Inception Report 2012

Sher Afzal Banda, Swabi District, 16.2.
2012
HELVETAS SWISS INTERCOOPERATION LIVELIHOOD SUPPORT & PROMOTION OF SMALL COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT (LACI-P)
Inception Report April 24, 2012
Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 1.2 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 Background ....................................................................................................................... 1 Scope of the Inception Report .......................................................................................... 2 Current Project Status ...................................................................................................... 3 Project Institutional Setup ................................................................................................. 3 Progress during the Pre/Inception Phase......................................................................... 3 Pre-Inception Activities.............................................................................................. 3 Inception Phase Activities ......................................................................................... 4 Identification and Selection of Target Districts ......................................................... 4 Identification and Selection of Partner Organizations (POs) .................................... 5 Identification and Selection of Union Councils, Villages and Target Communities .. 5 Poverty Assessment of Communities ....................................................................... 5 Project Proposals by the POs ................................................................................... 6 Essential Findings of the PPAF Selection Process .................................................. 6
SITUATION ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................ 3
2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.3 2.3.4 2.3.5 2.3.6 2.3.7 2.3.8 3 3.1 3.2
REVISED PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION CONCEPT ............................................................ 7 Project Area ...................................................................................................................... 7 Project Components ......................................................................................................... 7 Community Physical Infrastructure (CPI).................................................................. 7 Community Health and Education Schemes and Interventions (HED) .................... 8 Livelihood measures including Skills Training of Beneficiaries (LEP) ...................... 8 Disaster Preparedness and Management measures (DPM).................................... 9
3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.4 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 4 4.1 4.2 4.3
Project Objectives ............................................................................................................. 9 Project Implementation Arrangements ........................................................................... 10 Project Implementation Principles .................................................................................. 11 Total Cost and Financing ................................................................................................ 12 Timeframe ....................................................................................................................... 12 Objective of Consulting Services .................................................................................... 13 Range of Tasks and Nature of Assignments .................................................................. 13 Details of Specific Tasks................................................................................................. 13 Community Physical Infrastructure (CPI) Tasks ..................................................... 13 Community Mobilization and Livelihood Tasks ....................................................... 14 Disaster Preparedness and Mitigation (DPM) Tasks.............................................. 15 Management Assistance and Coordination Tasks ................................................. 18 Monitoring and Evaluation Tasks ............................................................................ 19
REVIEW OF THE SCOPE OF WORK FOR THE CONSULTANT......................................... 13
4.3.1 4.3.2 4.3.3 4.3.4 4.3.5 4.4
Schedule of Services ...................................................................................................... 20 i
Inception Report, April 24, 2012
4.4.1 4.4.2 5 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 6 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 7
Work Programming/Implementation Schedule ....................................................... 21 Staffing Schedule .................................................................................................... 21
STAFF ARRANGEMENTS AND STAFF PROFILES............................................................. 22 General Provisions ......................................................................................................... 22 Long-term Staff Profiles .................................................................................................. 22 The Advisory Review Team (ART) Members ................................................................. 22 Short-term Expert Pool ................................................................................................... 22 Duty Station .................................................................................................................... 23 Short Monthly Progress Reports (SMR) ......................................................................... 24 Quarterly Progress Reports (QPR)................................................................................. 24 Advisory Review Reports (ARR) .................................................................................... 24 Project Completion Report (PCR) .................................................................................. 24 Special Studies and Reports .......................................................................................... 24
REPORTING........................................................................................................................... 24
ISSUES AND CHALLENGES................................................................................................. 26
LIST OF ANNEXES
Annex 1 Annex 2 Annex 3 Annex 4 Annex 5 Annex 6 Annex 7 Annex 8 Annex 9 Annex 10 Annex 11 Funding Phase One PO Profiles District Profiles and exposure to natural disasters Revised Organization Chart Funding Phase One with 6 POs and 17 UCs Activities of DPM Revised Work Programme Revised Staffing Schedule ART Members and STCs TOR Senior International Expert Curriculum Vitae Klaus Euler
ii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ACO ADB AKRSP ARR ART BMZ BoD CBO CC CCB CO CPI CS CSO CSPM CUP CV DDP DNH DPM DRM DRR DRU EAD EIDM ESMF EU GBI GoP HDI HED HQ HSI IR IUCN KfW KP LACI-P LEP LFM LSO M&E MER MIS Assistant Coordination Officer Asian Development Bank Aga Khan Rural Support Programme Advisory Review Report Assignment Review Team (German) Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development Board of Directors Community Based Organization Climate Change Citizen Community Board Community Organisation Community Physical Infrastructure Conflict Sensitivity Civil Society Organization Conflict Sensitive Programme Management Community Uplift Program Curriculum Vitae District Development Plan Do No Harm Disaster Preparedness Mitigation Disaster Risk Management Disaster Risk Reduction District Response Unit Economic Affairs Division (Federal Government) Energy, Infrastructure & Disaster Management Environment & Social Management Framework European Union Grant-Based Intervention Government of Pakistan Human Development Index Health Education & People with Special Needs Headquarter HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation Inception Report International Union for the Conservation of Nature Kreditanstalt fr Wiederaufbau (German Development Bank) Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province (previously NWFP) Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project Livelihood Enhancement & Protection Logical Framework Matrix Local Support Organization Monitoring & Evaluation Monitoring, Evaluation & Research Management Information System
iii
MOU MTDF NDMA NGO NOC NRSP NWFP O&M PCR PMU PO PMD PPAF PRA QPR RDP SAP-PAK SDC SERVE SIE SMR SNE SRSP STEP SWO SWWS TL TOR TOT UC UNDP UNHCR VDP VO VSWA WB W&E
Memorandum of Understanding Mid-Term Development Framework National Disaster Management Authority Non Governmental Organization No Objection Certificate National Rural Support Programme North West Frontier Province (officially renamed as Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province) Operation and Maintenance Project Completion Report Project Management Unit Partner Organization (of PPAF) Pakistan Meteorological Department Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund Participatory Rural Appraisal Quarterly Progress Report Rural Development Project South Asia Partnership-Pakistan Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation Sustainable Development, Education, Rural Infrastructure, Veterinary Care and Environment Senior International Expert Short Monthly Progress Report Senior National Expert Sarhad Rural Support Programme Short-Term Expert Pool Social Welfare Officer Support With Working Solution Team Leader Terms of Reference Training of Trainers Union Council United Nations Development Programme United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Village Development Plan Village Organization Voluntary Social Welfare Agency Ordinance World Bank Water & Energy
iv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Inception Report was prepared by the Consultant of the Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project which is executed by the Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund and co-financed by the Federal Republic of Germany through KfW. The report is based on the first three months of the Project and the collaboration between PPAF and the Consultant. It provides an analysis of the present situation, gives an updated Project Implementation Concept and reviews the scope of the Consulting Services including staff arrangements and the reporting schedule. The report concludes with a discussion of issues and challenges encountered. At the end of the Inception Phase a full time PPAF Project General Manager is in charge, professional staff of the relevant Units are nominated and the Consultants staff are mobilized and have taken up offices at the PPAF office in Islamabad. The selection process of the first funding phase is also completed and 6 POs are approved working in 17 UCs of the 5 Project Districts. The selection for the second funding phase is under way and appraisal of POs is in its final stage. The Project Objectives remain unchanged and the Project Implementation Concept still follows basically the outline of the project planning phase. Main changes concern the geographical coverage which has been extended to five Districts from originally three, the final inclusion of health, education and livelihood schemes which were originally only tentatively included and Disaster Preparedness and Management measures as a new component. The timeframe for the execution of the Project is 36 months, from February 2012 to the end of January 2015. The same timeframe applies to the Consulting Services. The scope of the Consulting Services has undergone a slight shift with a stronger focus on livelihoods. The profile of the Senior International Expert has been adjusted to reflect that and an additional Senior National Advisor on Climate Change / Disaster Risk Reduction was added with a 50% time allocation. The Senior National Expert, a full time post, has remained unchanged. The Reporting Schedule is unchanged with the exception that the first Advisory and Review Team Assignment was postponed until July 2012 and in April only an assignment of the International Team Leader took place because of the fact that field implementation had not yet started at that time. ART assignments will take place twice per year. Major issues regarding Project management and implementation could be solved in early April but the fact that for most of the time of the Inception Phase no Project General Manager was appointed yet hampered communication between PPAF and the Consultant. Also the approval of the Partner Organisations by the Board of Directors took place only in early April, therefore fund disbursement could be done only towards the end of April and field activities will only start thereafter. The planning phase of up to 6 months with setting up Community Organisations and community based planning is considered crucial and it will provide a first opportunity to assess training and coaching needs of POs as well as COs. Setting up of the results framework and defining the appropriate indicators are other important issues that need to be addressed as well as establishing the required baselines to monitor progress later. Regarding the allocation of funds to the different funding phases it is observed that much of the Health and Education schemes are now in the third phase (75%) which has a duration of only 24 months. This is considered a rather short timeframe since these schemes (HED) require an operation phase before handing over. On the other hand, most of the livelihood activities which require less time for implementation are in the longer first and second funding phases.
vi
1
1.1
INTRODUCTION
Background
The Consulting Contract between the Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund (PPAF, Employer) and HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation (Helvetas, Consultant) for the latters services relating to the implementation of the KfW-funded Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project (LACI-P) in Khyber Pakhtunkwa Province (KP) had been signed on 5th of May 2011. The Project started from February 1, 2012 after signing the MoU between the Government of Pakistan and the PPAF in December 2011. The commencement of the Consulting Services is accordingly from February 2012, when HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation mobilized the Consultant team for the Project. The Project implementation period is for 36 months ending January 2015. The overall objective of the Project is to contribute to the improvement of the general living conditions and quality of life of the poor population in the five selected project districts of KP1 with a special focus on the poorest targeting approximately 600,000 people in those districts. The Project objectives are (i) (ii) (iii) increased access to and sustainable utilization of social and economic infrastructure by the population of the project region, increased employment and income opportunities, especially for the poor strengthening of the local civil society and enhanced participation of the population in the decision making process including building the target community disaster preparedness and mitigation capacities.
PPAF is the Executing Agency for the Project which will be implemented in line with the PPAF-III programme launched in August 2009. PPAF-III is funded through a loan of $250 million provided by the World Bank and it focuses on social mobilization, institution building, enhancement and protection of livelihood, access to microcredit, basic services and infrastructure over the next five years (ref. KfW Request for Tenders). The LACI-P activities will be implemented in close coordination and complimentary to activities of the PPAF III. However, microcredit will not be provided through this project. Where appropriate the Consultant will co-ordinate activities with the operations of the World Bank funded PPAF-III and other relevant stakeholders to ensure that the proposed standards, systems, methods, etc. are compatible and complementary as much as possible and to avoid duplication of efforts or inconsistencies of the approach. The implementation of the LACI-P may require PPAF to adjust and develop its management systems and structures to suit the implementation of the projects. PPAF can already draw on its previous experience for the management of the new community infrastructure schemes and particularly on the Operational Policies Manual for Grant-Based Interventions (GBIs). However, processes and systems may need adaptation and updating and skills and capacities will need to be reactivated and extended. The same applies for the work of the implementing Partner Organizations (POs) of LACI-P. In addition to the small infrastructure schemes, livelihood support has become a major component in both this Project and the PPAF III. PPAF has acquired useful and valuable experience in the livelihood sector with a limited number of well targeted initiatives. However, the setting up of this scale of livelihood support (7000 units) with successful implementation and effective control of this overall component is considered a major challenge for all parties involved.
The target districts for the project are Chitral, Buner, Charsadda, Swab, and D.I. Khan.
Similarly, Disaster Preparedness and Mitigation (DPM) has been added as a major focus to the Project not only to mainstream DRR in the small community infrastructure schemes but also to enhance capacities of the communities to prepare for and cope with likely disasters. The Consultant provides services and within the existing structures of PPAF and in close cooperation with PPAFs POs and the Community Organisations (COs) in the target communities. Close coordination is also maintained with the KfW headquarter in Frankfurt and their office in Islamabad. The Consultants tasks are outlined in Chapter 4. During the period of Pre-Project activities, PPAF has tentatively selected six Partner Organizations (POs) and the first 17 Union Councils for the implementation of the Project activities. PPAF has conducted a preliminary poverty assessment and has also done preliminary social mobilization of the target communities. An intervention in one village of Swabi District (Sher Afzal Banda) has already started through retroactive financing by PPAF.
1.2
Scope of the Inception Report
This Inception Report has been prepared by the Consultant in close collaboration with PPAF within the stipulated period of three months ending in April, 2012. It is based mainly on discussions with PPAF and KfW staff involved in the Project and brief field visits and interactions with beneficiaries, PO personnel and other stakeholders. Besides, it draws heavily on 4 important documents: (1) the KfW Request for Tenders (October 2009) and specifically the TORs provided in this document, (2) the Technical Proposal of the Consultant (December 2009 and the update of August 2010), (3) the Separate Agreement to the Loan, Financing and Project Agreement (dated 12 June 2010) and (4) the PPAF Operational Policies Manual for Grant Based Interventions (GBIs) (Draft 22 August 2011). The Inception Report provides first a summary of the activities initiated and/or completed during the Inception Period and a current situation analysis including essential findings during the PPAF selection process (Chapter 2). The Report then presents the updated Project Implementation Concept (Chapter 3.) and the revised scope of work of the Consultant (Chapter 4). A revised Implementation Schedule is also provided in Chapter 4. Chapter 5 outlines staff arrangements for long-term and short-term inputs and special studies. The reporting requirements (Chapter 6.) remain basically unchanged from the earlier contract documents and are documented here for reference and convenience. The Report concludes with a chapter on issues and challenges identified during the Inception Period. The Inception Report also serves as the first Assignment Review Report (ARR) as specified in the TORs of the Contract for the Consulting Services.
2
2.1
SITUATION ANALYSIS
Current Project Status
The 3-months Inception Phase started in February 2012 and will end with the approval of the Inception Report at the end of April 2012. During this period, the PPAF Credit Committee has approved the Funding Phase One on March12, 2012 and the Board of Directors has approved it on April 3, 2012. Six POs will work in the 5 Districts and in 17 Union Councils. Program costs of Funding Phase One are EUR 12.13 million or about 45% of the total budget for Investment Costs. Mobilisation for Project implementation is thus ready to start immediately with setting up of Community Organisations (COs), initiating the need based planning process and establishing of Multi Sector Plans (MSP) in the target UCs. Desk appraisal of Funding Phase Two is completed, field appraisals are under way and approval is expected shortly.
2.2
Project Institutional Setup
The PPAF BoD has approved a revised organogram which places the HID Unit directly under the CEO. The other five major Technical Units relevant for this Project are CPI, W&E. LEP, HED and DPM. The Group Head Energy, Infrastructure & Disaster Management (EIDM), Mr.Zaffar Pervez Sabri, is PPAFs Focal Point for this Project. A full time Project General Manager, Mr. Masood Khalid, has been appointed for this project on April 9, 2012 and he has assumed responsibilities with immediate effect. He will report to the Focal Point and coordinate all Project activities, including the Consulting Services. The Consultant Team Leader, Mr.Chris Morger, is based at the headoffice in Switzerland. The Senior International Expert (SIE)/Deputy Team Leader, Mr.Klaus Euler, and the Senior National Expert (SNE, both fulltime), Mr.Hayatullah Khan are based at the PPAF office in Islamabad. In addition, HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation also placed a Senior National Advisor for DPM (50% time), Mr.Syed Sajidin Hussain, with the Consultant team. Besides the Technical Units, the Project and the Consultant work also closely together with the Monitoring, Evaluation and Research Unit (MER) of the Quality Assurance and Compliance Group (QAC) while also exchanging with the Communication & Media Unit (C&M) as well as the Environmental & Social Management Unit (ESM), both also part of the QAC Group. All of these Units have an important role for the overall implementation, particularly MER who is responsible for compliance of the Projects with the PPAF Results Framework (Annex 12 of the OPs Manual) and overall monitoring. MER also plays an important role in the preparation of the Quarterly Progress Reports (QPR).
2.3
2.3.1
Progress during the Pre/Inception Phase

Pre-Inception Activities
After signing of the MOU between PPAF and the Ministry of Finance of the Government of Pakistan in December 2011, the Consultant Team Leader visited the country from January 08 to 14, 2012 to get acquainted with the PPAF management structure and to get an understanding of the ground situation and discuss the mobilization of the of the Consultant team. Several discussions were held by the TL with PPAF to clarify the scope of the Consultancy, its approach and methodology and to get an understanding about the PPAF vision of Project implementation in the overall PPAF framework. During this visit, Sher Afzal Banda village in Swabi District was visited where pilot activities under HED, LED and CPI are implemented. A second field visit was made to an Integrated Area Upgrading Project (IAUP) near Islamabad. At the end, the TL shared a first outline of the Inception Report and the way forward with the PPAF senior management in the debriefing session.
2.3.2
Inception Phase Activities
The Consultant team was mobilized and started work from February 1, 2012; they took up office at the PPAF premises in Banigala. During the Inception Period progress has been made by PPAF and the Consultant as summarized below: POs have submitted their applications for intervention along with 30-months Grant Proposals; these technical and financial proposals have been reviewed by the MultiSector Review Team and have been cleared by the PPAF Credit Committee for approval by the BoD. The PPAF has prepared Inter-PO/ Inter-District financial apportionments on the basis of the proposals of the POs. For a comprehensive overview on the Funding Phase One see Annex 1; Six POs (AKRSP, NRSP, SRSP, RDP, SWWS and SERVE) were officially approved by the PPAF BoD on April 3, 2012 to implement Projects and Financing Agreements will be signed with them. Profiles of these POs are given in Annex 2. Seventeen UCs have been selected for Project implementation in the five Districts and a poverty assessment survey of communities will be conducted using the Poverty Score Card methodology. The selected POs have mobilized their staff for effective implementation and supervision of the Project and an orientation workshop for the selected POs has been conducted by PPAF; Two Short Monthly Progress Reports (SMRs) for February and March 2012 have been submitted to KfW as per agreement; the SMR for April and the first Quarterly Progress Report (QPR) are due soon after the end of the Inception Phase.
2.3.3
Identification and Selection of Target Districts
PPAF prioritizes grant funding for poor districts with low human development indices. Within the districts, a particular emphasis is given to poor households, equally ensuring access to Project benefits to women who are given a priority in all decisions regarding interventions. Similarly, selection of target villages is based on poverty criteria defined by PPAF. Social mobilization ensures participation of the poor while interventions comprise cost effective, pro-poor and context relevant multi-sector packages. A country-wide assessment was conducted by PPAF in order to identify the priority Districts in terms of food insecurity and human development index values. In total 15 Districts were prioritised in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (List of Priority Districts in Annex 7, PPAF OPs Manual). These Districts were also included in the governments Mid Term Development Framework (MTDF 2005-10). Five Districts were then selected for this Project namely Chitral, Buner, Charsadda, Swabi and D.I. Khan and approved by KfW. It is important to mention that prior to the floods, the Project Districts included Buner, Haripur and Swabi. However, in response to the humanitarian crisis caused by the floods in 2010, the German Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) together with the Pakistani Government agreed to alter the Project Districts. The five Project Districts selected are presently considered sensitive due to the recent history of violent conflict and a likely risk of being engulfed with such troubles again. Large areas in these Districts were also affected by the floods of 2010. It is expected that a tangible improvement of the living conditions of the poor in these Districts will contribute to reducing the risk of further social and political unrest, instability, further marginalization of poor and exacerbating poverty. A snapshot of the characteristics of the selected Districts is given under section 3.1 and a summary is provided in Annex 3.
2.3.4
Identification and Selection of Partner Organizations (POs)
The procedures to be followed for Grant Proposals and Appraisals are described in Chapter 4 of the PPAF OPs Manual and Chapter 4.2.2 provides the Eligibility Criteria for Partner Organisations. Six POs have been approved for implementing the Project interventions under Funding Phase One comprising EUR 12.132 million in 17 UCs of the 5 target Districts. Details are given in Annex 1 and short profiles of the six POs are presented in Annex 2. The selection process of these first six POs was conducted by PPAF prior to the commencement of the Consulting Services. The information was officially communicated on March 12, 2012 after the appraisal by the PPAF Multi-Sector Review Team was completed and the grant proposals were approved by the PPAF Credit Committee. The selection for another 6 new POs for Funding Phase Two is under way, desk appraisals are completed and field appraisals are on-going with participation of the SNE of the Consultants team. It is expected that Funding Phase Two will be approved shortly and implementation will start in July 2012. The third Funding Phase will tentatively comprise up to 10 POs, some already from the first two Funding Phases and some new ones. It is expected that the total number of POs will not exceed 15. The start of Funding Phase Three implementation is expected in January 2013. The first and second Funding Phases will be for a duration of 30 months each whereas 24 months are foreseen for Funding Phase Three. Details of the Funding Phases are in Annex 5.
2.3.5
Identification and Selection of Union Councils, Villages and Target Communities
The identification and selection of the UCs is made by the POs based on their experiences and consultation with District officials. The baseline for identification of households will be done using Poverty Score Card (PSC) technique. A situation analysis of the infrastructure and an analysis of institutions present in the identified UCs is also carried out. At least 50% coverage of the rural households is mandatory in a selected Union Council to comply with the saturation approach stipulated in the OPs Manual. Selection of villages and target communities is part of the recommended social mobilization process as described in Annex 8 of the OPs Manual. The planning and establishment of a MultiSector Plan (MSP) for the priority UCs are the steps that follow this selection. Funding Phase One has been approved for six POs working in 17 proposed Union Councils of the 5 Districts in KP Province. Details are given in Annex 1. Funding Phase Two foresees to work in 17 Union Councils as well and the proposals are undergoing the final appraisal at the time being. Funding Phase Three is expected to work in 13-19 UCs. Nevertheless, some of the Funding Phases may have overlapping UCs and the total number of UCs that will benefit from the Project is expected to be between 30 and 36.
2.3.6
Poverty Assessment of Communities
Based on criteria described in the PPAF OPs Manual, the poor and ultra poor households in a community are targeted using the Poverty Score Card technique. This tool applies a Proxy Mean Approach to Poverty Tracking aiming to find a weighted combination of proxy variables/indicators that together identify whether a household is poor or not. The data collected is then shared and confirmed with the Community Organizations (COs) to obtain their endorsement. This ensures ownership of the process as well as authenticity of the information collected. Households with a score of 0-23 on the Poverty Score Card are considered poor, and those in the 0-18 range are classified as ultra poor.
2.3.7
Project Proposals by the POs
The Project proposals approved under the Funding Phase One by the PPAF BoD are frame proposals. Each proposal indicates programme-wise budget, the coverage of priority Districts and Union Councils and total beneficiaries. Community based detailed planning of specific activities under the LACI-P and the formulation of MSPs at UC level are the next steps. The Consultant will assist PPAF and work closely with the POs and the COs during the process of Project formulation and the elaboration of MSPs. This detailed planning usually takes up to six months after approval and it follows Annex 8 of the OPs Manual, Recommended Steps in Social Mobilization and Multi-sector Planning and Implementation.
2.3.8
Essential Findings of the PPAF Selection Process
In order to speed up the selection process at least for the First Funding Phase the following selection criteria were adopted by PPAF: Accordingly, the POs should: Be an existing and experienced partner of PPAF; Have a presence in at least one of the five LACI-P Districts or in Districts with similar socio economic and environmental conditions; Alternatively, they can be specialised organisations in a particular topic or in an area where other existing partners may not have the necessary experience; and Ideally the group of selected POs should be a mix of larger and smaller PPAF partners to create synergies.
3
3.1
REVISED PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION CONCEPT

Project Area
The Project covers five target Districts of KP, namely Chitral, Swabi, Buner, Charsadda and D.I. Khan. The selected Districts represent topographical differences varying from high altitudes in the north to irrigated plains in the central valley and dry lands in the south. The total area covers 26,580 sq. km with a population of more than 4 million people. Generally, land holdings are relatively small and self operated. With the exception of Charsadda, these Districts are spatially and economically marginalized, but all experienced recurring natural disasters (ref: Note of March 2011 on adjustments of the Technical Proposal). A brief description of the 5 selected Districts based on their HDI value, food insecurity and susceptibility to natural disasters, a susceptibility that is likely to increase in the future due to climate change and variability effects, is provided in Annex 3.
3.2
Project Components
The Project follows an integrated approach, which means that a range of interventions will be carried out simultaneously in the selected Union Councils and Villages. The selection of interventions will be determined in a demand based, participatory process by the communities with the support of the POs and in accordance with PPAFs Operational Policies Manual for Grant-Based Interventions. Special focus will be given to women and women-headed households entailing the formation of women community organizations and their active participation. Vulnerable groups, such as orphans, disabled community members and minorities are other focus beneficiaries. The Project will finance the following components:
3.2.1
Community Physical Infrastructure (CPI)
Community Physical Infrastructure will respond to a community demand and follow a Community Driven Development approach. Approximately 68% of the overall investment cost budget of EUR 22 million will be used for the provision of CPI projects. In total approximately 2,350 CPI schemes (2000 conventional and 350 innovative) will be implemented through the Project in the 5 target Districts. In Funding Phase One, Rs.704 million has been approved for CPI interventions. Local contribution to any intervention scheme shall be in accordance with PPAF standard procedures, but with more flexibility towards poorest communities; In general this comprises 0% contribution in very poor communities for the first scheme, 10% for the second and third scheme and 20% for any additional schemes. However, in the case of natural disaster or in war hit zones the CO contribution may be waived but on the average a 10-15% contribution is expected. CPI projects include both conventional and technological innovative schemes as follows: The conventional CPI include the construction and/or rehabilitation of i) irrigation water management schemes2 ii) road sector3 iii) soil conservation, DRR, mitigation and preparedness structures4; vi) water supply and sanitation v) school buildings and renovation and /or repair of existing school infrastructures; xiii) health centre buildings and renovation and or/ repair of existing health infrastructures.
open channel (surface), pipe and lift irrigation schemes, storage reservoirs, tube-wells and open wells, drip, sprinkler and bubbler irrigation schemes, delay action and check dams rural roads ii) short to medium scale bridges and culverts flood protection structures, earth retaining walls, retrofitting of structures for earthquake resistance, watershed management, community based early warning systems and community shelters
3 4
Preference will be given to rehabilitation, modernization and/or extension of existing schemes. Where not possible, new schemes will be implemented using low cost local materials. Such schemes are relatively simple and can be constructed to a great extent by the communities themselves with technical support of the POs. Average cost is assumed to be EUR 6000. The criteria for a CPI scheme to be eligible for PPAF funding are given in Paragraphs 36 and 37 (p. 31) of the PPAF OPs Manual. The innovative CPI schemes require more technical assistance and in some cases are larger in scale and they are usually more costly. An average cost of EUR 9000, excluding community contributions, has been allocated for such schemes. Schemes in this sub-category will include, but are not limited to, renewable energy schemes such as solar/wind pumps, wind turbines and mini/micro hydro-electric power projects with up to 200 Kw capacity, slope stabilisation, drought mitigation and high efficiency irrigation systems including drip and sprinkler etc. They are to be implemented in coordination with the upcoming, also KfW-funded, Renewable Energy project. Due to the higher cost and complexity and the lower involvement of unskilled labour in the construction of these schemes, their number shall be limited to a maximum of 15% (350 units) of the overall number of schemes or 20% of overall costs (EUR 3.15 million). An Operation and Maintenance (O&M) plan for each scheme will be established and discussed with the CO beforehand to ensure sustainability of the interventions. Consultants and PPAF will inspect the operation and maintenance of projects during their joint field visits. The existing monitoring procedures will be reviewed, e.g. by using the PPAF O&M Technical Guidelines. These guidelines will be updated and/or developed with the assistance of the Consultant. This applies particularly to complex and innovative CPI projects, as well as to health and education facilities.
3.2.2 Community Health and Education Schemes and Interventions (HED)

HED interventions had previously been included tentatively in the project (EUR 2 million) subject to final approval. In the trilateral meeting between KfW, PPAF and the Consultant on November 23, 2011, KfW approved funding of HED interventions on the basis of the August 2011 version of the PPAF OPs Manual and with the condition that separate Technical Guidelines for the sector will still be developed (see Separate Agreement, Chapter 4. Special Implementation Agreements). Through this component, support would be rendered to villages with existing health or education facilities operated by the government or community organisations requiring physical and functional improvements. New schools or health facilities would only be provided in rare cases (e.g. if there is no facility within a 2 km radius) and if the sustainable operation of the facilities can be guaranteed. PPAFs strict and very specific criteria about when to support such investments must be applied to ensure sustainability and to avoid replacing the role of the Government. Prior to constructing new health and/or education facilities coordination with the relevant district and provincial departments is mandatory. However some innovative interventions may be introduced with interested communities to initiate establishing self operated schools. To this effect services of the reputed model school will be engaged for skills training.
3.2.3
Livelihood measures including Skills Training of Beneficiaries (LEP)
Livelihood initiatives have been included within the project (approx. EUR 5 million, same conditions as under HED above). Measures include targeted and appropriate skills- and enterprise trainings (Ustaad-Shagird principle5) and targeted asset transfers for beneficiaries
Literally means teacher-pupil relationship for learning as apprentice
with PSC scores up to 18 whereas households with scores up to 23 on the Poverty Score Card are eligible for trainings. Initiatives include advice on agricultural intensification, awareness raising on entitlements, local job opportunity analyses, etc. The formation of Common Interest Groups is one of the tested approaches followed including the formation of youth forums that will be provided with information on scholarships, judiciary matters, job opportunities, health and hygiene, etc. Mechanisms will be developed to run these youth forums on a self sustained basis. PPAF supports innovative approaches to promote best practices and a thorough value chain analysis. The experiences of HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation in livelihoods enhancement approaches and value chains will add value to this component. All these measures are part of the overall strategy to help the targeted communities and families to graduate out of poverty..
3.2.4
Disaster Preparedness and Management measures (DPM)
DPM has been added to the project in view of its importance country-wide but also under PPAF III. The DRM expert of the Consultant will closely work with the DPM Unit to integrate and mainstream DRR in the design and the construction of the CPI and HED projects. Where necessary, he will advise on special DRR structural and non-structural as well as bio-engineering measures. Focus will also be put on strengthening disaster preparedness capacities of the vulnerable communities (both women and men) in the target Districts by introducing a package of activities such as raising community awareness on DPM, formation/training of Emergency Response Teams, systematic vulnerability assessments and the implementation of early warning systems. The Consultants activities and network in D.I.Khan and Chitral on DPM/DRR will be useful in this regard.
3.3
Project Objectives
The overall objective of the Project is to contribute to the improvement of the general living conditions and quality of life of the poor population in the Project region with a special focus on the poorest. The project objectives are: (i) increased access to and sustainable utilization of social and economic infrastructure by the population of the Project region; (ii) increased employment and income opportunities, especially for the poor and (iii) strengthening of the local civil society and enhanced participation of the population in the decision making process and its disaster preparedness capacities at the local level. The Project shall be regarded successful if during the final Project review approximately 3 years after Project completion: at least 60% of the infrastructure schemes financed through the Project are used, stay resistant to natural disasters and are operated and maintained by the target communities; at least 40% of the target groups have an increased income of 20% as compared to a baseline value (baseline and reference time e.g. annually or over a multi-annual period which still needs to be defined based on the findings of the initial poverty assessment at the beginning of the Project); at least 33% of the community organisations supported through the Project continue to be actively involved in the planning and implementation of local development initiatives, have access to external support programmes and their capacity is built to cope with natural disasters.
Other than those main three indicators, additional monitoring indicators on innovative technology will be jointly elaborated by PPAF and the Consultant. Such indicators will be based on PPAF Results Framework and be conform to the requirements of the PPAF M&E Results Chain (see Inception Report, April 24, 2012 9
OPs Manual, Chapter 5.). Indicators are an integral part of any Logical Framework for a Project as are the specification of the baseline data has needs to be acquired. For each specific planned intervention under the LACI-P, the respective indicators will be determined according to the activities and baselines will be established where necessary and appropriate.
3.4
Project Implementation Arrangements
The total funds for the Project amounting to EUR 31.5 million have been provided by KfW and KfW will administer these funds on behalf of the Government of Germany. KfW is responsible for overseeing correct and appropriate use of these funds in the Project in order to achieve the Project objectives. The Economic Affairs Division (EAD) represents the Government of Pakistan (GoP) and thus signed the Financing Agreement on its behalf. The GoP will be the recipient of Financial Cooperation grant and soft loan funds and will pass these on as grant funds to the Project Executing Agency (PPAF). PPAF as the Project Executing Agency is obliged to control and ensure proper utilization of the funds. Currently, PPAF comprises of five operational Units (W&E, CPI, DPM, LEP, HED), which have a major role in the LACI-P; HID has been placed directly under the CEO, whereas the Quality Assurance & Compliance Units like MER, ESM, C&M are also relevant for the LACI-P. The basis for Project implementation will be the PPAF OPs Manual. All PPAF policies laid down there have been updated in early 2012 - and are still being updated - to include all Project-related requirements. PPAF is implementing Projects through a mix of bigger and smaller local CSOs, which are PPAFs Partner Organizations (POs). In general, preference will be given to the CSOs which have already been active in the LACI-P districts and therefore have hands-on experience of working in similar situations. Engaging smaller POs will contribute to capacity building of these CSOs. More importantly, it might enable project operations in security sensitive districts, as smaller CSOs source their staff locally with people who are known and respected in the area. Despite supporting smaller CSOs, the emphasis of the Project lies in providing communities with a wide range of services and skills in a speedy way to improve their lives. While preference will be given to such smaller CSOs, especially where security considerations exist, larger CSOs will not be excluded. In areas where security is of less concern and/or where the comparative advantage of the larger CSOs is very significant, these large CSOs will also be included. The selected POs will coordinate closely with the local government and relevant line departments, particularly in the case of health/ education and DPM measures. All schemes under the Project must comply with the relevant official standards. In addition, KfW encourages based upon a request by KP government the establishment of District Development Forums as a means of sharing information between the private and public stakeholders within a particular area. PPAF and its POs will actively encourage the establishment of Community Organisations in villages (COs) and UC-level organizations and strengthen their capacity to have their voice heard at the local government. The implementation of the Project is technically supported by an international consultant, HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation. The team is led by a Team Leader based in Switzerland. The Pakistan team comprises two full-time and one half-time employees and support staff. The services consist of support to the PPAF in technical, social and monitoring tasks (with a change in focus of expertise from engineering to livelihood for the SIE) and will be provided through a combination of short term international and national experts and through Advisory Review Team (ART) assignments. The updated Project implementation arrangements are visualised in the Organization Chart presented in Annex 4. Inception Report, April 24, 2012 10
3.5
Project Implementation Principles
According to the PPAF Vision and the organizations Core Values laid down in the OPs Manual (3.1/3.2, p. 7), PPAF follows implementation principles and approaches which can be characterized as pro-poor, community-driven/bottom-up, participatory and with special support to marginalised groups within the communities such as orphans, women-headed households, people with disabilities and minorities. The Do no harm approach is part of the Project implementation principles and a special Annex is provided on this in the Request for Tenders document and it is also mentioned specifically in the Separate Agreement of June 2010. In its cross-sectoral concept on crisis prevention, conflict transformation and peace building, the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) thus stipulated that all new projects in countries with an acute or greater need for prevention must anticipate and monitor their potential positive and negative impacts on conflicts. This also applies to projects not explicitly designed as peace-building measures such as this Project. It will be important that it does justice to the Project districts by avoiding negative impacts on the conflict and promoting positive ones. This is referred to as the do no harm (DNH) approach. The Consultant will also provide support to ensure that the do no harm approach and conflict sensitive project implementation is followed. All Project interventions have therefore to be planned and implemented accordingly. Regular results monitoring compliant with do no harm criteria and the relevant reporting will be carried out. If the security situation worsens in the Project area, the Project context might need to be monitored in line with the security analysis PPAF also follows the Density of Interventions principle which is also known under the names of the Saturation Approach or Linear Inter-Project Integration. The basic aim of this approach is to leverage the investments made towards consciously planned sustainability. In practice it means that at least 50% of the rural households in a covered UC should be included in the MSP.
Equally part of the Project implementation principles is sound Operation and Maintenance (O&M) planning. For all schemes, an O&M plan is a must to ensure their sustainability. The O&M plan is part and parcel of the feasibility study and the project design and its implications need to be discussed with the communities before Project implementation is started. The PO staff and the communities will be made aware of their O&M responsibilities and the financial implications it may have. Environmental and social safeguards are observed through respective assessments and control will be carried out according to defined procedures as specified in the PPAF Environment & Social Management Framework (ESMF). Procurement of goods and services will be carried out according to the procedures defined and as agreed with World Bank for PPAF lll. For procurements not specifically covered by this agreement, the KfW Procurement Guidelines will be applied (available at www.kfw.de). Disbursement Procedures for Project interventions other than the international consultancy services will follow a disposition fund procedure. The disposition fund will be administered by PPAF. Replenishments of the disposition fund will only be made upon the actual implementation progress, e.g. completed schemes, numbers of training measures, and against the disbursement by the POs of PPAF. According to the Financing Agreement between PPAF and the PO, replenishments of funds will be approved by PPAF if 80% of the previously provided funds have been disbursed by the POs. Disbursement to the Consultant will be made directly by KfW.
11
3.6
Total Cost and Financing
The total Cost and Financing of the LACI-P is provided in Annex 3 of the Separate Agreement of June 12, 2012. The Grand Total of EUR 31.508 million comprises Programme Costs of EUR 27.941 million, Administrative Costs PPAF of EUR 1.060 million, International Consultant Costs of EUR 1.5 million and Contingencies of EUR 1.006 million. After contract negotiations between KfW and the Consultant and the inclusion of an additional expert for DRR/DRM, the costs for the International Consultant increased to EUR 1884600 and the item Community Infrastructure (CPI) standard was reduced to EUR 11615400 (from originally EUR 12 million) reducing the Programme Costs to EUR 27326082. The Grand Total remains unchanged. This was confirmed by the parties in the Amendment No. 1 to the Separate Agreement which is dated November 16, 2011.
3.7
Timeframe
The overall timeframe for the execution of the Project and the Consultant services is 36 months starting from February 1, 2012. The planned completion of the Project is thus end of January 2015.
12
4
4.1
REVIEW OF THE SCOPE OF WORK FOR THE CONSULTANT

Objective of Consulting Services
The objective of the Consultant assignment is to help guarantee the LACI-Ps overall effectiveness and hence assist in achieving the Project objective.
4.2
Range of Tasks and Nature of Assignments
The services of the Consultants Team in Pakistan as well as inputs by the Consultants Team Leader at HQ and the short-term national and international experts from the Consultants pool can and will be utilised on request of PPAF. The services cover a range of special technical and monitoring tasks in support of and in coordination with PPAF. Among others, this includes updating of existing and development of additional guidelines on technical matters and for Operation and Maintenance (O&M) as well as providing regular technical audits and involvement in output and outcome monitoring. The Consultant will also provide support for establishing links to international scientific and development organizations for bringing in international experiences on innovative technologies, lessons learned documentation, best practices in the region and capacity building and training. The services are provided through a combination of long-term experts assigned over the whole 36 months Project duration and short-term expert Advisory Review Team (ART) assignments twice per year. Long term assigned consulting staff will be given a number of clearly defined tasks within the overall project. As the Project develops, Project operations, activities or even Project focus may require adjustment. The Consultant will contribute and actively support PPAF and KfW by reviewing the activities, holding discussions with the Project team and other Project partners, formulating and/or reviewing specific proposals for improvement or adjustment. The ART assignments have the specific task to regularly review Project progress and suggest eventual adjustments
4.3
Details of Specific Tasks
The specific tasks of the Consultant cover basically five major components and areas: (1) Community Physical Infrastructure, (2) Community Mobilization and Livelihood measures, (3) Disaster Preparedness and Mitigation, (4) Management Assistance and Coordination, (5) M&E and Specialized Studies. Under the current PPAF policy, there is one central document or manual, the Operational Policies Manual for Grant-Based Interventions (GBIs) which provides all regulations and procedures for Project implementation, all other technical documents are considered as guidelines.
4.3.1
Community Physical Infrastructure (CPI) Tasks
Support to the revision of the Technical Guidelines: The Community Physical Infrastructure Project Manual 2001 is the actual document that provides technical guidelines for CPI. The Consultant will provide support for updating these guidelines to be adopted and used by the POs and COs for the technical aspects of design and implementation of CPI interventions under the Project. The Consultant will especially focus on aligning these guidelines with the PPAF OPs Manual, and update technical specifications for designing conventional and technologically innovative CPI schemes. New specifications for innovative schemes may include i.e. parabolic canal lining technology, high efficiency irrigation systems, micro-hydel units, solar power or soil stabilisation projects. The revision of the CPI technical guidelines will also include the environmental management framework (ref. Section IV of the CPI Project Manual) to ensure environmental sustainability which is also an important aspect of the overall sustainability of the schemes.
13
In addition, new guidelines will be developed for Operation and Maintenance (O&M) of CPI schemes. Such O&M guidelines are currently lacking but are necessary and crucial for the post Project sustainability. For these tasks, the Consultant will liaise with relevant stakeholders including the PPAFs Water and Energy unit and other relevant PPAF units. The work is likely to involve the following interventions: Identification of the various users of such technical manuals (PPAF staff, POs, COs, Contractors) and their specific needs; Review of the current status, quality of technical details, comprehensiveness and clarity of the manual (procedures and guidelines) and the effective compliance on site; Review of selected finished projects for strengths and weaknesses of designs; Recommendations, where necessary, for further optimization; Provision, as needed, for specific assistance and training of users to raise the level of awareness of the manual and to obtain feedback and improve the quality and compliance levels. Development of technical guidelines for LEP and HED projects/schemes as far as infrastructure is concerned; Technical Guidelines for other potential areas of improvement identified by PPAF
Other Community Physical Infrastructure related technical tasks: The Consultant will, as part of PPAFs Project team, assist Project implementation through: Providing technical assistance in the design, documentation and implementation supervision of standard and innovative community physical infrastructure schemes; Supporting PPAF in design, documentation and implementation supervision of small schools and health posts, including the development of financial concepts for the sustainable operation of these; Identifying issues which are related to construction such as geo-hazard zoning, soil testing, surveying, etc. and recommend above mentioned studies; Identifying, proposing and carrying out together with PPAF the procurement of technical surveys and specific studies relevant to the Project implementation; Monitoring of preliminary and final acceptance of works, ensuring the compliance with the national building regulations and any Special Implementation Agreements; Providing technical guidance and assistance and skills training to Partner Organisations and Community Organisations especially regarding new technologies, where appropriate; Facilitating the exchange of technical ideas and feedback among Partner Organisations and towards PPAF through workshops, seminars, etc. (technical feedback and information forum).
4.3.2
Community Mobilization and Livelihood Tasks
LACI-P aims to improve livelihoods of the local population through infrastructures that help to reduce the vulnerability of the rural communities, especially in the rain-fed areas of the KP Province. In order to assure that the infrastructures can contribute to the improvement of the rural livelihoods, the Community Organisations must be involved in the planning and implementation of the infrastructures. The sustainability of the infrastructures depends on the value it adds for the community. In order to assure the sustainable use of the infrastructures, social mobilisation of the communities and the establishment of Community Organisations is a standard process followed. These Community Organizations take responsibility for the infrastructure provided and they are responsible for operation and maintenance.
14
The livelihood assessment is based on identifying potentials and vulnerabilities of a community in order to plan livelihood interventions together with the communities. There is a good potential for exchange of knowledge between PPAF and the Consultant on the approach in order to lay a strong foundation for effective results from each component of LEP projects. The Livelihood Assessment Tool developed by Intercooperation can be applied in a time efficient manner using simple PRA tools. Livelihood is not one of many components of the Project. Livelihood should be seen as an overall approach and improving livelihoods is the objective and the desired outcome of each intervention of the Project. However, the livelihood assessment framework is not a poverty assessment tool. This framework does not overlap with the Poverty Score Card tool that is already used by PPAF. The two should find a complementarity in the field.
Social mobilization of the communities, the establishment of Community Organisations and a close cooperation with the individuals within the communities are thus considered the key factors for the success of the Project. Here is a likely need for specific inputs, monitoring and advice from the Consultant for the livelihood component. The Consultant can support PPAF in conducting a comprehensive analysis of the potential for livelihood improvements, as well as monitoring the social fabric of the target groups and village communities. In addition, support can also be provided at the implementation level through activities in the following areas: Support PPAF in the design, documentation, implementation and supervision of livelihood measures such as asset transfers and dedicated skills development for the poor and ultra poor; Support in the utilization of the poverty assessment tool in identification of beneficiaries activities; Support in undertaking a skills demand analysis; Support in conducting feasibility analysis for the marketability of various skills and in value chain analysis and planning; Support in conducting trainings and setting-up of a reference system for skill trainings from qualified training providers; Support PPAF in training the POs on gender mainstreaming; and to a lesser extent Backstopping of community mobilisation.
4.3.3
Disaster Preparedness and Mitigation (DPM) Tasks
DPM was initially neither part of the Project concept as such nor part of the Consulting Services and it is also only sporadically mentioned in the TORs. Based on decisions of a meeting of PPAF/ KFW/ Helvetas6 on March 24, 2011, provision of a Senior National Advisor DRR was included for 50 percent time in the Consulting Services based upon the rationale that almost all the five selected Districts were hit hard by floods in 2010. These target Districts are also highly susceptible to all other types of natural disasters (see District Profiles in Annex 3). The frequency of these natural disasters is likely to increase in the future due to climate change effects (increased droughts, flash floods, erratic and intensive rains etc). PPAFs strategy for managing natural disasters is outlined in Box 1.
see NOTE of March 2011 regarding adjustments to the Technical Proposal and the Financial proposal
15
BOX 1 PPAF strategy for managing the natural disasters The objective of the DPM programme of PPAF is to put in place necessary community managed infrastructure, equipment, and institutional mechanisms to: (a) mitigate / minimize the impact of a disaster; (b) help better preparedness among people to cope with various disasters in a pre-planned manner; and (c) in case of a disaster, get actively involved in relief, reconstruction, and rehabilitation efforts, in coordination with the government and other stakeholders. As per the OPs Manual Guidelines, the DPM programme of PPAF would finance the following activities and investments. civil works related to protective infrastructure aimed at minimizing the loss of life and property in the case of floods and cyclones; putting in place infrastructure and promoting afforestation to prevent landslides and conserving soil in fragile environments; civil works aimed at maintaining water balance in drought prone areas; putting in place early warning systems for rains, floods, cyclones and droughts; multipurpose, community managed buildings, to act as safe, predesignated shelters in the case of a flood, cyclone, or earthquake; maintenance of a network of disaster response centres; provision of relief goods and services in case of disaster; and, technical assistance/training for capacity building.
In view of these facts, DPM is one of the six focus areas and programmes as outlined in PPAF OPs Manual. A DPM Unit has been established by PPAF with a full time Senior Manager and a consultant under the overall supervision of the Group Head (EIDM). While the DPM Unit has the main responsibility, a matrix structure has been adopted for technical support from relevant sections of PPAF so that to integrate the whole Disaster Management Cycle in the PPAF work programmes (see Figure 1).
16
Figure 1: Disaster Management Cycle
DISASTER MANAGEMENT CYCLE

Disaster
EIDM
Relief & Recovery (DPM + HED + LEP) Preparedness (DPM)
Prevention/ Mitigation (CPI + W&E)
Rehabilitation & Reconstruction (CPI + W&E + HED + LEP)
In line with the PPAF OPs Manual guidelines, the Consultants DPM advisor will closely work with the DPM Unit in order to mainstream/ integrate Disaster Preparedness and Risk Management in all Project interventions making use of the PPAF matrix approach. To ensure a more systematic degree of attention within the Project as envisaged under the PPAF III, the DRR interventions under the Project will particularly focus on the following (see the detailed list of intervention in Annex 6): Mainstreaming DRR in CPI: CPI being the major component of the Project, the POs will be facilitated to ensure that Disaster Risk Reduction elements are incorporated in the design and implementation of CPI schemes. Where necessary, special structural measures including bio-engineering measures will be introduced that reduce/ mitigate the risk of disasters, safeguard livelihood assets of the communities and/or protect the existing and newly built physical infrastructures on which their livelihoods depend (both women and men). This would include also adopting earth-quake resistant architecture, even if costs of such technologies would make the infrastructures more expensive in building costs. Some of the mainstreaming activities will include the following: Develop a training of trainers (TOT) Manual for POs that also includes a DRR checklist to ensure that DDR is mainstreamed in design and implementation of CPI schemes. Training of trainers (selected from the POs) following the manual Training to the POs staff for further use of the manual by their staff in designing and implementing of CPI schemes under the Project. Monitoring the checklist to ensure mainstreaming DRR in CPI schemes. On a case to case basis provide technical advice on technologically innovative CPI schemes, especially focussing on piloting community based slope stabilization and flash flood protection measures as well as on earth-quake resistant architecture.
17
Strengthen awareness and competence through workshops at the level of the technical service suppliers on the need for additional technical specifications in order to make infrastructures more resistant to disaster damages.
Strengthening community disaster preparedness capacities In addition to mainstreaming DRR in CPI, capacities of POs will be enhanced under the Project so that risk reduction and disaster response capacities of vulnerable communities (women and men) in the target areas are strengthened. The ultimate aim is that the communities are prepared for timely dealing with disasters and have the right organizational strength and tools to do so. This will include a package of activities including awareness raising about DRR / DRM, building preparedness response capacities of communities (e.g., establishment of Emergency Response Teams and Plans), provision of DRR toolkits, systematic vulnerability assessments and the implementation of early warning systems for all selected project areas. Under the Project the Consultant together with the DPM Unit will also initiate some necessary disaster preparedness activities with the POs. These will include the following (covering women and men): Training of POs in conducting a simple hazards and vulnerability assessment at village level and identify most vulnerable communities / points in the village. Special need assessments and trainings for woman will be included. Relevant interventions coming out as a result of the assessment will be integrated in the Village Development Plans (VDPs). The VDPs will also include a community preparedness/ contingency plan using their local systems, potentials, etc and will have an added value to the VDPs and community based DRR interventions. These VDPs will be compiled and will form union council (UC) level MSPs. All the UC level MSPs once compiled at the district level will become part of the District Development Plan. The added advantage of the hazard and vulnerability assessment integrated in the VDPs will be that these DRR concerns will also be well reflected in the UC level MSPs and will become part of the district development plan. One workshop each will be held in the target districts to facilitate local district government/ POs in developing/ initiating Early Warning Systems (EWS) for communities in target areas based on indigenous knowledge indicators and supported by meteorological data for the district from the Pakistan Meteorological Department (PMD). The EWS will be regularly updated and monitored during the Project period. Establishing, equipping and training Emergency Response Teams within the communities in selected villages for emergency support as well as first aid in case of natural disasters. Ensure, where possible, linking organized communities with District Response Units (DRUs) which are mainly coordinated by the Assistant Coordination Officer (ACO) and Social Welfare Officer (SWO). Linkages with other similar projects in the area will also be made to complement each other activities and avoid duplications.
4.3.4
Management Assistance and Coordination Tasks
The Consultant shall support the PPAF with the general management, administrative implementation and monitoring of the Project and the coordination with other relevant stakeholders. Tasks may include, amongst others: Management Assistance to PPAF Advice and assistance in Project implementation, coordination and monitoring as and when required by PPAF; Assistance to PPAF with regard to contractual issues, if and when required.
18
Coordination with POs Coordination, through PPAF, of PO activities in the Project, in particular in facilitating a technical feedback and information forum; Assistance to PPAF, its POs and Community Organisations in initiating the establishment of proposed District level forums in which ties with local governments are fostered; Render specific capacity building measures not covered by WB or PPAFs own programmes as and when required by PPAF. Liaising through PPAF with other organisations active in capacity building and livelihood training of POs and Community Organisations (such as World Bank, UNHCR, UNDP, training providers, CSOs implementing contemporary projects in neighbouring areas, etc.); Coordinating with other agencies / CSOs active in the Project area and/or neighbouring Union Councils to avoid duplication of activities and to assess how to best cooperate. This applies among others - to the EU-funded Refugee Affected and Hosting Area (RAHA) Programme, which will be partially funded through BMZ and the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs; In coordination with PPAF, establishing and making use of links to relevant international scientific and development organisations.
Coordination with other stakeholders
4.3.5
Monitoring and Evaluation Tasks
The PPAF Results Framework will be followed as specified in the OPs Manual (Section 5 and Annex 12). The Results Framework reflects the requirements of a result chain, the logic that links inputs, activities, outputs, outcomes and impacts (see Figure 2 below). The conventional approach has been to focus on inputs, activities and outputs; this is referred to as implementation monitoring. The result based approach focuses on outputs and impacts monitoring. PPAF requirements for M&E cover both implementation monitoring and results based monitoring.
Figure 2: The Results Chain Implementation Inputs Activities Outputs Results Outcomes Impacts
What resources are used? Financial, human and material resources
What is done?
What is produced or delivered? Products and services
What do you wish to achieve? Intermediate effects of outputs
What long-term change are you aiming for? Long-term effects on identifiable population groups
Tasks personnel undertake to transform inputs to outputs
19
For the current Project, monitoring indicators will be developed by PPAF with support of the Consultant soon after the Inception Phase. It was also decided to include the development of a Logical Framework Matrix (LFM), which currently only exists in a rough form. Similarly, a baseline will be established by the POs before each intervention for which the Consultant - in collaboration with the MER unit of PPAF - will work with the POs to specify baseline indicators according to the planned activities and formats for measuring those indicators. The POs will report on outputs achievements and budgets on the basis of indicators developed for the Project on a quarterly basis using standard formats of PPAF. The information will be compiled and stored in the PPAF computerized Management Information System (MIS) under the MER Unit. Performance monitoring and evaluation will be conducted at bi-annual basis by the ART jointly with PPAF. The focus of bi-annual reviews will be on reviewing processes and overall progress. The Client Satisfaction tool will be applied for social monitoring. It empowers target groups and verifies whether Project elaboration and implementation is in accordance with the initial demands of the groups. During regular bi-annual reviews by the ART the following activities will be performed: Field visits and discussions with PPAF, Partner Organisations, Community Organisations and local communities; Review of LACI-P activities and their effectiveness in coordination with PPAF, with regard to achieving the Project objectives; Development of and/or review of specific proposals to adjust or further optimize Project performance, presentation, transparency, etc.
The Consultant may also support PPAF in Impact Assessment and Evaluation tasks as outlined in the PPAF OPs Manual, Chapter 5.3, pp. 15/16.
4.4
Schedule of Services
The Consultancy Services are rendered as a combination of long-term and short-term national and international expert assignments. For budgeting purposes, 32 person-months each have been allocated for long-term experts (one international and one national). For the six-monthly review and advisory team assignments 12 person-months for international and 24 for national experts are foreseen. The first Advisory Review Team (ART) assignment was scheduled two months after commencement of the services. However, since at that time the First Funding Phase had just been approved and no field activities had started yet, it was decided to have an assignment of the Team-Leader only (April 3-16, 2012). It is proposed to have a first full-fledged ART assignment three months after commencement of PO activities towards end of July 2012 and the second in November 2012 coinciding with a scheduled KfW mission. Thereafter, the assignments are planned approximately every six months. Changes in this schedule need the approval of PPAF and no objection from KfW. The assignments will, whenever possible, be coordinated with the KfW progress control missions. The exact makeup of the team and the focus of the assignments will be agreed ahead of each assignment, based on the specific needs and issues and following discussion with PPAF, KfW, etc.
20
4.4.1
Work Programming/Implementation Schedule
The Work Programme 2012-2015 has been prepared by the Consultant with PPAF in a joint workshop during the Inception Phase (see Annex 7). The Work Programme for the Project provides a tentative plan of activities and disbursements for the three Funding Phases. The Work Programme of the Consultant provides an overview of planned activities of the Consulting Services. Both Work Programmes are necessarily broad and schematic since much depends on the activities of the POs and their detailed planning is only staring now.
4.4.2
Staffing Schedule
The Staffing Schedule has been adapted to the changed dates and terminology (ref. Annex 4 of the Technical Proposal, p. 23). It is presented in Annex 8.
21
5
5.1
STAFF ARRANGEMENTS AND STAFF PROFILES

General Provisions
The Services of the Consultant in support to PPAF in the implementation of the Project are divided into long-term experts (assignment of 32 months over 3 years), short-term experts to undertake regular six-monthly Review and Advisory Team Assignments as well as short-term experts to provide one-off consulting services. A list of potential short term, national and international experts is provided in Annex 9. The exact timing and tasks to be undertaken by the expert(s) will be agreed between the Consultant, PPAF and KfW. Assignments will focus on Project priorities and on those areas where particular technical, monitoring or strengthening needs have been identified. PPAF used a matrix system and has assigned their staff (one person each from the seven relevant PPAF Units of CPI, LEP, HED, HID, DPM, W&E and M&E), who will work together with the Project General Manager and the Consultant.
5.2
Long-term Staff Profiles
The Consultants Team Leader/International Project Coordinator, Christoph Morger, is also the Advisory Review Team Leader; his CV had been provided in the NOTE of March 2011. The Consultant has assigned a long-term Senior International Expert/Deputy Team Leader, Klaus Euler (revised TORs are attached in Annex 10 and his CV in Annex 11). He is supported by a Senior National Expert, Hayatullah Khan, and a Senior National Advisor CC/DRR (50%), Syed Sajidin Hussain, and four support staff.
5.3
The Advisory Review Team (ART) Members
The Advisory Review Team (ART)7 consists of short-term international and national experts and is lead by the Team Leader. Besides the Team Leader, the ART will be composed of a second international expert and up to 4 national experts. Team composition will be determined jointly with PPAF and in consultation with KfW prior to each assignment depending of the specific purpose and focus of the review. Team members will be selected from the pool of ART members proposed or from the short-term expert pool list. It is proposed to have continuity in the ART composition at least regarding the national experts covering the main areas of the project while the second international expert could be selected according to the specific requirements of the particular assignment. Assignment Review Reports (ARR) will be prepared by the Consultant which contains specific recommendations and proposes practical next steps for the relevant sectors. The ARR reflects the view of the Consultant while PPAF will prepare a management response on the ARR.
5.4
Short-term Expert Pool
The Consulting contract also includes up to EUR 100.000 as reimbursable for further experts and specialists to carry out additional technical assistance, studies or surveys as and when required by PPAF and agreed by KfW. Experts will be sourced either from the expert pool provided by the Consultant or from other agreed sources as identified by the Consultant or PPAF and agreed with KfW during the course of the Project.
formerly Review and Advisory Team (RAT)
22
5.5
Duty Station
The Consultant is based in the premises of the PPAF in Islamabad and office space has been provided. Travel to the Project area has started, but field visits depend on the security situation and are subject to Non Objection Certificates (NOCs). Currently it is not planned to establish a dedicated PPAF field office as PPAFs Partner Organisations maintain offices in the field. The need for the establishment of such a field office might become apparent during the implementation of the Project. Funding for such an office would have to be provided through PPAF. KfW must be informed about the establishment of such offices.
23
REPORTING
The reporting requirements have remained the same as detailed under Chapter 5 of the Terms of Reference in the Request for Tenders and have been followed where required already (e.g. the Inception Report and the SMRs). Other than the Inception Report itself, the list of Reports is as follows:
6.1
Short Monthly Progress Reports (SMR)
The Consultant and PPAF jointly prepare the SMRs and submit them to KfW not later than 3 weeks after the end of the respective month. Two such SMRs have been submitted during the Inception Phase.
6.2
Quarterly Progress Reports (QPR)
Similarly, the Consultant and PPAF will compile the QPRs for the project and will submit them to KfW following the structure and the requirements given in the Tender Document (5.3, p. 24). According to the OPs Manual the MER unit is also involved in the preparation of the QPR since it is this unit that maintains the MIS with the Project indicators. PPAF and the Consultant will carry-out joint monitoring visits and prepare visit report for lessons learned and technical advice to POs.
6.3
Advisory Review Reports (ARR)
Advisory Review Reports will be prepared by the Consultant with a management response by PPAF. ARRs are due six weeks after the commencement of the ART assignments planned two times a year depending upon Project needs. The information contained in the ARR provides a more global perspective of the state of the Project in relation to achieving its overall goal. The ARR is a communication tool to PPAF and KfW for the Consultant reporting where he sees the need to readjust, refocus or improve project activities.
6.4
Project Completion Report (PCR)
A Project Completion Report will be prepared by the Consultant and will be submitted 6 weeks after the completion of services. All deviations from the original Project plan as shown in the Inception Report shall be clearly shown and explained. The structure of the PCR will be as outlined under 5.5 of the Tender Document, pp. 25/26.
6.5
Special Studies and Reports
A sum of up to EUR 100.000 is provided in the budget of the consulting contract for particular international and/or national expert consultancy services. These services will generally be oneoff assignments which can be commissioned outside of the regular ART assignments to undertake studies, surveys, trainings or monitoring activities as and when required by PPAF. One such input from the short-term expert pool has been identified already as a support by the Consultant to PPAF and the POs to prepare the District Development Plans (DDP). They will include District profiles, an institutional map with relevant completed, contemporary and pipeline interventions. The DDP will also state community needs and outline linkage possibilities. While preparing these plans, reference to and use of existing District-level plans will be made, e.g. the NDMA/UNDP District Disaster Management Plan for Charsadda. Other contributions envisaged may be the following: Technical Papers/Reports on innovative canal lining technology; Technical Papers/Reports on high efficiency irrigation systems (sprinkler and drip);
24
Overall project quality auditing / review assignments with proposals for adjustment and project improvement in close coordination with PPAF; Impact studies; Expert-pool for implementing improvements, providing specific identified services, skills etc. in close cooperation with PPAF.
25
ISSUES AND CHALLENGES
Some of the major issues regarding Project management and implementation during the Inception Phase could be solved in early April. This refers to the vacancy of the Project Manager post in February and March and the fact that no POs had been approved yet and the Project had thus no official Partner Organisations. In the first week of April the PPAF BOD approved the first funding cycle on April 3, 2012 with 6 POs working in 17 UCs and on April 9, 2012 Mr. Masood Khalid was appointed Project General Manager. These two positive developments will first allow starting interactions with POs and second improve communication between the Consultant and PPAF. The full time Project General Manager will have more time to devote to the Project than the rather busy Focal Person Mr Zaffar Pervez Sabri who has a multitude of responsibilities as Head of a rather large Group. Due to the fact that no project implementation in the field took place during the Inception Phase, not much can be said regarding issues and challenges related to PO implementation. Only now, after approval of Funding Phase One, the first disposition fund payment will be made before the end of April. The POs will then mobilise their teams and the detailed planning will begin with community mobilisation, establishing Community Organisations, carry out need assessments and developing Multi Sector Plans (MSP). This detailed planning phase is considered a highly important step because the MSPs will be the backbone for the following implementation. It is thus suggested to follow this process rather closely and to get a first hand impression of the approach of the POs to implementation. Of importance is also to develop the results framework for each activity that is planned including the appropriate indicators and to establish the respective base lines. This will facilitate the proper monitoring later to assess Project progress. First interactions with POs and their field staff as well as with the COs will also allow to carry out a first training need assessment to be able to plan necessary capacity buildings and trainings. The training need assessment will also give a first impression whether the manuals and guidelines of PPAF are useful and are used by POs in their daily work and it will allow to assess the need for developing new manuals and/or improving existing ones. Of particular importance during the planning phase will be to develop O&M plans - including financial plans - of any infrastructure and scheme that will be implemented. The consequences of this O&M plan must be discussed with the community to make sure that they are aware of the responsibilities they will take over when the schemes are handed over. The financial plan has to explore sustainable external financing (government subsidies, cross subsidies) when a full cost recovery by user fees is considered beyond the means of the users. Without a solid financing arrangement for O&M beyond project implementation, the sustainability of any scheme is highly jeopardised. Regarding the allocation of funds for Funding Phase One to the different project components the following observations need to be mentioned. As can be seen from the charts in Annex 1, HED is somewhat underrepresented as only one PO (AKRSP) has proposed this component and in one UC (Swabi) only. On the other hand LEP activities appear to be somewhat overrepresented as compared to the overall budget allocation. The charts in Annex 5 comparing the three funding phases confirm this. The comparison of the funding phases also shows that HED activities are predominantly planned in the second and the third phases and it is especially the allocation to the third phase that raises some concerns (75% of total for LED). The last phase is of 24 months only, a rather short period for HED activities because health-posts as well as schools require an operation phase under the Project before they are handed over to the communities. To do that in a 24 months phase appears to be rather tight, especially considering that community mobilisation and detailed planning can take up to 6 months already. On the other hand we believe that there is an overrepresentation of LEP activities in the first funding phase and corresponding underrepresentation in the following ones. LEP activities need Inception Report, April 24, 2012 26
an intensive preparation time for demand identification, value chain analysis and the identification of the beneficiaries but require much less time for the implementation which consists basically of a training of the beneficiary and asset procurement and transfer and some follow up. LEP activities very likely can be relatively easily accommodated in a 24 months phase and it is thus suggested to shift LEP to the third funding phase and have more of the HED interventions in the longer phases. It must be realised that the numbers and plans presented now are still rather tentative as in fact plans always are. They are not cut in stone, they are considered rolling plans and will be updated regularly as more precise information becomes available. However, they are useful to analyse the tentative process and to assess the actual progress. Finally an administrative matter which does not concern PPAF but only KfW and the Consultant: the armoured vehicle. The budget for Consulting Service foresees the procurement of an armoured vehicle for field trips (EUR 180000). However, the Consultants national as well as international experts were of the opinion that such a vehicle would not necessarily increase the safety since nowadays hostage taking is also a serious problem and an armoured vehicle does not prevent that. KfW has analysed the situation and considering also the fact that the import of such a vehicle would likely take up to 18 months the pragmatic decision was taken that the Consultant can buy a second normal vehicle (type Landcruiser) for the field trips instead of an armoured vehicle.
27

Inception Report 2012

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Inception Report 2012

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Sher Afzal Banda, Swabi District, 16.2.

Inception Report April 24, 2012

Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project

SITUATION ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................ 3

REVIEW OF THE SCOPE OF WORK FOR THE CONSULTANT......................................... 13

4.3.1 4.3.2 4.3.3 4.3.4 4.3.5 4.4

Schedule of Services ...................................................................................................... 20 i

Inception Report, April 24, 2012

Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project

Work Programming/Implementation Schedule ....................................................... 21 Staffing Schedule .................................................................................................... 21

ISSUES AND CHALLENGES................................................................................................. 26

Inception Report, April 24, 2012

Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project

Inception Report, April 24, 2012

Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project

Inception Report, April 24, 2012

Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project

Inception Report, April 24, 2012

Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project

Inception Report, April 24, 2012

Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project

Inception Report, April 24, 2012

Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project

Scope of the Inception Report

Inception Report, April 24, 2012

Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project

Project Institutional Setup

Progress during the Pre/Inception Phase

Inception Report, April 24, 2012

Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project

Inception Phase Activities

Identification and Selection of Target Districts

Inception Report, April 24, 2012

Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project

Identification and Selection of Partner Organizations (POs)

Identification and Selection of Union Councils, Villages and Target Communities

Poverty Assessment of Communities

Inception Report, April 24, 2012

Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project

Project Proposals by the POs

Essential Findings of the PPAF Selection Process

Inception Report, April 24, 2012

Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project

REVISED PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION CONCEPT

Community Physical Infrastructure (CPI)

Inception Report, April 24, 2012

Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project

3.2.2 Community Health and Education Schemes and Interventions (HED)

Livelihood measures including Skills Training of Beneficiaries (LEP)

Literally means teacher-pupil relationship for learning as apprentice

Inception Report, April 24, 2012

Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project

Disaster Preparedness and Management measures (DPM)

Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project

Project Implementation Arrangements

Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project

Project Implementation Principles

Inception Report, April 24, 2012

Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project

Total Cost and Financing

Inception Report, April 24, 2012

Livelihood Support & Promotion of Small Community Infrastructure Project

REVIEW OF THE SCOPE OF WORK FOR THE CONSULTANT

Range of Tasks and Nature of Assignments