to honor its corporate commitments regarding fiduciary and safeguards responsibility;
oversight and implementation support; and M&E of project implementation, outcomes, and results.
The TPMA will operate throughout the project target areas as opposed to exclusively for safeguards,
with particular added value in areas that are inaccessible to the World Bank staff due to security and
safety concerns. The TPMA will produce and transmit to the World Bank all required data, reports, and
information required to monitor project implementation progress, detect deviations, and identify and
respond to problems and bottlenecks. Within the World Bank’s overall fiduciary responsibilities, the
TPMA will monitor the procurement transactions and FM requirements, verify construction sites and
19
While the current resources are not sufficient for financing a TPMA from the World Bank budget, discussions with bilateral
institutions such as DFID have been under way to explore the possibility for such agencies to engage a TPMA for a broader crisis
recovery program that could also benefit and extend services to other World Bank projects. In addition, the task team will be
exploring whether secured trust funded resources from DFID can be used or scaled up to support this TPMA.

Page 100 of 121

 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

assets acquired under each project against the specifications, and report to the World Bank on the
progress and status of project implementation and contract administration against agreed or
contractual timetables and schedules.

5. The TPMA will also report to the World Bank on compliance with the triggered E&S safeguards
polices. The TPMA will have access to all relevant E&S documents and instruments of the projects; will
supervise E&S due diligence processes; monitor the prompt preparation of E&S assessments and
management instruments, which generally will be required to be completed, consulted with the public,
and approved by the World Bank, before any physical activity or works may commence; will report to
the World Bank any incidents in which construction, rubble removal, or other activities with a physical
footprint have occurred without proper safeguards instruments in place and deployed; and will ensure
that a functioning GRM is in place and maintained by the contractors and supervision engineers for
every project area.

6. Given the level of damage sustained by the NE and the resulting needs demonstrated in the
region, this ISP focuses on (a) ensuring compliance with the World Bank procedures, (b) attaining the
PDOs, (c) building capacity of government institutions to ensure sustainable recovery, and (d) ensuring
alignment of overall programmatic objectives among the many development partners active in the NE.

Implementation Support Plan and Resource Requirements

7. The World Bank’s ISP for the project draws from the emergency nature of the project, lessons
learned from the past World Bank projects in the country, and international best practices gleaned
from other conflict settings around the world. The core principles underlying the MCRP ISP are (a) the
need for intensive, risk-based implementation support20 because the project has been prepared using
rapid procedures that did not allow time for very detailed appraisal and (b) maximizing the use of
national staff, international staff, and consultants on a needs basis. The plan will be regularly reviewed
and revised as required.

8. The ISP includes frequent review of implementation performance and progress. The World
Bank team will monitor progress on several fronts including (a) key performance indicators as defined in
the Results Framework and the project’s contributions to broader programmatic outcomes for recovery
and peace building; (b) federal- and state-level project implementation; (c) third-party verification of
project activities; (d) proper fiduciary management of all activities carried out by the PCUs and other
implementing agencies; (e) reconciliation of payments with contracts; (f) supervision of large numbers
of state-level procurement activities; and (g) monitoring of key legal covenants.

9. Information from various sources will be used to assess and monitor the progress of the
project throughout its implementation. In addition to the data generated through the project’s
management information system and M&E systems, the World Bank will also review the findings and
results of third-party assessments and E&S audits that will be undertaken during the course of the
project implementation.

10. In addition to formal semiannual implementation support missions and field visits to the states
and the project target areas, continuous support will be provided to the PCUs and component

20
Including for implementation, fiduciary, and safeguards risk mitigation.

Page 101 of 121

 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

implementing entities given the relative complexity of the project. The semiannual Implementation
Status Reports will be produced to provide the World Bank management and the public with progress
updates, tracking risk development and efficacy of mitigation measures. In addition to Implementation
Status Reports, periodic briefings will also be prepared for management. It is proposed that in the first
two years of the project implementation, three missions per year will be conducted.

11. Implementation support missions will focus on the following areas: (a) TA, (b) M&E, (c) client
relations, (d) FM, (e) procurement, (f) safeguards, and (g) communications.

12. The World Bank’s procurement, FM, and E&S safeguards specialists will also provide prompt
and effective support. In addition to carrying out an annual ex post review of procurement that falls
below the prior-review thresholds, the procurement specialist will provide routine hands-on support to
the procurement agencies on a needs basis. The FM specialist will review all FM reports and audits and
take necessary follow-up actions according to World Bank procedures, working closely with the PFMU of
the FMoF. Semiannual inputs from the E&S safeguards specialists will be required throughout the
project, and both formal implementation support missions and routine field visits will ensure that the
SAP and ESMP are implemented in accordance with the World Bank safeguards policies. The project will
also conduct comprehensive fiduciary assessment of the implementing agencies to reduce fiduciary
risks. The procurement, FM, and safeguards specialists will also help identify capacity-building needs to
strengthen fiduciary and safeguards capacity at the federal and state levels.

13. Given the Substantial residual FM risk rating, on-site supervision will be carried out at least
twice a year. On-site review will cover all aspects of FM, including internal control systems, the overall
fiduciary control environment, and tracing transactions from the bidding process to disbursements as
well as statement of expenditures review. Additional supervision activities will include desk review of
IFRs, quarterly internal audit reports, audited annual financial statements, and management letters.

14. The following ISP reflects the preliminary estimates of the skill requirements, timing, and
resource requirements over the life of the project. Keeping in mind the need to maintain flexibility over
project activities from year to year, the plan will be reviewed annually to ensure that it continues to
meet the implementation support needs of the project.

Page 102 of 121

 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Table 3.1: MCRP ISP

Resource
Year Focus Skills Needed Trips Partner Role Comments
Estimate (US$)

Year 1  Project launch  Team lead  4/17  100,000  Fully staffed PCU to  Project will likely become
operationalize project effective by March 2017 with
 Initialization of  FM, procurement,  7/17  80,000 components the first mission occurring by the
project components safeguards
 10/17  80,000 start of April 2017
specialists  Contract project management
 FM systems 
functioning  Health, education,  Routine and other local support firms as Task team to support smooth
support needed start-up following effectiveness
effectively transport, WASH,
agriculture, social,  Ensure continuing program  Ensure safeguards arrangements
 Procurement
and M&E alignment with the IsDB, AfDB, are built into implementation
practices following specialists and other partners plans
World Bank norms
 Prepare comprehensive project  Review implementation,
 ESMP in place
progress and results monitoring commitment, and disbursement
reports in advance of each status
mission
 Ensure safeguards arrangements
 Update implementation plans are built into implementation
and PPs routinely plans
 Organize field visits  Provide support to monitor
progress of activities and in-
depth technical review of
implementation; make
adjustments to implementation
plan if needed

Page 103 of 121

 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Resource
Year Focus Skills Needed Trips Partner Role Comments
Estimate (US$)

Year 2  Monitor  Team lead  3/18  80,000  Prepare comprehensive project  Review implementation,
implementation of progress and results monitoring commitment, and disbursement
 FM, procurement,  7/18  60,000
project activities reports in advance of each status
and safeguards
 FM, procurement, specialists  11/18  120,000 mission
 Ensure safeguards arrangements
and safeguards  Routine  Update implementation plans are built into implementation
 Health, education, and PPs routinely plans
 MTR
a.
transport, WASH, support
agriculture, social,  Organize field visits  Provide support to monitor
and M&E progress of activities and in-
 Ensure continuing program
specialists depth technical review of
alignment with the IsDB, AfDB, implementation; make
and other partners
adjustments to implementation
plan if needed

Year 3  Monitor  Team lead  3/19  60,000  Prepare comprehensive project  Review implementation,
implementation of progress and results monitoring commitment, and disbursement
project activities  FM, procurement,  9/19  60,000 reports in advance of each status
and safeguards
 Routine mission
 MTR specialists  Ensure safeguards arrangements
support  Update implementation plans are built into implementation
 FM, procurement,  Health, education,
and PPs routinely plans
and safeguards transport, WASH,
agriculture, social,  Organize field visits  Provide support to monitor
and M&E progress of activities and in-
 Ensure continuing program
specialists depth technical review of
alignment with the IsDB, AfDB, implementation; make
and other partners
adjustments to implementation
plan if needed
 Conduct MTR after 2.5 years of
project implementation

Page 104 of 121

 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Resource
Year Focus Skills Needed Trips Partner Role Comments
Estimate (US$)

Year 4  Monitor  Team lead  3/20  60,000  Prepare comprehensive project  Review implementation,
implementation of progress and results monitoring commitment, and disbursement
 FM, procurement,  9/20  60,000
project activities reports in advance of each status
and safeguards
 FM, procurement, specialists  Routine mission
 Ensure safeguards arrangements
support
and safeguards  Update implementation plans are built into implementation
 Health, education, and PPs routinely plans
transport, WASH,
agriculture, social,  Organize field visits  Provide support to monitor
and M&E progress of activities and in-
 Prepare preclosure review
specialists depth technical review of
 Ensure continuing program implementation; make
alignment with the IsDB, AfDB, adjustments to implementation
and other partners plan if needed

Year 5  Monitor  Team lead  3/21  60,000  Prepare comprehensive project  Review implementation,
implementation of progress and results monitoring commitment, and disbursement
 FM, procurement,  9/21  60,000
project activities reports in advance of each status
and safeguards
 FM, procurement, specialists  Routine mission
 Ensure safeguards arrangements
support
and safeguards  Update implementation plans are built into implementation
 Health, education, and PPs routinely plans
 Planning for final transport, WASH,
evaluation and agriculture, social,  Organize field visits  Provide support to monitor
Implementation and M&E progress of activities and in-
Completion Report specialists  Ensure continuing program depth technical review of
alignment with the IsDB, AfDB,
implementation; make
 Project withdrawal and other partners adjustments to implementation
and closure
 Project closure plan if needed

Note: a. Given the complexity of the implementing context and the principle of flexibility, MTR will be conducted after 18 months of project operation.

Page 105 of 121

 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

ANNEX 4: Economic Analysis

COUNTRY : Nigeria
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria

1. This section presents the details of the economic analysis performed for the typologies of
interventions under Component 1 followed by Component 2.

Component 1: Strengthening Peace Building, Stability, and Social Cohesion

2. Component 1 ensures the sustainable return of the displaced population by providing the means
for self-sufficiency and promoting social cohesion. This component addresses the needs of the
estimated 2.3 million individuals who have been internally displaced by the conflict in a region where 80
percent of the population relies on agriculture for their livelihood.

3. The assumptions made toward the economic analysis of Subcomponent 1.1 include

(a) Valuation of costs and benefits: based on market and shadow prices;

(b) Appraisal period: a five-year appraisal period is selected for projects; and

(c) Discount rate: a 6 percent discount rate is applied.

4. Typology 1 on supporting the safe and voluntary return and/or reintegration of displaced
persons supports the provision of goods (that is, kitchen sets, mosquito nets, plastic mats, blankets,
hygiene kits, and other essentials) and access to productive assets (that is, agricultural inputs and
livestock to farming families and trading commodities for non-farmers) to 30,000 households and
30,000 individuals, respectively, across the BAY states. This subcomponent will also support the capacity
of state and local governments for IDP return and resettlement. In the short term, this component is
expected to (a) contribute to job creation; (b) restore incomes through livelihood and income-
generating activities; (c) increase food security for the affected households; and (d) ease the immediate
fiscal burden for the Government. In the medium term, this component is expected to (a) restore
agricultural products by providing communities with inputs and enabling off-season planting and (b)
restore household income and food through improved agricultural production. Benefits will accrue from
the estimated annual income of US$500 per individual as well as better health conditions through
greater food access. The economic analysis performed for this typology suggests that this would be
economically feasible at a cost of up to US$63 million.

5. Typology 2 on strengthening reconciliation, peace building, and community cohesion relates to

the establishment of an investment fund for basic numeracy and literacy skills for out-of-school children
and youth, sports for peace activities for both men and women, radio programming, cultural activities
that promote common identities, the restoration of participatory local governance structures and local
peace platforms, and the provision of community-based psychosocial support. An estimated 61,560
individuals will benefit from the delivery of these public services. This typology remains economically
feasible with a minimum of 54,000 beneficiaries.

Page 106 of 121

 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

6. Finally, Typology 3 on strengthening local governance and citizen engagement relates to

supporting LGAs and enhancing social accountability mechanisms (that is, budget monitoring,
transparent contract awards, taxation systems, and GRM). The total population of the BAY states, which
is estimated to be in excess of 11 million individuals, is considered to indirectly benefit from this type of
support. This typology is economically feasible with a minimum of 9 million beneficiaries.

Component 2: Infrastructure Rehabilitation and Service Delivery Restoration and Improvement

7. Component 2 of the MCRP envisages the (a) rehabilitation of damaged state and local bridges;
(b) restoration of municipal services including WASH and solid waste management; (c) rehabilitation of
health facilities with the restoration of fully functional services; (d) rehabilitation of schools with the
restoration of fully functionary services; and (e) rehabilitation of local government offices with the
restoration of fully functional services. The conflict has resulted in an estimated infrastructure damage
of US$9.2 million and accumulated output losses of US$8.3 billion. This component will lead to a
recovery of the infrastructure damaged by the conflict through the rehabilitation of state and local roads
and bridges, in municipal services—such as WASH and solid waste management—health facilities,
educational facilities, and local government offices, as well as the full restoration of essential services in
transportation, WASH, health, education, and local governance.

8. The following assumptions have been made toward the economic analysis of Component 2:

(a) Valuation of costs and benefits: based on market and shadow prices;

(b) Time horizon: a 15-year period is selected for the project to yield results;

(c) Discount rate: a 6 percent discount rate is applied; and

(d) Additional security premium: 10 percent for operating in the BAY states in low-capacity
environment and in situations of fragility and conflict.

9. Typology 1 relating to the rehabilitation of damaged state and local roads and bridges. It is
assumed that the project will rehabilitate roughly 100 km of state and local government rural roads at
an average cost of US$180,000 per km, rehabilitate and repair bridges, recover key public transport
services, and restore traffic management systems and services. Benefits will accrue through the impact
of the reduction in the number of hours spent commuting for individuals and businesses on the value of
time and the reduction in the operations and maintenance cost of vehicles, as well as through increased
commercial activity related to enhanced regional connectivity. The economic analysis indicates that this
project would be economically feasible up to a cost of US$140 million.

10. Typology 2 relating to WASH and solid waste management. This typology relates to the
reconstruction of water distribution points, provision of water supply in IDP return areas, promotion of
sanitation and hygiene services in areas with a high concentration of IDP, and restoration of solid waste
management services in IDP return areas and host communities. If 60 WASH initiatives were to take
place, it would benefit an estimated 27,000 individuals, with increased access to potable water, better
hygiene conditions, time saved, and expanded opportunities for agricultural and livestock activities. This
typology would remain economically feasible with a minimum of 6,900 households or a maximum cost
of US$57 million.

Page 107 of 121

 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

11. Typology 3 pertaining to the rehabilitation of health facilities with the restoration of fully
functional services. It is assumed for the purposes of this analysis that 100 buildings would be
reconstructed, including accommodation for medical staff on call, along with the purchase of machinery
and equipment and appropriate staffing, with a unit cost of US$300,000 per facility. An estimated
67,500 patients are expected to benefit from these services with expected benefits to be reaped with
regard to the effect of reduced morbidity and mortality on productivity, higher quality of life, and
greater efficiency of the school system and reduced expenditures on drugs and medical care. The results
of the economic analysis suggests that this typology would remain economically feasible with a
minimum of 54,000 patients being treated every year or a maximum cost of US$84 million.

12. Typology 4 on the rehabilitation of schools with restoration of fully functional services will
lead to the reconstruction of 100 school buildings and the acquisition of goods and services, with a per
unit cost of US$300,000. An estimated 36,000 students are expected to attend these schools every year,
with double shifts throughout the day. Benefits will come from the increased labor productivity (as
measured by the earnings differential between an educated and uneducated individual) as well as
through greater social cohesion. The results of the economic analysis suggest that this typology would
remain economically feasible with a maximum cost of US$100 million.

13. Finally, Typology 5 will rehabilitate local government offices including areas for community
meetings and events. It is assumed that, with a budget of US$21.2 million, 80 of such buildings would be
constructed and rehabilitated, which are estimated to directly benefit about 1,800 public servants and
36,000 participants of community events. The resulting improved efficiency of the public administrative
system and social cohesion will indirectly benefit approximately 2 million individuals. The economic
analysis indicates that this typology would be economically feasible with a minimum of 1.2 million
indirect beneficiaries or a maximum cost of US$38 million.

Page 108 of 121

 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

ANNEX 5: Complementarity with Other Interventions in North East Nigeria

COUNTRY : Nigeria
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria

1. The design of the MCRP borrows from the rigorous gap analysis conducted by the task team to ensure its complementarity with other
currently undergoing interventions by the government, the World Bank, and other development partners. Especially, the MCRP team worked
closely with the teams of the six AF projects financed by the World Bank, and consulted closely with the recovery project preparation teams in
the AfDB and IsDB. Table 5.1 summarizes the major areas of interventions proposed by the MCRP on how the points of departure were drawn
upon filling the gaps identified between the sector needs and existing interventions.

Table 5.1. Summary of Gap Analysis by Area of Intervention

Sector AF Project AfDB/IsDB Funding Implementation/Niche for MCRP
Social With regard to psychosocial support, the CSDP and No known interventions The MCRP will avoid cash transfer programs, which have already
Cohesion YESSO focus on traditional community support; SEPIP been proposed under YESSO. Instead, it will set up a community
and NSHIP provide focused, nonspecialized support investment fund to focus on interventions that aim for organizing
in schools and health facilities, respectively. activities for better social inclusion and peace building. The MCRP
Specifically, YESSO supports livelihood restoration, will also plan for the provision of psychosocial support to trauma
skills and capacity building, and empowerment of victims of the BH conflict.
youth and women in the six NE states. It focused on
the selection and mobilization of poor and unskilled
youth and women to participate in public works,
offering them monthly stipends and cash transfer.
Education SEPIP proposed a performance-based financing The AfDB proposed a project As SEPIP is focusing on rehabilitation of services in schools, the
scheme to support TA and institutional capacity with approximately US$ 31 MCRP will cover the major reconstruction of infrastructure
strengthening of NE states with regard to teacher million financial support instead, including classrooms, offices, tables, seats, chairs,
management and deployment and school-level attributed to the reconstruction fences, playgrounds, latrines, water pumps/boreholes, and so on.
funding through School-Based Management of model primary schools with It is acknowledged that the AfDB is planning to do some
Committees, and psychosocial and pedagogical teachers’ accommodation and investments on reconstruction and rehabilitation of schools as
training for teachers will be developed and delivered, library facilities. well. However, the amount of the proposed funding by the AfDB
as well as development and delivery of a training is fairly small compared to the total sector needs identified in
package for School-Based Management Committees RPBA, and it is agreed between the two agencies that the MCRP’s
for the promotion of social cohesion and violence investments on school reconstruction and restoration are very
prevention. necessary. The project teams are closely coordinating with each
other to ensure complementarity in coverage.

Page 109 of 121

 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Sector AF Project AfDB/IsDB Funding Implementation/Niche for MCRP

Health Both NSHIP and PERSRIP are investing in the health AfDB proposed to finance a set As vaccination provision is addressed both under PERSRIP and the
sector. PERSRIP focuses only on polio vaccination, of interventions in support of proposed interventions of the AfDB, the MCRP will not include
while NSHIP will focus on performance-based improving the health and such vaccination-related interventions. Instead, the MCRP will
financing to improve health and nutrition status in nutrition conditions of the focus on the reconstruction of health centers that have been
the LGAs with the highest concentration of IDP. conflict affected residents in the severely damaged or destroyed by the crisis. The team will
NE, including reconstruction and coordinate closely with the AfDB (on geographic coverage and
rehabilitation of Primary Health funding amount) as their investment plans further develop.
Care Services, training of health
workers, as well as community
nutrition support through an
extensive Outpatient
Therapeutic Program (OTP).
Transport No AF projects in this field No known interventions The MCRP will consult with the states to reconstruct damaged
roads and bridges that are the most key to the mobility of the
population.
Public The CSDP will support communities to develop, No known interventions The MCRP will reconstruct and repair local government buildings.
Buildings implement, and monitor micro social infrastructure Opportunities will be sought to combine community spaces into
projects. public buildings to provide areas for communities to gather for
meetings, events, and consultations.
Water and No AF projects in this field The AfDB has an extensive Given the planned interventions covered by the AfDB, the MCRP
Sanitation proposal to support WASH will not invest a significant amount in the WASH sector. However,
infrastructure rehabilitation, to keep some flexibility and to ensure critical WASH needs are
consisting of infrastructure met, the MCRP may reserve some funding on WASH to fill the
provision and institutional gaps left by the AfDB and other donors.
strengthening support to the
organizations providing water
supply and sanitation services.
Institutional The CSDP will strengthening the skills and capacity of The AfDB proposes to provide The proposed institutional support and capacity building
support and LGAs and sectoral public agencies to support institutional strengthening assistance provided by the MCRP will focus on strengthening
capacity communities and build partnerships between them. support to the government, PCNI at the federal level and the MDAs in the BAY states. The
building including technical assistance to MCRP will also link with the CSDP AF to strengthen the capacity
federal ministries and the Social of local governments and engage local communities and citizens
Investment Unit of the Office of for effective recovery and stabilization planning and area-based,
the Vice President. geo-spatial recovery planning in affected states.

2. As a broader context, the following tables provide a summary of recovery and development operations/projects planned or undergoing
in NE Nigeria, based on information gathered from the federal and state governments, World Bank, and other development partners as of
September 5, 2016. As it is infeasible to track all interventions in real time, this list is by no means a comprehensive one. Meanwhile, the MCRP

Page 110 of 121

 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

team has been working closely with the Government and major development partners to ensure the complementarity of the operations among
different stakeholders.

Table 5.2: List of Projects on Humanitarian Responses, Peace Building/Stability, and Social Protection
Total
Sector Project Description Status Start Date End Date Donor Adamawa Borno Yobe
Commitment
Fragility, Conflict, Emergency Assistance for Ongoing March March Global Affairs, US$3 million No Yes Yes
and Violence Populations in North 2014 2017 Canada
Eastern Nigeria
Fragility, Conflict, Nigeria Stability and Ongoing November December DFID £39 million for 10
and Violence Reconciliation Programme 2012 2017 states
(NSRP)
Fragility, Conflict, Nigeria International Completed 2015 2016 Multiple donors — Yes Yes Yes
and Violence Committee of the Red Cross including Canada,
Humanitarian Appeal UK, and Japan
Fragility, Conflict, Nigeria UNICEF Ongoing April 2016 March Global Affairs, — Yes Yes Yes
and Violence Humanitarian Appeal 2017 Canada
Fragility, Conflict, UN Office for the Ongoing April 2016 March Global Affairs, — Yes Yes Yes
and Violence Coordination of 2017 Canada
Humanitarian Affairs
Emergency Appeal for
Nigeria
Fragility, Conflict, Training of Leaders on Ongoing 2012 2017 USAID US$4.8 million in No Yes No
and Violence Religious and National Co- 6 states
Existence (TOLERANCE)
Fragility, Conflict, World Food Programme Ongoing April 2016 March Global Affairs, — No Yes Yes
and& Violence Sahel Appeal 2017 Canada
Governance Federal Public Ongoing 2010 2016 ATOS — Yes Yes Yes
Administration Programme
Governance Public Sector Reforms and Ongoing 2012 2016 World Bank US$80 million in 2 Yes No No
Development Project states
Governance Public/Private partnership Ongoing 2011 2017 World Bank US$115 million in Yes Yes Yes
6 states
Governance SACE - Strengthening Ongoing January January USAID US$19.2 million in Yes Yes Yes
Advocacy and Civic 2014 2019 26 states
Engagement including 6 NE
states
Governance State Accountability and Ongoing 2010 2016 DFID £36 million for 9 No No Yes
Voice Initiative states

Page 111 of 121

 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Total
Sector Project Description Status Start Date End Date Donor Adamawa Borno Yobe
Commitment
Governance State Partnership for Ongoing 2010 2016 DFID £67 million for 9 No No Yes
Accountability states
Responsiveness and
Capability
Governance World Bank Governance Ongoing 2011 2016 World Bank US$19 million in 6 Yes Yes Yes
Partnership facility states
Humanitarian Emergency Humanitarian Ongoing April 2016 April 2019 DFID £33.5 million in 3 Yes No Yes
Relief in Nigeria states
Humanitarian Office of Food for Peace Ongoing June 2015 April 2017 USAID (through US$12 million Yes Yes Yes
Office of Food for
Peace)
Humanitarian Office of Food for Peace Ongoing November October USAID (through US$6.8 million No Yes Yes
2015 2016 Office of Food for
Peace) and UN-
World Food
Programme
Humanitarian Office of Transition Ongoing September September USAID (through US$23 million in 3 Yes Yes Yes
Initiative-OTI 2014 2018 Office of NE states
Transition
Initiative)
Humanitarian Office of US Foreign Disaster January September USAID (through US$10 million No No Yes
Foreign Assistance (OFDA) 2014 2016 Office of US
Foreign Disaster
Foreign
Assistance
Humanitarian
Response in
Nigeria)
Humanitarian Rapid Response to Food and Ongoing March 2017 Japan US$1.5 million in
Livelihoods Improvement 2016 3 states
for IDP and their Host
Families in the Emergency
States of North East Nigeria
- Borno and Yobe
Humanitarian Water, Sanitation, Health Ongoing 2016 2016 EU €31 million across Yes Yes Yes
and Nutrition, Protection, 6 states
Emergency Shelter

Page 112 of 121

 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Total
Sector Project Description Status Start Date End Date Donor Adamawa Borno Yobe
Commitment
Peace building/ Contribute to the Approved 2016 2021 EU and German €37 million from Yes Yes No
Stability stabilization of NE Nigeria Federal Ministry the EU; €13
through strengthening the for Economic million from the
resilience of IDP, host Cooperation and German Federal
communities, returning Development Ministry for
refugees and the local Economic
population affected by Cooperation and
insurgency. Development
Peace building/ Help address the root Just started 2016 2018 EU €40 million Yes Yes No
Stability causes of displacement and
ensure durable solutions for
forcibly displaced
population and host
communities
Peace Building/ Strengthening the Capacity Completed 2014 2015 Japan US$0.5 million Yes Yes Yes
Stability of West Africa's Peace across all Nigerian
Support Operations in states
Nigeria
Peace building/ Promoting the engagement Ongoing 2014 2017 EU €10 million across Yes No Yes
Stability of women in peace building 5 states
and conflict resolution
Peace building/ PRO ACT I: Building food Just signed 2016 2020, EU €50 million No No
Stability security and resilience in
Northern Nigeria
Peace building/ Capacity Building for Ongoing March 2016 Japan US$0.46 million Yes No Yes
Stability Effective Prosecution of 2015 across all Nigerian
Terrorism Offences in states
Nigeria
Peace building/ Promoting socioeconomic Just started 2016 2018 EU €55 million across Yes No No
Stability recovery and sustainable 2 states
livelihoods, community
conflict mediation and
reducing the risks associated
with mines/IEDs/war debris
Peace building/ Emergency Assistance to IDP Ongoing March 2017 Japan US$1.45 million in Yes No No
Stability Women/Girls and Survivors 2016 3 states
of BH Terrorism Attacks in
Nigeria

Page 113 of 121

 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Total
Sector Project Description Status Start Date End Date Donor Adamawa Borno Yobe
Commitment
Peace building/ Prevention and Response to Completed June 2014 July 2015 Japan US$0.185 million Yes Yes Yes
Stability Gender-Based Violence in in 3 states
NE Nigeria
Peace building/ Support to Early Recovery Ongoing March 2017 Japan US$1.5 million in Yes Yes Yes
Stability Programme in the NE 2016 3 states
Social Protection Integrated Provision of Life- Ongoing March 2017 Japan US$4.5 million in Yes Yes Yes
& Labor Saving Emergency 2016 3 states
Interventions for Vulnerable
Populations and Support for
Returnees in the NE of
Nigeria
Social Protection Child Protection Ongoing October December UNICEF US$3.4 million
& Labor 2015 2016 across three
states
Social Protection CSDP Ongoing 2009 2017 World Bank US$340 million in
& Labor 5 states
Social Protection Voices for Change Ongoing September December DFID £41 million Yes Yes Yes
& Labor 2011 2017 nationally
Note: UNICEF = United Nations Children’s Fund.

Page 114 of 121

 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Table 5.3: List of Projects on Infrastructure, Economic Recovery, and Service Delivery
Total
Sector Project Description Status Start Date End Date Donor Adamawa Borno Yobe
Commitment
Agriculture FADAMA III Ongoing 2009 2017 World Bank US$450 million Yes Yes Yes
in 3 states
Agriculture Famine Early Warning Systems Ongoing September December USAID US$1.6 million No Yes Yes
Network (FEWSNET) 2005 2017
Agriculture Input Supply to Vulnerable Ongoing 2014 Food and —
Internally Displaced Agriculture
Population in Emergency Organization
States in North Eastern Nigeria
Agriculture PROPCOM Maikarfi Ongoing 2012 2018 DFID £26 million for Yes Yes Yes
21 states
Agriculture Transforming Irrigation Ongoing 2015 2022 World Bank US$495 million Yes No No
Management in Nigeria
(TRIMING)
Agriculture UTF Development of National Ongoing 2014 Food and —
Irrigation Policy and Strategy Agriculture
for Nigeria Organization
Agriculture West African Agricultural Ongoing 2010 2016 World Bank US$45 million Yes Yes Yes
Productivity Project (WAAPP) in 6 states
Education Education Crisis Response Ongoing October October USAID US$15 million Yes Yes Yes
2014 2017 in 5 states
Education Nigeria Global Partnership for Ongoing 2015 2019 World Bank US$100 million Yes Yes Yes
Education Fund Grant (GPE) in 6 states
Education Supporting the Safe Schools Ongoing 2014 2016 Multi-donor trust —
Initiative fund with input
from GIZ, USAID,
DFID, and UNICEF
Education Technology Enhanced Ongoing 2015 2016 USAID US$0.8 million Yes No No
Learning for All (TELA)
Education Conflict-affected Pre-school Ongoing 2015 2016 UNICEF US$0.5 million Yes Yes Yes
children have access to quality
early stimulation and early
learning opportunities
Energy Energy ( Clean Technology) Ongoing World Bank US$16 million
Fund in 6 states
Energy Nigeria Electricity and Gas Ongoing 2010 2017 World Bank US$300 million Yes Yes Yes
Improvement Project (NEGIP) in 6 states

Page 115 of 121

 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Total
Sector Project Description Status Start Date End Date Donor Adamawa Borno Yobe
Commitment
Environment Climate Change Adaptation Ongoing 2013 International Fund —
and Agribusiness Support for Agricultural
Programme Development
Environment Multi-national programme to Ongoing July 2015 July 2019 AfDB US$31.34 No Yes No
rehabilitate and strengthen million,
the resilience of lake chad including other
basin systems neighboring
countries
Environment Nigeria Erosion and Ongoing 2013 2020 World Bank US$500 million Yes Yes Yes
Watershed Management in 6 states
Project (NEWMAP)
Environment PolyChlorinated Biphenyls Ongoing 2012 2015 World Bank US$6.3 million Yes Yes Yes
Management Project in 6 states
Health Community Management of Ongoing 2015 2016 UNICEF US$2,100,436 No Yes No
Severe Malnutrition in Nigeria across 2
programs
Health Strengthening Integrated Ongoing September September USAID US$448 No Yes No
Delivery of HIV/AIDS Services 2011 2018 including other
(SIDHAS) states
Health Strengthening Sexual and Ongoing March 2016 Japan US$2.3 million Yes Yes Yes
Reproductive Health Services 2015 in 3 states
to Conflict Affected
Communities in NE Nigeria
Health EU support to immunization Ongoing 2011 2018 EU €10 million Yes No Yes
governance in Nigeria across 4 states
Health Reinforcing the Resilience and Completed July 2014 December Japan US$0.3 million No Yes No
Psychosocial Wellbeing of 2014
Children, Adolescents and
Families Affected by the
Violence in Borno State,
Nigeria
Health Strengthening community- Ongoing 2015 2016 EU €15 million No Yes No
based psychosocial support
and protection services for
children and adolescents

Page 116 of 121

 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Total
Sector Project Description Status Start Date End Date Donor Adamawa Borno Yobe
Commitment
Health Integrated Provision of Life- Completed February December Japan US$3.4 million Yes Yes Yes
Saving Emergency 2015 2015 in 3 states
Interventions for Vulnerable
Populations in the NE of
Nigeria
Health Increased Capacity for Sexual Ongoing 2014 2016 UN Population US$10 million Yes Yes Yes
and Reproductive Health Fund in 4 states
Services in Humanitarian
Setting
Health Enhancing RI Delivery Ongoing Bill & Melinda — Yes Yes Yes
Platforms in Developing Gates Foundation
Countries and Developing
New Metrics of Performance
Management
Health Accelerating the Reduction of Completed March March Global Affairs, — No Yes No
Maternal and Newborn 2011 2016 Canada
Mortality
Health Access to Family Planning Ongoing September June 2017 DFID £18 million Yes Yes Yes
Commodities 2011 nationally
Health Better Nutrition for Better Ongoing March March Global Affairs, US$5.6 million No No Yes
Lives 2014 2019 Canada
Health Community Management of Ongoing 2015 2016 UNICEF US$3 million Yes No Yes
Severe Malnutrition in Nigeria across two
programs
Health Enhancing Nigeria's Response Ongoing November December DFID £110 million No No Yes
to HIV/AIDS 2013 2021 nationally
Health Hard to Reach Project Ongoing Bill & Melinda — No Yes Yes
Gates Foundation
Health Health PILs Ongoing 2013 2018 World Bank US$150 million Yes No No
Health Increased Capacity for Quality Ongoing 2014 2017 UN Population — No No Yes
Family Planning Services (7th Fund
Country Program)
Health Integrated high Impact and Ongoing 2012 2017 UNICEF US$2.5 million Yes No No
evidence-based nutrition
intervention
Health Integrated PHC Service Ongoing 2015 2016 UNICEF US$6 million Yes Yes Yes
Delivery
Health IPV Country Induction and Ongoing Bill & Melinda — Yes Yes Yes
tOPV-bOPV Switch Support Gates Foundation

Page 117 of 121

 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Total
Sector Project Description Status Start Date End Date Donor Adamawa Borno Yobe
Commitment
Health Maternal Newborn Child Ongoing August December DFID £101 million for No No Yes
Health 2 2013 2018 5 states
Health Overhaul of Immunization Ongoing Bill & Melinda — Yes Yes Yes
Data System and Integration Gates Foundation
at NPHCDA
Health Polio Eradication Support Ongoing 2013 2017 World Bank — Yes Yes Yes
Health Polio Eradication (Social Ongoing Bill & Melinda — Yes Yes Yes
Mobilization) Gates Foundation
Health Saving One Million Lives Ongoing 2015 2018 World Bank US$500 million Yes Yes Yes
in 6 states
Health Scaling up CMAM Services in Ongoing Bill & Melinda — No Yes No
Borno Gates Foundation
Health Scaling up Nutrition Ongoing January 13 May 16 Global Affairs, — No No Yes
Canada
Health Strengthening Integrated Ongoing September September USAID — Yes Yes Yes
Delivery of HIV/AIDS Services 2011 2018
(SIDHAS)
Health strengthening of ONE MAIN Ongoing 2013 2017 UNICEF US$2 million Yes No No
PHC PER WARD
Health Support to Scale up Maternal Ongoing 2013 2017 EU €15 million Yes No No
and Newborn Child Health
Initiative in Northern Nigeria
Health Support to Scale up Maternal Ongoing 2015 2016 UNICEF US$1.3 million Yes No No
Newborn and Child Health across 3
Outcomes programs
Health UNICEF Nutrition Response in Ongoing 2015 2016 UNICEF US$5 million Yes Yes Yes
Sahel across 2
programs
Health Women for Health Ongoing November November DFID £29 million in 5 No No Yes
Programme 2012 2017 states
Health Working to improve nutrition Ongoing July 2011 March DFID £52 million in 5 No No Yes
in northern Nigeria 2 (WINN 2) 2017 states

Page 118 of 121

 The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Total
Sector Project Description Status Start Date End Date Donor Adamawa Borno Yobe
Commitment
Health Scale up Maternal and Extension to 2016 2020 EU €50 million Yes No No
Newborn Child Health an ongoing across 3 states
Initiative to include more project
nutrition and social protection
activities. Also €20 million to
be added (WHO) for polio in
high risk states and HDIM
system.
Health Emergency Primary Health Completed February November Japan US$3.2 million Yes Yes Yes
Care Convergence 2014 2014 across northern
Intervention for Sahalian Nigeria
Northern States in Nigeria
Housing Housing Finance Development Ongoing 2014 2018 World Bank US$300 million Yes Yes Yes
in 6 states
Transport Federal Roads Development Ongoing 2009 2016 World Bank US$330 million Yes Yes Yes
Project in 6 states
Transport Rural Access Mobility Project Ongoing August April 2019 Agence Francaise US$15 million Yes No No
II (RAMP2) 2013 de Developpement
WASH Water Supply and Sanitation Ongoing 2012 2017 EU €23 million Yes No Yes
Sector Reform Programme across 2 states
(WSSSRP) Phases 2 and 3
WASH Water Supply, Sanitation and Ongoing 2013 2018 UNICEF US$2.5 million
Sector Reform Project
(WSSSRP-III)
WASH Dams reoperation and Trans Ongoing AfDB — Yes Yes Yes
Boundary Issues on Climate
Change Impact and Social
Development Issues
WASH Preparation of Strategic Ongoing May 2015 March AfDB: Hadejia- €2,690,940 No No Yes
Action Pan For Water 2017 Jama'Are-
Resources Development in Komadugu-Yobe
Komadugu-Yobe Basin Basin Trust Fund
(HJKYB-TF)
WASH Rural Water Supply and Ongoing December August AfDB US$51.22 No No Yes
Sanitation Sub Programmes 2008 2016 million
WASH WASH emergency response in Ongoing 2015 2016 UNICEF US$906,393 in No Yes Yes
communities hosting IDP and 2 states
in IDP camps

Page 119 of 121

The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

Page 120 of 121

The World Bank
Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North Eastern Nigeria (P157891)

ANNEX 6: Map of the Target States in Nigeria

Page 121 of 121