the world bank - uprwssp.orguprwssp.org/pdf/rwss_lis_pad_negotiated.pdf · the world bank report...
TRANSCRIPT
Document of
The World Bank
Report No: 76346-IN
INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION
PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT
ON A
PROPOSED CREDIT
IN THE AMOUNT OF (SDRXX) MILLION
(US$500 MILLION EQUIVALENT)
TO THE
REPUBLIC OF INDIA
FOR
RURAL WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION PROJECT
FOR LOW INCOME STATES (P132173)
November 18, 2013
Sustainable Development Unit
India Country Management Unit
South Asia Regional Office
This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the
performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World
Bank authorization.
ii
CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS
(Exchange Rate Effective October 2013)
Currency Unit = Indian Rupees (INR)
US$1 = INR 61.47
US1$ = SDR 0.65018
FISCAL YEAR
July 1 – June 30
Regional Vice President: Philippe Le Houérou
Country Director: Onno Ruhl
Sector Director: John Henry Stein
Sector Manager: Ming Zhang
Task Team Leader: Smita Misra
iii
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AES Acute Encephalitis Syndrome
BA Beneficiary Assessment
BCC Behavior Change Communication
BCM Billion Cubic Meter
CBP Community Based Procurement
CDD Community Driven Development
CE Chief Engineer
CPSMS Central Plan Scheme Monitoring System
CQ Consultants’ Qualification
CRSP Central Rural Sanitation Program
DALY Disability Adjusted Life Year
DBOT Design, Build, Operate and Transfer
DC District Collector / Deputy Commissioner
DDC
DPMC
Deputy Development Commissioner
District Project Management Consultants
DPMU District Project Management Unit
DPR Detailed Project Report
DWSC District Water and Sanitation Committee
DWSD Drinking Water and Sanitation Department
DWSM District Water and Sanitation Mission
DSC
EA
District Sanitation Committee
Environmental Assessment
E-in-C Engineer-in-Chief
ECOPS Environmental Codes of Practice
EE Executive Engineer
EMF Environmental Management Framework
ERR Economic Rate of Return
FBS Fixed Budget Selection
FC Fully Covered
FM Financial Management
G/OHT Ground Level or Overhead Tanks
GAAP Governance and Accountability Action Plan
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GIS Geographic Information System
GoI Government of India
GP Gram Panchayat
GP-WSC Gram Panchayat Water and Sanitation Committee
ICB International Competitive Bidding
ICQS Independent Construction Quality Surveillance
IDA
IE
International Development Association
Impact Evaluation
IEC Information Education Communication
IHHL Individual Household Latrines
IMIS Integrated Management Information System
IMR Infant Mortality Rate
INR Indian Rupee
ISO International Standards Organization
iv
JE Japanese Encephalitis
JN Jal Nigam
LCB Local Competitive Bidding
LCS Least Cost Selection
LEGEN Environment and International Law Unit
LIS-MIS Low Income States Management Information System
lpcd liters per capita per day
MELD
M&E
Monitoring Evaluation Learning and Documentation
Monitoring and Evaluation
m.a.f Million Acre Feet
MGNREGS Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme
MoDWS Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation
MoEF Ministry of Environment and Forest
MTR Mid-Term Review
MVS Multi Village Scheme
MVS-WSC Multi-Village Scheme Water and Sanitation Committee
NBA Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan
NCB National Competitive Bidding
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
NGP Nirmal Gram Puraskar
NIC National Informatics Center
NPMU National Project Management Unit
NRC
NRDWP
National Resource Center
National Rural Drinking Water Program
O&M Operation and Maintenance
ODF Open Defecation Free
OHS Over Head Storage
OP Operational Policy
OP / BP Operational Policy / Bank Procedures
OPCS Operations Policy and Country Services
ORAF Operational Risk Assessment Framework
PDO Project Development Objective
PHED Public Health Engineering Department
PIP Project Implementation Plan
PMF Performance Measurement Framework
PPP
PRD
Public Private Partnerships
Panchayati Raj Department
PRI Panchayati Raj Institution
PWD Public Works Department
QBS Quality Based Selection
QCBS Quality and Cost Based Selection
RDD
RWSS
Rural Development Department
Rural Water Supply and Sanitation
RWSSP-LIS Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project for Low Income States
RTGS Real Time Gross Settlement
SA Stakeholder Analysis
SC/ ST Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes
SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
v
SE Superintending Engineer
SGS Multi-Habitation Schemes Within GP
SHS Single Habitation Schemes
SIL Specific Investment Loan
SLSSC State Level Scheme Sanctioning Committee
SLWM Solid and Liquid Waste Management
S-MIS State Management Information System
SO Support Organization
SPMU State Project Management Unit
SRP Sector Reform Project
SSS Single Source Selection
SSM
SVS
State Sanitation Mission
Single Village Scheme
SWAp Sector Wide Approach
SWSM State Water and Sanitation Missions
TA Technical Assistance
TAG Technical Advisory Group
TDP Tribal Development Plan
TSC Total Sanitation Campaign
UP Uttar Pradesh
UPJN Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam
USD United States Dollar
WSP Water and Sanitation Program
WSSO
ZP
Water and Sanitation Support Organization
Zila Parishad / Panchayat
vi
INDIA
RURAL WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION PROJECT FOR LOW INCOME
STATES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. STRATEGIC CONTEXT .................................................................................................1
A. Country Context ............................................................................................................ 1
B. Sector and Institutional Context.................................................................................... 1
C. Higher Level Objectives to which the Project Contributes .......................................... 3
II. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES ................................................................3
A. Project Development Objective (PDO) ........................................................................ 3
1. Project Beneficiaries ............................................................................................... 4
2. PDO Level Results Indicators ................................................................................. 4
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..............................................................................................4
A. Project Components ...................................................................................................... 4
B. Project Financing .......................................................................................................... 5
1. Lending Instrument ................................................................................................. 5
2. Project Costs and Financing Plan ........................................................................... 5
C. Lessons Learned and Reflected in the Project Design .................................................. 6
IV. IMPLEMENTATION .......................................................................................................7
A. Institutional and Implementation Arrangements .......................................................... 7
B. Results Monitoring and Evaluation .............................................................................. 8
C. Sustainability................................................................................................................. 9
V. KEY RISKS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ............................................................9
VI. APPRAISAL SUMMARY ..............................................................................................11
A. Economic Analyses ..................................................................................................... 11
B. Technical ..................................................................................................................... 11
C. Financial Management ................................................................................................ 12
D. Procurement ................................................................................................................ 13
E. Social (including Safeguards) ..................................................................................... 13
F. Environment (including Safeguards) .......................................................................... 15
vii
Annex 1: Results Framework .....................................................................................................16
Annex 2: Detailed Project Description .......................................................................................19
Annex 3: Implementation Arrangements ..................................................................................30
Annex 4: Operational Risk Assessment Framework (ORAF) .................................................52
Annex 5: Implementation Support Plan ....................................................................................58
Annex 6: Economic Analysis .......................................................................................................62
Annex 7: Governance and Accountability Action Plan (GAAP) .............................................67
viii
.
PAD DATA SHEET
INDIA
Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project for Low Income States (P132173)
PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT .
SOUTH ASIA
SASDU
.
Basic Information
Project ID Lending Instrument EA Category Team Leader
P132173 Investment Project
Financing
B - Partial Assessment Smita Misra
Project Implementation Start Date Project Implementation End Date
March 15, 2014 March 31, 2020
Expected Effectiveness Date Expected Closing Date
March 15, 2014 March 31, 2020
Joint IFC: No
Sector Manager Sector Director Country Director Regional Vice President
Ming Zhang John Henry Stein Onno Ruhl Philippe Le Houérou
.
Borrower: Government of India
.
Project Financing Data(US$M)
[ ] Loan [ ] Grant [ ] Other
[ X ] Credit [ ] Guarantee
For Loans/Credits/Others
Total Project Cost (US$M): 1,000.00
Total Bank Financing (US$M): 500.00
.
Financing Source Amount(US$M)
BORROWER/RECIPIENT 500.00
International Development Association (IDA) 500.00
Total 1,000.00
.
Expected Disbursements (in USD Million)
Fiscal Year 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Annual 10.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 70.00 50.00 10.00
Cumulative 10.00 70.00 150.00 250.00 370.00 440.00 490.00 500.00
ix
Project Development Objective(s)
The project development objective is to improve piped water supply and sanitation services for selected rural communities
in the target states through decentralized delivery systems and to increase the capacity of the Participating States to respond
promptly and effectively to an Eligible Crisis or Emergency.
Components
Component Name Cost (USD Millions)
Component A: Capacity Building and Sector Development
Component B: Infrastructure Development
Component C: Project Management Support
Component D: Contingency Emergency Response
46
430
24
0
.
Compliance
Policy
Does the project depart from the CAS in content or in other significant respects? Yes [ ] No [X ]
.
Does the project require any waivers of Bank policies? Yes [ ] No [ X ]
Have these been approved by Bank management? Yes [ ] No [ ]
Is approval for any policy waiver sought from the Board? Yes [ ] No [ ]
Does the project meet the Regional criteria for readiness for implementation? Yes [X ] No [ ]
.
Safeguard Policies Triggered by the Project Yes No
Environmental Assessment OP/BP 4.01 X
Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 X
Forests OP/BP 4.36 X
Pest Management OP 4.09 X
Physical Cultural Resources OP/BP 4.11 X
Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 X
Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP 4.12 X
Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37 X
Projects on International Waterways OP/BP 7.50 X* (cleared
with exception)
Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP 7.60 X
Legal Covenants
Name Recurrent Due Date Frequency
Description of Covenant: Covenants applicable to project implementation:
(i) Each year:
x
o GoI to make funds available to finance the RWSS activities, including NBA subsidies for all eligible
toilets in those GPs selected for inclusion under the project.
(ii) At MTR stage (31 March 2017) to prepare Project MTR Report, including:
o Independent assessment of the decentralized institutional arrangements to provide mid-course
recommendations.
o Beneficiary assessment of WSS service delivery improvements for completed schemes.
(iii) By December 31, 2019 carry out following assessments:
o Independent assessment of the achievements of the RWSSP-LIS Project;
o Beneficiary assessment of WSS service delivery improvements for completed schemes;
and finalize Project Completion Report within 90 days after the Closing Date.
Conditions
Name Type
Description of Condition
Locations
Country First
Administrative
Division
Location Planned Actual Comments
Team Composition: Bank Staff and Consultants
Name Title Specialization Unit
Smita Misra Lead Water and Sanitation Specialist Team Lead, Economist, Water Supply and
Sanitation
SASDU
Martin P. Gambrill Lead Water and Sanitation Specialist Water Supply and Sanitation LCSWS
Pratibha Mistry Water and Sanitation Specialist Water Supply and Sanitation, Water
Resources
SASDI
Pyush Dogra Senior Environmental Specialist Sanitation and Environmental
Management
SASDI
Papia Bhatachaarji Senior Financial Management
Specialist
Financial Management SARFM
A.K. Kalesh Kumar Senior Procurement Specialist Procurement SARPS
Thomas K. S. Anang Procurement Specialist Procurement SARPS
Luis A. Andres Lead Economist Economist SASSD
Rafik Fatehali Hirji Senior Water Resources Specialist Water Resources, Groundwater
Management
AFTN2
Surbhi Dhingra ET Social Development Social Development, Institutions SASDS
Suryanarayan Satish Senior Social Development Specialist Social Development, Institutions SASDS
Manu Prakash Water and Sanitation Analyst Water Supply and Sanitation SASDU
Rajesh Balasubramanian Senior Infrastructure Specialist Water Supply and Sanitation SASDU
Neeraj Gupta Senior Investment Officer, IFC Public Private Partnership CSAPP
xi
Anshum Saxena Investment Analyst, IFC Public Private Partnership CSAPP
Pankaj Sinha Investment Officer, IFC Public Private Partnership CSAPP
Junxue Chu Senior Finance Officer Financial Management CTRLN
Vikram Raghavan Senior Counsel Legal LEGES
Sunita Singh Program Assistant SASDO
Michelle Lisa Chen Program Assistant SASDO
Suseel Samuel Water and Sanitation Specialist Water and Sanitation TWISA
D. Maruthi Mohan Consultant Engineer, Water and Sanitation SASDU
Vijendra Vikramaditya Consultant Engineer, Water and Sanitation SASDU
Swati Gamaliel Consultant Procurement SASDU
BKD Raja Consultant Environmental Management SASDU
Kumar Amarendra Narayan
Singh
Consultant Water Supply and Sanitation SASDU
Gary Moys Consultant International Technical Expert SASDU
Christopher A. Sandeman Consultant International Technical Expert SASDU
Parameswaran Iyer Lead Water and Sanitation Specialist Peer Reviewer EASVS
Maria Angelica Sotomayor Sector Leader Peer Reviewer LCSSD
Miguel Vargas-Ramirez Senior Water and Sanitation Specialist Peer Reviewer AFTU2
Institutional Data
Sector Board
Water
Sectors / Climate Change
Sector (Maximum 5 and total % must equal 100)
Major Sector Sector % Adaptation Co-
benefits %
Mitigation Co-benefits
%
Water, sanitation and flood protection Water supply 50
Water, sanitation and flood protection Sanitation 30
Public Administration, Law, and Justice Public administration-
Water, sanitation and flood
protection
20
Total 100
I certify that there is no Adaptation and Mitigation Climate Change Co-benefits information applicable to this
project
Themes
Theme (Maximum 5 and total % must equal 100)
Major theme Theme %
Rural development Rural services and infrastructure 100
Total 100
1
I. STRATEGIC CONTEXT
A. Country Context
1. India has been one of the fastest growing economies in the last decade, but its economy
now shows signs of slowing down. Between 2004 and 2011, the period that includes the global
financial crisis, India’s growth averaged 8.3 percent per year. Expanding social programs
lowered the poverty rate by 1.5 percentage points per year during 2004–09, double the rate of the
preceding decade. India’s growth rate has however slipped to 6.5 percent in 2011-12 due to a
combination of domestic and external factors, including high inflation, high fiscal deficit and
weak external demand for the country’s exports. This slow down carries high social costs for
millions of Indians, and threatens the gains made in poverty reduction over the past decade.
Within this context, the Government of India approached the Twelfth Five year Plan around the
theme of ‘Faster, Sustainable, and More Inclusive Growth’. The Plan focuses on investment in
infrastructure, and recognizes the benefits of improved water and sanitation services to health
and economic welfare, particularly in rural areas. It recommends piped water coverage for at
least 50 percent of the rural population, along with a conjoint approach for addressing sanitation
and hygiene challenges. According to the 2011 Census of India, close to 70 percent of India’s 1.2
billion people live in rural areas, and contribute to about 40 percent of the country’s GDP. It is
estimated that the total economic impacts of inadequate sanitation in India is about INR 2.44
trillion (USD53.8 billion) a year, equivalent to 6.4 percent of GDP in 20061, implying an annual
loss of INR 2180 (USD48) per person. Therefore, improving access to water and sanitation
services is a development priority for India.
B. Sector and Institutional Context
2. The Government of India (GoI) and State Governments have together invested about
USD30 billion for Rural Water Supply and
Sanitation (RWSS) in the last five decades, with
USD8 billion spent in the last 3 years. 74 percent
of rural habitations have achieved a Fully Covered
(FC) status with 40 liters per capita daily (lpcd),
but this coverage is primarily through hand-pumps
and does not necessarily translate into reliable,
sustainable, and affordable service. Only 31
percent of the 167 million rural households have
access to tap water, 31 percent of rural households
have access to domestic toilets, and more than 60
percent of the remaining continue to defecate in
the open (Census 2011). India accounts for about
50 percent of the world’s open defecation. Figure 1 presents important, but relatively small
increases in RWSS piped water coverage nationally between Census 2001 to Census 2011.
3. Sustainability of service delivery is an area of concern with large numbers of rural
habitations slipping to a ‘partially covered’ status mainly due to sources going dry, or systems
1 WSP (2007). The Economic Impacts of Inadequate Sanitation in India.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Access toTap Water
Access toDomestic
Toliets
Pe
rce
nt
of
Ru
ral
Ho
use
ho
lds
Census 2001
Census 2011
Figure 1: Water and Sanitation Access in 2001
and 2011
2
working below capacity due to poor operations and maintenance (O&M). Depleting groundwater
table and deteriorating ground water quality are further threats to sustainability. Together these
pose large coping costs to consumers. Weak cost recovery from users implies that most schemes
require large operating subsidies provided by GoI and the States. On the sanitation front, while
expenditure on toilet construction has been increasing, there are significant ‘slippages’ in
coverage, coupled with low usage, mainly due to lack of understanding at the communities level
of the linkages between sanitation, hygiene practices and related diseases. Although the 73rd
Constitutional Amendment promotes service provision to be decentralized to local governments
(Panchayati Raj Institutions – PRIs2), most of the work of designing, implementing and
operating RWSS schemes continues to be with the state engineering agencies through top-down,
engineering-based, ‘supply-driven’ approaches, which also adversely impacts governance and
accountability. Monitoring and Evaluation systems focus mostly on ‘infrastructure creation’
(number of schemes and expenditures) but less information is provided on the quantity, quality
and availability of services.
4. GoI has launched significant sector reforms in the last two decades, including the Sector
Reform Project (SRP) in 1999 and the Swajaldhara Program in the early 2000s for
decentralizing service delivery responsibilities. Recently, the Ministry of Drinking Water and
Sanitation (MoDWS) has launched the National Rural Drinking Water Program (NRDWP),
emphasizing the involvement of PRIs and communities in planning, implementing and managing
drinking water supply schemes, along with providing support to capacity building programs and
M&E systems. MoDWS long term strategy includes coverage of 90 percent of rural population
with piped water supply by 2022 and 80 percent rural population having household connections
with 70 lpcd water supply. The strategy emphasizes achieving water security through
decentralized governance, with oversight and regulation, participatory planning, and
implementation of improved sources and schemes. The State sector institutions and/or Zila
Panchayats (District PRIs) will implement and manage large multi-village schemes, delivering
bulk water to villages, and Gram Panchayats (GPs) will implement and manage the intra-village
schemes.
5. GoI’s Total Sanitation Campaign (TSC), launched in 1999, moved away from a supply
driven approach followed under the Central Rural Sanitation Program (CRSP) since 1986, and
attempted to adopt a demand driven program with greater thrust on Information Education
Communication (IEC), Human Resource Development and Capacity Development activities.
The Nirmal Gram Puraskar (NGP) award scheme was launched in 2003 to incentivize Open
Defecation Free (ODF) villages. However, only 28,196 Panchayats (11.47 percent of the
245,000 Panchayats in the country) have received NGP in the last eight years. MoDWS has
recently restructured the TSC as the Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan (NBA, the Clean India Campaign
Program) for a GP-based ‘saturation’ approach to sanitation, with enhanced cash support to
households for construction of toilets, emphasis on Solid and Liquid Waste Management
(SLWM) programs for achieving clean villages, integrated approach for planning and
implementing sanitation and water schemes, and convergence of local programs, e.g., Mahatma
Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS). The long term goal is to
attain universal ‘Nirmal Status’ (clean status) by 2022.
2Panchayati Raj is a system of governance encompassing lower tiers of government, in which Gram Panchayats (village
governments, GPs) are one of the basic units of administration.
3
6. RWSS service achievements vary across States with some states like Kerala,
Uttarakhand, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka having higher coverage through piped water supply.
On the other hand, States like Bihar, Jharkhand, Assam and UP continue to struggle with
minimum provision of services. The eight states that have the lowest coverage of tap water
include Bihar (2.6%), Jharkhand (3.7%), Assam (6.8%), Odisha (7.5%), Chhattisgarh (8.8%),
Madhya Pradesh (9.9%), West Bengal (11.4%) and UP (20.2%) – collectively referred to as the
“Low Income States” in this document. Of these, Bihar, Jharkhand and UP are also significantly
lagging in sanitation, with more than 75 percent of the rural households not having access to
latrines within premises.
C. Higher Level Objectives to which the Project Contributes
7. The Project is directly aligned with the Bank Group’s India Country Partnership Strategy
(CPS) 2013-2017, contributing to the Bank’s strategic engagement area of ‘transformation’,
which specifically includes the multi-state RWSS Project focused on low-income states. In
addition to supporting the decentralization of programs and policies under on-going RWSS
projects, the key strategic shifts under this CPS, supported by this Project, includes: (i) piloting
an array of management models for large or multi-village schemes; (ii) supporting sustainable
RWSS programs by linking Gram Panchayats (GPs) with higher levels of government and
strengthening the capacity of PRI institutions; (iii) integrating water supply and sanitation
interventions into catchment area protection schemes, household and village environmental
sanitation programs, solid and liquid waste management, and health and hygiene awareness
promotion; (iv) piloting the use of PPP models for efficient and accountable service provision,
and (v) institutionalizing and scaling up proven policies and strategies demonstrated through
various Bank-supported projects.
II. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES
A. Project Development Objective (PDO)
8. The project development objective is to improve piped water supply and sanitation
services for selected rural communities in the target states through decentralized delivery
systems and to increase the capacity of the Participating States to respond promptly and
effectively to an Eligible Crisis or Emergency.
9. Table 1 presents the preparation readiness milestones that have been achieved.
Table 1: RWSSP-LIS – Key Readiness Milestones Achieved
Readiness Milestones Achievement
Establishment of PMUs PMUs at national and State level established and functional
Preparation of Project Implementation Plan (PIP) PIP finalized, presenting detailed RWSS program
Preparation of ToRs for major consultancies ToRs finalized and under implementation
Preparation of Investment Program 30% Investment Program and Bid Documents prepared;
Tenders invited
Preparation of Procurement Plan Procurement Plan finalized for first 18 months
4
1. Project Beneficiaries
10. The Project will support RWSS programs in 33 districts in Assam, Bihar, Jharkhand, and
Uttar Pradesh and is expected to directly benefit about 7.8 million rural people, including about
3.8 million female beneficiaries. In convergence with NRDWP and NBA, the project will
improve the ‘access and usage’ of the water supply and sanitation facilities created in the project
area. Women and children will benefit significantly from the project interventions as they
currently bear the burden of securing daily water supplies and dealing with illnesses resulting
from poor water and sanitation facilities. The rural population is expected to benefit from IEC
and BCC programs which will promote the adoption of improved sanitation and hygiene
practices, including usage of latrines. Rural women will be empowered to have voice and choice
through membership in the Gram Panchayat Water and Sanitation Committees (GP-WSCs). The
project beneficiaries also include tribal population.
2. PDO Level Results Indicators
11. The key PDO level results indicators are3 the following:
i) Number of people with increased access to piped water.
ii) Number of people with access to improved sanitation facilities.
iii) Number of people using improved latrines.
iv) Improvements in O&M cost recovery.
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Project Components
12. The Project will be implemented over a six year period and will support the design and
implementation of a ‘ring-fenced4’ RWSS program in MoDWS for improving piped water and
sanitation coverage in the “Low Income States”. The MoDWS has prioritized four states, Assam,
Bihar, Jharkhand, and UP, for Phase I of the program, based on: (i) rural piped water coverage;
(ii) water quality problems; and (iii) number of Acute Encephalitis Syndrome (AES) and
Japanese Encephalitis (JE) afflicted districts. The Project comprises the following three
components (details in Annex 2):
Component A: Capacity Building and Sector Development (Cost USD 93 million; IDA
contribution USD 46 million). This component will support the building of institutional
capacity for implementing, managing and sustaining project activities, along with sector
development studies to inform policy decisions: (a) Capacity Building activities for MoDWS; (b)
Capacity Building activities for State, district, and village level institutions, PRIs, and sector
stakeholders; (c) Information, Education and Communications (IEC) Program; (d) Sector
Development Studies and Pilot Innovations and Technologies; and (e) Monitoring and
Evaluation Program at the State and Sector level, along with on-line system for financial
management and reporting. Governance and Accountability Action Plan will be implemented by
the MoDWS and the participating States. Awards will be given for good performance.
3 The related Core Sector Indicators are presented in Table 5 in Annex 1. 4 This will be a dedicated RWSS Program for the Low Income States, under the on-going NRDWP of the Ministry.
5
Component B: Infrastructure Development (Cost USD 860 million; IDA contribution USD
430 million). This component will support investments for improving water supply and
sanitation coverage, including construction of new infrastructure and rehabilitation and
augmentation of existing schemes. Water supply investments will include water source
strengthening and catchment area protection activities. Most habitations are expected to be
served by Single Village Schemes (SVSs) using local groundwater sources. Multi Village
Schemes (MVSs), mainly relying on surface water sources, will be taken up for habitations
where the local source is either not sustainable or not of acceptable quality. The sanitation
component will support the NBA5 activities including soak-pits, drain and lane improvements,
community awareness programs for improving sanitation and hygiene practices, along with
incentives for achieving ‘open defecation free’ status. In addition, the project will promote pilot
programs for 24/7 water supply and the introduction of new technologies in the RWSS sector,
including the use of solar energy6.
Component C: Project Management Support (Cost USD 47 million; IDA contribution USD
24 million). This component includes project management support to the various entities at the
national, state, district, and village levels for implementing the project, including staffing,
consultancy and equipment costs, and internal and external Financial Audits.
Component D: Contingency Emergency Response (Cost USD 0 million). Following an
adverse natural event that causes a major natural disaster, the Government may request the Bank
to re-allocate Project funds to support response and reconstruction. This component would draw
resources from the unallocated expenditure category and/or allow the Government to request the
Bank to re-categorize and reallocate financing from other Project components to partially cover
emergency response and recovery costs.
B. Project Financing
1. Lending Instrument
13. The lending instrument is Investment Project Financing.
2. Project Costs and Financing Plan
14. The overall allocation of funds, based on inter-state priorities determined by MoDWS, is
presented in Table 2. The sharing of counterpart funds between GoI and States (Table 3) is based
on GoI-NRDWP guidelines, while World Bank funds are an additional source of funds to these
States. In the event that any individual state under or over performs compared to the plan, a
mechanism is in place to reallocate World Bank funds between the States based on performance
at the time of the mid-term review (details in Annex 3).
5 GoI -NBA funds will be leveraged for construction of new toilets in all the Project GPs. 6 Synergies will be explored with the Bank Energy team for promoting the use of solar pumps and other energy efficient devices.
6
Table 2: RWSSP-LIS Financial Outlay (USD million)
Table 3: RWSSP-LIS Financing of Components (USD million)
Components
Total RWSS
Sector
Program
Government Financing*
World
Bank
Financing
Community
Contribution
WB Financing
as % of Total
Project Cost
GoI
Financing7
State
Contribution8
Capacity and Sector
Development 93 41 6 46 0 50%
Infrastructure Development 860 276 146 430 8 50%
Project Management Support 47 13 10 24 0 50%
Contingency Emergency
Response 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 1,000 330 162 500 8 50%
C. Lessons Learned and Reflected in the Project Design
15. Since 1991, the World Bank has supported GoI in piloting and scaling up the RWSS
Reform Program, contributing more than USD1.4 billion and benefitting about 24 million rural
inhabitants in over 15,000 villages. The key lessons learnt from this partnership and reflected in
the project design are:
The need to use PRI-based decentralized institutional models for the design, implementation
and management of RWSS services.
Sustainability is enhanced through inclusive, community-based, participatory, demand-
responsive approaches to RWSS service delivery.
Building the capacity of state RWSS departments, sector institutions, local governments,
support organizations, local private sector and communities is critical to successful
outcomes.
Project designs should integrate governance and accountability aspects.
The criticality of focusing on sustainability, including financial sustainability of programs,
water source sustainability and service delivery sustainability.
The importance of designing and implementing consistent sector-wide approaches at the state
and district level to scale-up reforms.
Enabling the achievement of ‘open defecation free’ villages through effective sanitation
programs, advancing the household sanitation agenda and starting to tackle the next
generation of sanitation challenges related to community-centric solid and liquid waste
management.
7 GoI NRDWP funds. 8 Matching State counterpart funds, as per NRDWP guidelines.
State/MoDWS Project Outlay (USD
million) %
Assam 240 24%
Bihar 261 26%
Jharkhand 146 15%
Uttar Pradesh 331 33%
MoDWS 22 2%
TOTAL 1000 100%
7
IV. IMPLEMENTATION
A. Institutional and Implementation Arrangements
16. The Project will support progressive decentralization, with increased responsibility to the
PRIs at the district and village level for designing and implementing the schemes, and to the
SWSM and DWSM for policy and oversight aspects. Following are the main institutional and
implementation arrangements (details in Annex 3).
(a) National Level: MoDWS Steering Committee, National Project Management Unit,
Technical Advisory Group. The Steering Committee chaired by the Secretary, MoDWS will
include the Principal Secretaries of the four States and the Joint Secretary, MoDWS (Sanitation)
as members and Joint Secretary, MoDWS(Water) as Member-Secretary. A National PMU
(NPMU) will be established to assist MoDWS in implementing the project. The NPMU will be
supported by a specially constituted Technical Advisory Group (TAG) with responsibility to
review and guide the implementation of the project. The existing NRC will be strengthened with
the expertise available with NPMU. The NPMU will provide technical and policy advice and
assist MoDWS in managing RWSS programs in the four States. The NPMU will be supported by
a Professional Agency for assisting the States in implementing the project activities.
(b) State Level: State Water and Sanitation Mission, Water and Sanitation Support
Organization, Public Health Engineering Department, Drinking Water and Sanitation
Department, Jal Nigam, Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department, State Project
Management Unit. The existing State Water and Sanitation Missions (SWSMs) in the four states
are responsible for planning and policy formulation, capacity building, fund flow, approval of the
annual plan and budget allocation, and monitoring and evaluation of the Sector and District
Programs. The Project will support the existing SWSM and the Water and Sanitation Support
Organization (WSSO) in implementing its roles and responsibilities. The State Departments
such as PHED/DWSD, or Jal Nigam and RDD/PRD (in UP), will work primarily as the
‘facilitator’ for all aspects of the district programs, including technical support, capacity
building, and training programs. Their role in large schemes (MVS and SLWM) would be to
plan and implement the schemes, with the involvement of GP-WSCs for intra-village works and
operations. The Project will also support institutions, including Vishwa in Jharkhand and Pranjal
in Bihar, for training and research activities in the RWSS sector. The State Project Management
Unit (SPMU) has been established as part of the SWSM, with sector specialists, for preparing
and implementing the project. (c) District level: District Water and Sanitation Mission, District Water and Sanitation
Committee, Public Health Engineering Department, Drinking Water and Sanitation Department,
Jal Nigam (District Technical Divisions), Multi Village Scheme-Water and Sanitation
Committee, District Project Management Unit. DWSM, headed by the ZP Chairperson and the
DWSC headed9 by the District Collector (DC) / Deputy Commissioner / Chief Development
Officer (CDO) / Deputy Development Commissioner (DDC), will be strengthened for receiving
policy guidance from the SWSM and translating into district-level programs. DWSC will be
9 States have different arrangements for the DWSC.
8
responsible for overall management of the district program, including selection of GPs based on
criteria laid down by SWSM, engaging Support Organizations (SOs), and allocating funds for
various schemes. Technical Divisions of PHED / Jal Nigam/DWSD/RDD/PRD at the district
levels will be responsible for designing and implementing the MVSs (possibly through PPPs)
and large SLWM schemes, in partnership with participating GP/GPWSCs, and facilitating
GPWSCs in designing and implementing the SVSs. They will also be the technical back-
stopping agency for all schemes during the design, construction and O&M cycles. The MVS-
WSC at the district level will be a representative committee of the group of GPs for MVS and
will endorse and sign off the scheme design and implementation phase payments. All Project
districts will have fully staffed DPMUs for supporting implementation of the Project.
(d) Village Level: Gram Panchayat, Gram Panchayat Water and Sanitation Committee,
Support Organization. The GP will be responsible for taking all important decisions through
resolutions at the Gram Sabha meeting, including tariffs, within the overall guidelines given by
SWSM and DWSM. The GP-WSC, as the sub-committee of the GP, will be responsible for
design and implementation of SVS, the intra-village component of MVS, and SLWM activities,
along with IEC/BCC programs for sanitation and hygiene promotion activities. GP-WSC will
work closely with the counterpart health and education committees at the village level. SOs will
be appointed by DPMU to assist the GP and GP-WSC. SOs will be responsible for community
mobilization, capacity building of GP/GP-WSC, and IEC/BCC activities at the village level.
B. Results Monitoring and Evaluation
17. Monitoring and Evaluation Program. The Project will adopt a results-based approach
to monitoring and evaluation at the State, Sector and National level.
State Level: State Management Information System (S-MIS). Project data will be collected
‘bottom-up’ from habitations/villages upwards to the districts and the State level. S-MIS will
be responsible for data collection, monitoring and evaluation, adapted for each State as part
of the IMIS system, based on the comprehensive web-based MIS developed under the World
Bank assisted Uttarakhand RWSS Project.
Sector Level: Low Income States Management Information System (LIS-MIS). The State MIS
will be integrated across the participating States into an MIS for the Low Income States (LIS-
MIS), as part of the National IMIS. The LIS-MIS will provide information for reporting
progress towards the achievement of the PDO through the Project Results Framework. A
Performance Scorecard will be developed to facilitate implementation performance review
on the basis of specific indicators (Annex 3).
National Level (MoDWS level). The Project will strengthen the National IMIS with a greater
focus on service delivery: (a) Sector Performance Measurement Framework (PMF) to
measure progress of the RWSS sector, including a GIS based MIS system to integrate data
across the Ministry; (b) Capacity Building Monitoring and Evaluation to study the
effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability of capacity building interventions; and (c)
an independent impact evaluation will be designed and implemented to assess the project's
sustainability and potential for scalability.
18. Reviews on Project Implementation Progress. Indicators in the Project Results
Framework will be monitored against the agreed targets annually, based on progress reports
submitted by NPMU. In addition, following covenants are applicable: (i) at MTR (March 31,
9
2017), (a) independent assessment of the decentralized institutional arrangements to provide
mid-course recommendations, and (b) beneficiary assessment of WSS service delivery
improvements for completed schemes; and (ii) by September 30, 2019 (a) independent
assessment of the achievements of the RWSSP-LIS Project, and (b) beneficiary assessment of
WSS service delivery improvements for completed schemes.
C. Sustainability
19. Sustainability of Schemes. The key ingredient for sustainability of RWSS schemes is
operationalizing each State’s already articulated commitment and policies supporting the
decentralized service delivery arrangements. PRIs and communities will be involved in water
supply and sanitation schemes from the planning stage to ensure that schemes are designed and
implemented as per community needs and affordability. The modest community contribution
towards capital costs promotes ownership of the design of piped water schemes. Support
organizations, such as NGOs, along with technical experts, will be involved in mobilizing
communities, building capacities, and understanding local demands for preparation of scheme-
level feasibility reports. The technical experts will work closely with the communities in
designing schemes that communities desire and are willing to maintain, thus maximizing the
likelihood of provision of safe and sustainable services. Source sustainability issues will be
addressed through source recharge programs integrated within the design of the schemes.
Governance and accountability measures, which will support improved sustainability, include
independent monitoring through technical, financial and social audits, and the introduction of
grievance redressal measures to address complaints by villagers.
20. The project will explicitly address issues of: (i) financial sustainability, especially for
multi-village schemes, and beneficiaries ability and willingness to pay for improved services and
the importance of minimizing the need for subsidies for covering O&M and replacement costs;
(ii) institutional sustainability of the system operation and maintenance and the need to explore
back-up arrangements for professionalized support to local community operators; (iii)
environmental sustainability of RWSS schemes to minimize the chance that they run out of raw
water of adequate quantity and quality; and (iv) sustaining ODF villages and not letting them
slip back to non-ODF status.
V. KEY RISKS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
21. The detailed Operational Risk Assessment Framework (ORAF) is presented in Annex 4.
The implementation risk of the project is High.
Table 4: Summary Risk Rating
Risk Rating
Stakeholder Risk Moderate
Implementing Agency Risk (including Fiduciary)
- Capacity High
- Governance Moderate
Project Risk
- Design High
- Social and Environmental Moderate
- Program and Donor Low
- Delivery Monitoring and Sustainability High
10
Risk Rating
Overall Implementation Risk High
22. The major implementation risks are as follows:
Weak capacity and institutional arrangements for implementing the decentralization
program.
Convergence with NBA for financing the sanitation program and achieving ODF status.
Effective implementation of project activities, including Social and Environmental
programs.
Timely delivery of the project activities, given the low and varying capacity across the
four participating States.
23. The key measures to address the identified risks are summarized below.
i. Project design has a strong focus on building the capacity of all stakeholders, particularly
PRIs and Sector Agencies. Strong PMUs will be set up at the national, state and district
levels, actively supporting and coordinating with PRIs and concerned stakeholders to
streamline project implementation. NPMU will monitor the effective functioning of the
governance structure and systems built into the project design (including findings of
independent reviews and internal and external audit reports). The NPMU will be
strengthened with a Technical Advisory Group (TAG) for reviewing and guiding the
implementation of the RWSS Program.
ii. GP-WSC headed by the GP President will lead implementation, hence any risk associated
with NBA funding (including MNREGS) as convergent resources for toilet and SLWM
schemes will be resolved at the GP level through annual / batch-wise identified work
program. MoDWS will prioritize funds for the project villages to achieve ‘saturation’ of
water supply and sanitation facilities. Information Education Communication (IEC) and
Behaviour Change Communication (BCC) programs will be specially designed, targeting
diverse rural communities, for achieving village-wide ODF status.
iii. Project will have ‘twinning’ arrangements with successful on-going Bank supported
RWSS Projects in India. Project agencies, in particular the NPMU, SWSM/WSSO, and
DWSM/DWSC, as well the various project consultants, will monitor the effective
implementation of the project as designed, including social and environmental programs.
iv. The risk that the four States do not perform as programmed, is addressed by permitting
reallocation of IDA funds between the States, based on the use of Performance Scorecard
tool to assess performance of the participating States. The Bank will provide intensive
implementation support, especially during the initial years of the project.
24. An additional risk is that certain areas may not be accessible due to local disturbances
which may possibly result in project implementation delays. This risk will be addressed through
careful selection of project villages through ‘demand responsive’ and participatory approaches,
involving the PRIs, local NGOs and Support Organizations for effective and timely
implementation.
11
VI. APPRAISAL SUMMARY
A. Economic Analyses
25. Cost-benefit analysis has been carried out for a sample of schemes, using representative
technology options and a representative household sample survey covering 5,522 households.
The following benefits have been quantified: (i) value of time saved in water collection; (ii)
value of incremental water supply; and (iii) value of health benefits due to reduction in the
incidence of diseases (diarrhea, malaria, encephalitis and dengue) which are widely prevalent in
the Project habitations. The economic rate of return (ERR) of the project is estimated to be 30
percent and the benefit cost ratio is estimated to be 6.2. Annex 6 presents the details, including
estimations for the four states and for each of the scheme types. Sensitivity tests based on
assessed risks indicate that the project will be able to absorb negative impacts and still generate
an acceptable ERR. O&M cost recovery is expected to increase from the current low level of 5
percent to at least 70 percent by the end of the project period.
26. The ERR is a conservative estimate, since benefits that are harder to quantify were not
included in the computation, e.g., several health outcomes (such as the reduction of miscarriages
since women are not fetching water) are not included. Project interventions also have a strong
social component at the village level through the GP-WSCs. This social cohesion will generate
spill-overs in the communities. Finally, the analysis does not include the value of savings in
capital and recurring costs incurred in the 'without' project scenario.
B. Technical
27. The Project will support improvements in water supply and sanitation coverage in the
project habitations through construction of new infrastructure or rehabilitation and augmentation
of existing schemes, with safe disposal of wastewater, as described below10
:
(i) Single Village Water Supply Schemes (SVS). Piped water schemes, mostly using local
ground water through deep bore wells, will involve pumping from the bore well,
construction of elevated service reservoirs, and piped distribution networks to provide
house connections to all households. The small schemes will adopt safe and appropriate
disinfection programs. The cost of house connections will be provided by the project.
(ii) Multi Village Water Supply Schemes (MVS). The scheme will use surface water sources
(river), where locally available ground water has quality and quantity problems covering
more than one GP, and will involve construction of infiltration wells/galleries or
conventional water treatment plants, elevated service reservoirs for each village/GP, and
piped distribution networks to provide house connections to all households. All MVSs will
use disinfection mechanisms for treating raw water. Bulk flow meters will be provided at
the inlet of each village Over Head Storage (OHSs) and these will be linked to a simple
SCADA system. The cost of house connections will be provided by the Project. For large
MVSs serving the peri-urban and large villages with 24/7 water supply, all households will
be provided with metered connections and the cost of the meters will be included in the
Project.
10 Details in PIP, including responsibilities for the Technical and Administrative approvals.
12
(iii) Sanitation and Solid and Liquid Waste Management (SLWM). The Project will support
the following in convergence with NBA: sanitation (household toilets, institutional
sanitation (toilets for schools and anganwadi, community/public toilets) and Solid Liquid
Waste Management (SLWM) activities.
(iv) Quality of Detailed Engineering. Each State will adopt the following engineering
practices: (a) Total Station Survey; (b) GIS base map; and (c) preparation of Water
Security Plans. The Project has provision for procuring design software for the distribution
system amenable to hydraulic modeling; optimal design of reservoirs conforming to the
latest codes for RCC, seismic and wind loads; and GIS software.
(v) Design Criteria. The project will adopt agreed criteria for design population, service
levels, and technology options, including service storage capacity, pipe materials for
pumping mains, gravity mains and distribution systems, type of water treatment plants,
disinfection facilities, etc. A dedicated power supply will be provided for MVSs. Solar
power will be provided wherever power is not available or is unreliable. Provision of
diesel generating sets will be carefully considered, in view of the high cost of diesel.
(vi) Independent Construction Quality Surveillance (ICQS). Departmental Engineers will
assist GPs in day-to-day monitoring of works and materials procured by GPs. SPMU will
retain an ICQS Consultant to monitor the quality of supervision of works, including the
quality of materials procured and the quality of construction.
(vii) O&M Arrangements. For SVS, the construction contract will have a provision for O&M
for one year, during which the capacity of the GP will be developed to manage O&M. If
necessary, the GP will select an agency for O&M. For MVS, the construction contract will
have a provision for O&M for five years / ten years for both common facilities and in-
village facilities. States will develop and adopt a sector-wide O&M Policy.
(viii) Water Quality Monitoring. GPs will ensure disinfection and check regularly for residual
chlorine in all SVS. For MVS, water quality sampling and analysis will be carried out by
the implementing departments in their water laboratories and state referral laboratories.
These laboratories will regularly analyze samples of drinking water supplied in all rural
water supply schemes.
(ix) Technical Manual. Considering the diverse nature of activities and the requirement of a
much higher level of technological input to the proposed activities, a Technical Manual is
being developed with guidelines for planning, design, construction, and operations and
maintenance of water supply and sanitation facilities under the Project.
C. Financial Management
28. FM Assessments have been conducted for MoDWS, SWSMs and DWSCs of the
participating States and project districts. FM arrangements of a few GPs have also been reviewed
in the participating States. The review of FM arrangements of NRDWP and NBA Programs
indicates the following strengths: (i) financial management arrangements are well documented in
the Program Operational Manual; (ii) staff is trained to carry out basic accounting functions at all
levels, including SWSM and DWSCs; (iii) a system of periodic financial reporting from the
Districts and States to MoDWS is operational; and (iv) an online computerized Management
Information System exists. However implementation experience shows a number of
weaknesses, namely: (a) parking of funds at SWSM and DWSC is a common feature; (b) delays
in bank reconciliations, inadequate control over fund authorization and non-settlement of
advances have been noted in external audit reports of DWSCs; (c) SWSMs are merely routing
funds received from the Centre to the Districts under the existing Programs; (d) devolution to
13
GP-WSCs is limited; (e) accounting is done manually; (f) internal audit is non-existent; (g)
current staffing structure at MoDWS and SWSM allows only limited oversight of financial
management functions; and (h) FM staffing at DWSCs requires strengthening.
29. FM arrangements for the Project have been designed based on the above strengths and
weaknesses and the risk profile of the existing programs. These arrangements will be adequate
to meet the Bank’s fiduciary requirements, subject to compliance with the financial management
framework summarized in Annex 3. FM arrangements of the Project are detailed in the FM
Manual prepared for the Project.
D. Procurement
30. Goods, works and consultancy services required for the Project, and financed out of the
proceeds of the IDA credit, will be procured in accordance with the World Bank’s ‘Guidelines:
Procurement of Goods, Works and Non-Consulting Services under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits
& Grants by World Bank Borrowers,’ dated January 2011 (Procurement Guidelines); and
‘Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits &
Grants by World Bank Borrowers,’ dated January 2011 (Consultant Guidelines). A project
Procurement Manual has been developed by MoDWS in consultation with the Bank, which
details procurement arrangements and methods. In addition, model bidding documents will be
developed and agreed with the States.
31. The procurement risk assessment found that e-procurement system is already in use in
Assam, Bihar, Jharkhand and Uttar Pradesh. The PWD Codes are being followed for
procurement of Works and adequate knowledge and expertise is available in all project States.
The assessment found that there are no uniform or predictable practices for procurement of
goods and services. A lack of capacity, transparency and grievances management in procurement
has been observed in all participating States. A common procurement framework has been
designed for the project comprising: (i) community based procurement (CBP) for small single
village schemes where user groups will implement either through community Force Account or
through Shopping and Local Competitive Bidding; (ii) conventional single responsibility
contracts issued by the implementing agency through NCB and ICB procedures; and (iii) Design
Build Operate Transfer (DBOT) PPP methods. The project will use the e-Government
Procurement System developed by NIC, with appropriate customization in all participating
states. The current two envelope system will be termed as ‘bids in two parts’: technical
qualification assessment will determine the eligibility and qualification of the bidders; and the
technical-financial part of the bid will be opened in a timely fashion for the qualified bidders.
Procurement under emergency situation (OP 10.00) will be guided by paragraph 20 of OP 11.00
procurement under emergency situation using simplified procurement procedures.
E. Social (including Safeguards)
32. Social Aspects. Project interventions are expected to provide positive health,
environmental, and social benefits through the provision of 'safe' drinking water and the creation
of sanitary conditions in villages. Success of the project will depend on mobilizing local
communities to participate in the development of water supply and sanitation facilities and in
enabling them to shoulder the O&M responsibility. The communities are quite diverse – social
(scheduled castes, others), economic (landless, small, marginal, and large farmers), ethnic
14
(scheduled tribe, others), gender (female headed households) and geographical setting (hills,
plains, forests, flood prone areas). The GPs are still in their infancy. There are areas
characterized as ‘extremist affected’, rendering accessibility difficult. In addition, the RWSS
sector rests mainly with Government Departments, which have traditionally followed top-down
decision making, with hardly any accountability to the communities.
33. The project has identified the following as significant social issues: (i) ensuring
participation; (ii) ensuring inclusion and enhancing equity; (iii) decentralizing service delivery,
underpinned by the principle of subsidiarity; and (iv) human and institutional development.
Other important aspects are: (a) enabling participation, especially of women; (b) GP
Strengthening; (c) change management initiatives for changing the role of Government from
‘provider’ to ‘facilitator’; (d) improving accountability and transparency; and (e) information,
education and communication (IEC) campaign, along with capacity building programs. The
project will provide capacity support to participating communities and local self-governments. It
will strengthen existing and/or new institutions at the grassroots level to enable local
communities participate in planning and construction of RWSS facilities and subsequently
operate and maintain the systems.
34. Gender. Although there are efforts to address gender issues, the social norms and
conventional ways within villages often influence the way women view RWSS facilities and use
them. Inadequate access or shortage of water implies women will have to walk longer to fetch
water to meet their needs. The quality of water being consumed is also an issue, impacting the
health and income earning capacity of women. The absence of household latrines has a gender
impact. The absence of girl friendly toilets with water facilities and safe menstrual hygiene
management is a strong deterrent for girl attendance in schools. The project will support
sensitizing the functionaries and stakeholders at all levels and will promote full participation of
women in sub-project activities at the village level, and in project activities at the district and
state level. Capacity building initiatives will underpin gender sensitization as one of the major
themes, with focus on social mobilization and participation, up-grading skills, and operational
activities. The project will support gender mainstreaming as part of project activities.
35. Land. Land requirement arises for four purposes: (i) water source; (ii) water treatment
plants (WTPs); (iii) construction of ground level or overhead tanks (G/OHT) or cisterns; and (iv)
water transmission and distribution pipelines, and sullage/ storm water drains. Water sources
could be either ground water or based on surface sources, mainly rivers and canals. Ground
water sources require ‘land’, as do WTPs and G/OHTs. Transmission and distribution lines are
laid mostly on public land, or along public streets. In a few cases, pipelines may have to pass
through private agriculture fields. Since the pipeline is laid at least 90 centimeters below ground
level, no land acquisition is required, but permission from the land owner may be required. If
such permission is not forthcoming, then an alternative pipe routing could be used.
36. Ownership of land acquired for Project activities could be either public or private. While
it is easier to access public land, arrangements will have to be made for securing privately owned
land. The prevailing practice is that such plots are obtained either through voluntary donation or
through outright purchase. Private land will be secured through market based purchase and will
be voluntary; as such Operational Policy (OP) 4.12 -Involuntary Resettlement is not triggered.
Mechanisms have been developed to ensure the voluntary aspect and that these do not involve
any significant adverse impact upon the income or physical displacement of affected persons.
15
37. Tribal Development (Indigenous Peoples Policy – OP/BP 4.10). All the four states
have some Schedule Tribe population. However, barring districts in Jharkhand, there are no
‘tribals’ (Indigenous Peoples, as defined by the Bank) in any of the other project areas. In
Jharkhand, state policies ensure that tribal interests are protected in accordance with the Indian
Constitutional provision (Article 244). Four of the six districts chosen for project coverage in
Jharkhand are recognized as distinct tribal territories, where special Constitutional protections
apply. The proposed project interventions are not likely to have any adverse impact on the tribal
groups. Accordingly, in line with the Bank’s OP 4.10, a Tribal Development Plan (TDP) has
been prepared, with the objective of the ‘promotion of inclusive, equitable and sustainable water
supply and sanitation delivery through fostering and empowering grassroots tribal institutions in
the tribal areas’. The TDP will have geographical jurisdiction comprising all distinct tribal
territories of the six project districts in Jharkhand. Simultaneously, GoI’s policies for promoting
RWSS activities for STs shall also be implemented in the four States.
F. Environment (including Safeguards)
38. The participating states have conducted state-specific Environmental Assessment (EA)
studies, comprising an assessment of the current status of rural water supply and sanitation in
each state, which includes the quantity and quality of available water resources, baseline
environmental issues, along with institutional programs and policies. The EA has assessed the
expected environmental impact of the proposed interventions and proposed mitigation measures.
An Environmental Management Framework (EMF) has been developed with institutional
arrangements for the implementation of the EMF. The EA study indicates that while the
proposed interventions are expected to result in overall environmental and public health
improvements, potential adverse impacts could occur if the schemes are not properly designed,
sited, implemented, and maintained. The EMF will be applied to all individual single or multi
village schemes, with respect to upfront screening of the schemes and identifying potential
impacts and mitigation measures. The EMF will be a dynamic document, and will be updated
from time to time, depending on any new issues or experience gained during project
implementation. Annex 3 summarizes steps to be taken to ensure the project’s environmental
safeguard compliance. Currently, the safeguards assessments and management plans have not
been planned for component “D” of the project. These will be updated and applied, as and when
the component “D” is made effective in the project.
39. Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01). Project activities are not expected to have
any significant adverse environmental impacts. However, due diligence of each water supply
scheme will ensure that in the unlikely event of any adverse impact, appropriate mitigation
measures will be put in place in accordance with the Environmental Management Framework
(EMF).
40. Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50). Individual schemes in Uttar
Pradesh, Bihar, Assam and Jharkhand may involve the use of surface water from the Ganges and
the Brahmaputra River basins. The project will not result in any adverse changes to the quality or
quantity of the river. In accordance with OP/BP 7.50, the Legal Department and the Regional
Vice President have provided an exception to riparian notification under Paragraph 7 (a) of OP
7.50.
16
Annex 1: Results Framework
INDIA: Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project for Low Income States
1. SECTOR LEVEL - MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM (LIS-MIS)
Table 5: Project Results Framework
The project development objective is to improve piped water supply and sanitation services for selected rural communities in the target states through decentralized delivery
systems.
PDO Level Results Indicators* Co
re
Unit of
Measure Baseline
Cumulative Target Values**
Frequency Data Source/
Methodology
Responsibility
for Data
Collection
Description
YR 1 YR 2 YR3 YR 4
YR5 YR6
Indicator 1: New piped
household water connections that are resulting from the project
intervention (number)
Number 0
1.15 million Annual
Project MIS,
Beneficiary Assessment,
Social Audits
DPMU, SPMU
Indicator 2: People provided with access to ‘improved sanitation
facilities’ under the project – rural
(number), of which female (percentage), BPL (percentage)
Number 0
As per baseline
survey and annual work
plan
Annual Project MIS,
Beneficiary Assessment,
Social Audits
DPMU, SPMU
Convergence with NBA
Indicator 3: Number of people
using improved latrines in the
project area (number)
Number 0
Target to be set through
baseline survey
Annual Project MIS,
Beneficiary
Assessment, Social Audits
DPMU, SPMU Convergence
with NBA
Indicator 4: O&M Cost
Recovery: (i) Percentage habitations with 50% or more
O&M Cost Recovery; (ii)
Percentage Habitations with 100% O&M Cost Recovery.
Percentage
(baseline
to be establish
ed after
selection of GPs)
As per Project
MIS
Annual Project MIS, Beneficiary
Assessment,
Social Audits
DPMU, SPMU
INTERMEDIATE RESULTS
Intermediate Result (Component One): Capacity Building
Indicator 5: People trained to
improve hygiene behavior or
sanitation practices under the
project (number), of which female
(number)
Number 0
Total= 7.8
million;
Female: 48%.
Annual Project MIS,
Beneficiary
Assessment, Social Audits
DPMU, SPMU
Indicator 6: Water Utilities the Project is supporting Number 4
4 Annual Project MIS, DPMU, SPMU
Indicator 7: Other water service
providers the project is supporting
(number)
Number 0
2000 Annual Project MIS, DPMU, SPMU
Number of
schemes
17
The project development objective is to improve piped water supply and sanitation services for selected rural communities in the target states through decentralized delivery
systems.
PDO Level Results Indicators* Co
re
Unit of
Measure Baseline
Cumulative Target Values** Frequency
Data Source/
Methodology
Responsibility
for Data
Collection
Description
Indicator 8: National, State, and District level institutions are set
up, staffed and fully functional:
NPMU, SPMU, and DPMU.
Yes/No/Partial n/a
1 NPMU/ 4
SPMUs; 33DPMUs.
Annually Institutional
Checklist NPMU
Indicator 9: Capacity building
activities undertaken as per agreed
strategy and plan in response to the requirements of the scheme
cycle
Yes/No/Partial n/a
As per Project
MIS
Annual Capacity
building checklist
SPMU
Indicator 10: Number of GP-
WSCs with at least 50% woman members
Number 0
As per Project
MIS
Annual Project MIS DPMU, SPMU
Intermediate Result (Component Two): RWSS Investments
Indicator 11: Direct project
beneficiaries (number), of which
female (percentage), BPL (percentage)
Number 0
7.8 million
Female: 48%;
BPL11: 42%
Annual Project MIS,
Beneficiary
Assessment, Social Audits
DPMU, SPMU
Convergence
with NBA
Indicator 12: People provided
with access to “improved water sources” under the project- rural
(number), of which female
(percentage), BPL (percentage)
Number 0
7.8 million Female: 48%;
BPL: 42%
Annual Project MIS,
Beneficiary
Assessment, Social Audits
DPMU, SPMU
Indicator 13:Improved community water points
constructed or rehabilitated under
the project (number)
Number 0
15000
Annual
Project MIS, DPMU, SPMU
Number of shared
connections
serving 20% households;
Indicator 14: Piped household
water connections that are benefiting from rehabilitation
works undertaken under the
project (number)
Number 0
64000
Annual
Project MIS, DPMU, SPMU
Piped
connections under
Rehabilitation
Schemes
Indicator 15: Number of schemes operationalized using the
decentralized service delivery
system, disaggregated by:
Single habitation schemes (SHS)
Multi habitations within single GP
schemes (SGS)
Small multi village schemes
Number 0
As per Project
MIS
Annual
Project MIS, DPMU, SPMU
11
NSSO 2009-10
18
The project development objective is to improve piped water supply and sanitation services for selected rural communities in the target states through decentralized delivery
systems.
PDO Level Results Indicators* Co
re
Unit of
Measure Baseline
Cumulative Target Values** Frequency
Data Source/
Methodology
Responsibility
for Data
Collection
Description
(Small MVS)
Large multi village schemes
(Large MVS)
Indicator 16: Percentage of
project GPs that are declared open-defecation free.
Percentage 0
As per Project MIS12
Every 6 months
Project MIS,
Beneficiary Assessment,
Social Audits
DPMU, SPMU Including NBA funding
Intermediate Result (Component Three): Project Management
Indicator 17: Number of schemes which have carried out: (a)
independent supervision quality
checks; (b) community monitoring /social audits; (c) beneficiary
assessments at least once a year
Number 0
As per Project MIS
Annual Project MIS DPMU, SPMU
Indicator 18: Number of External Audits of environmental
performance completed. Number 0
As per Project MIS
Annual
Project MIS: Independent
External
Environmental Audit
DPMU
*Core Sector Indicators are marked (http://coreindicators)
12 Project expects at least 30% of target GPs are declared open-defecation free.
19
Annex 2: Detailed Project Description
INDIA: Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project for Low Income States
1. The project development objective of the Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project in
Low Income States (RWSSP-LIS) is to improve piped water supply and sanitation services for
selected rural communities in the target states through decentralized delivery systems.
I. KEY FEATURES OF THE PROJECT
RWSS Program and Policies
2. Following are the key features of the RWSS-LIS Program and Policies supported by the
Project13
in convergence with NRDWP and NBA:
(i) Decentralized Service Delivery Systems. The Project will promote decentralized service
delivery arrangements in the participating states with increased participation by the PRIs and
communities and enhanced accountability at all levels. The project will support the following
major shifts from the ‘business-as-usual’ model currently practiced in these States.
i. Strengthening policy and planning activities at the State and the district levels, with clear
accountability to the GPs and the beneficiary communities. The existing State Water and
Sanitation Missions (SWSMs) and the participating District Water and Sanitation
Missions (DWSMs), Zila Panchayats (ZPs – District PRI), and GPs will be strengthened
to allow them to undertake their respective policy, planning and review functions.
ii. Decentralization of RWSS service delivery responsibility to the DWSM and the ZP for
Multi Village Schemes (MVSs) and to the GP Water and Sanitation Committee (GP-
WSC) for Single Village Schemes (SVSs) and the intra-village component of the MVSs.
GP-WSC will be formed as a statutory body of the GP, headed by the GP Chairperson.
iii. Facilitating decentralized responsibilities through Support Organizations (SOs)
contracted by the District PMUs to help the GPs in planning and implementing SVSs.
Multi Village and other complex schemes will be designed and implemented by the State
Engineering Agency, in agreement with the participating GPs.
(ii) Strengthening Institutions for Building Capacity. Project will support strengthening
existing institutions for carrying out capacity building activities, including the State RWSS
Institutes and the State Rural Water and Sanitation Management Organizations.
(iii) District-wide Approach. Uniform policies and institutional arrangements will be adopted
for the identified districts under the Project across the project districts, irrespective of the source
of financing.. The following criteria have been used by the States for the selection of districts:
Districts with low coverage of piped water supply and sanitation within the State.
Quality affected districts, especially with chemical contamination (Fluoride and Arsenic)
in ground water.
Districts with water scarcity due to non-sustainable or dried up water sources.
13Details are presented in the Project Implementation Plan. A series of stakeholder consultations were held in each State to get feed-back for
firming up the proposed program and policies.
20
Districts with large socially disadvantaged and poor population.
(iv) Integrated Approach to Water Supply and Sanitation. An integrated scheme cycle
approach will be adopted for planning, implementing and managing the water supply and
sanitation schemes.
Water Supply: SVSs and MVSs will provide piped water supplies, taking into consideration
the availability and quality of local water sources, and using catchment area management
programs as required for improving source sustainability. MVSs will be taken up only if a
local sustainable source is not available.
Sanitation interventions: Project will support: (a) household toilets14
; (b) institutional
sanitation (schools, anganwadi, community/public toilets)15
; (c) environmental sanitation
(SLWM, including soak-pits, drains and lane improvements for disposal of sullage and
wastewater, and solid waste management for village-wide cleanliness; and (d) IEC / behavior
change communication (BCC) activities. The sanitation component is designed to be
complementary to GoI’s NBA program, by bringing about convergence in institutional
arrangements and integrating water and sanitation processes into a single scheme cycle. A
‘saturation approach’ will be followed for achieving ODF coverage, with funding from both
NBA and the Project:
A comprehensive sanitation plan for each GP will be the basis for any household
sanitation works and SLWM activities to be undertaken by the GP. The list of districts /
GPs selected under the RWSSP-LIS will be submitted by the States to MoDWS for
priority NBA funding from the Project.
M&E System and Independent Checks: The Project MIS will monitor the sustained use
of latrines. The Project will make use of new innovations in monitoring, e.g., Qualitative
Information Systems (QIS), combined with GIS-databases (Geographic Information
Systems). Performance benchmarking and cross-checks will be carried out through
social audit teams within the village and externally through cross-visits by other GPs. All
data will be transparently shared through the Project MIS. The ‘usage’ of toilets will be
tracked on a self-reporting basis by the habitation / village / GP, with periodic
independent checks.
(v) Community Contributions towards Capital and O&M Costs:
Capital Cost (CAPEX) Contributions. To demonstrate support for the schemes, an
amount of Rs 450 per household will be collected as an upfront, one-time, contribution
from the beneficiary household (Rs 225 for SC/ST household). This contribution will
enable households living within 10 meters of the network to connect at no additional
charge.
O&M Cost Recovery. The Project will adopt a phased approach for achieving full O&M
cost recovery through user fees. Experience from on-going Bank assisted RWSS Projects
and willingness-to-pay surveys for similar socio-economic households indicate the
willingness to be in the range of Rs 50-70 per household per month. In some States it
could be more, depending on local demand and affordability. Based on these findings
high levels of cost recovery can be expected through “affordable tariffs” in low cost
schemes. In cases where affordable charges are inadequate for covering O&M costs, the
14 through convergence with GoI-NBA program 15 through convergence with GoI-NBA program
21
State Government will provide transparent subsidies through O&M grants available
under various programs, including NRDWP, Finance Commission, and State budgetary
allocations. 24x7 water supply services will include household metering and suitably
structured volumetric tariffs. For MVSs, ‘Bulk Water Tariffs’ will be introduced for bulk
water supply at the village entry point. Annual increases in tariff will be indexed to
inflation (consumer price index). States will develop and adopt a sector-wide O&M
Policy. GPs will be responsible for meeting any shortfalls in beneficiary contributions
and/or user charges.
(vi) Public Private Partnerships (PPPs). The project will support PPPs for efficient and
accountable services. About six to eight schemes have been identified in the four States for
possible PPP models. PPP options for provision of power through solar operated pumps will be
explored.
(vii) Selection of GPs. Under the demand responsive approach, any GP within the selected
districts that demonstrates commitment and willingness to implement the reforms could be
considered under the Project, taking into consideration the following criteria: (a) existing level of
water supply access and service; (b) water quality issues; (c) percentage of SC/ ST/ BPL; and (d)
GP location in flood prone zones and water scarce zones.
(viii) Governance and Accountability Aspects. The Project will improve transparency and
enhance governance and accountability through the following measures: (a) RWSS district-wide
program, including policies, institutions and infrastructure development program for transition to
decentralized service delivery; (b) Clarification of roles and responsibilities for RWSS
functionaries at each level: State, district, and GP, with well-defined responsibilities for policy
and planning, design, implementation, managing and maintaining the schemes; (c) independent
construction quality surveillance through technical experts to check on implementation quality
of SVSs and MVSs; (d) social audits and civil society oversight, through NGOs and community
organizations, during scheme planning and implementation phases; (e) grievance redressal
measures at the GP, district and State level, with the M&E system capturing grievances and
actions taken; (f) Service Delivery Assessment through household surveys, carried out once in
two years, for assessing water supply and sanitation services, health and hygiene improvements,
household expenditure on water and sanitation, etc.; (g) technical and financial audits to confirm
and validate the technical aspects and expenses incurred for schemes and programs under the
Project; (h) transparent and robust procurement processes, including competitive bidding
processes, with on-line contract management and monitoring system; (i) M&E Systems for
capturing project baseline and implementation progress, with clearly defined indicators; And (j)
public disclosure of all project documents and reports at the web-site of the SWSM.
(ix) ‘Twinning’ with Bank assisted RWSS Projects. The participating States will have
‘twinning’ arrangements with on-going Bank assisted RWSS Projects, including Uttarakhand,
Kerala, Karnataka, Maharashtra and Punjab, to learn from the decentralization experience of
these Projects.
Linkages with Education and Health Sectors
3. The Project will build partnerships, as appropriate, with the Education and Health-
Nutrition Sectors for improving RWSS services. The NBA, NRDWP, National Rural Health
22
Mission (NRHM), Sarva Siksha Abhiyan (SSA), and the Integrated Child Development Services
(ICDS) programs articulate commitment for inter-sectoral convergence and have identified
institutional mechanisms to do so. However, in practice these linkages largely remain weak and
the sectoral intents unrealized. The RWSS-LIS project offers the opportunity to strengthen the
linkages in the following ways:
Improving community awareness of the importance of improved water, sanitation and
hygiene in disease prevention and achieving better health and nutrition, particularly for
children, by strengthening IEC/BCC strategy, package and training.
Enhancing institutional convergence with NRHM and ICDS: (i) Building partnerships
with the GP-WSC and the Village Health Sanitation Nutrition Committee (VHSNC)
formed under the NRHM and ICDS for joint IEC/BCC, where VHSNCs exist. Where
VHSNCs do not exist, the project will collaborate with the Aanganwadi Worker (AWW)
and Accredited Social Health Activist (ASHA), key functionaries of ICDS and the
NRHM. (ii) Improving the collaboration between GP-WSC and NRHM to support and
promote each fulfilling its defined role for water, sanitation and health.
4. The Impact Evaluation of the project will design and test the impact of improved water
and sanitation on health and nutrition indicators, as well as design studies to assess the impact of
improved water and sanitation on morbidity reduction and specific disease incidence reduction.
Groundwater
5. On the basis of a review of the ongoing groundwater initiatives in Bihar (supported by
the Central Groundwater Board - CGWB) and UP (supported by the Department of Groundwater
and other agencies), and lessons from other States (Maharashtra and Gujarat), the Project will
support the inclusion of a TA program for strengthening the management of groundwater. The
TA will be developed in close collaboration with the respective Groundwater Departments of the
Project States.
II. PROJECT COMPONENTS
6. The Project will have three components: A. Capacity Building and Sector Development;
B. RWSS Infrastructure Investments; and C. Project Management. The total Project Cost is US
$ 1 billion, with World Bank financing of US$500m.
Component A: Capacity Building and Sector Development (Cost USD 93 million, IDA
contribution USD 46 million)
This component aims to build the capacity of the MoDWS and participating States to implement
the Project.
A1: Capacity Building of MoDWS. The Project will support the strengthening of MoDWS to
manage RWSS Programs, provide policy and technical advice, and to carry out training and
research programs to support RWSS in all States at the national level.
The NPMU will be supported by a Professional Agency for implementing project activities of
MoDWS.
A2: Capacity Building of RWSS Sector Institutions and PRIs. The following capacity building
and training programs will be implemented under the Project:
23
o State level. Capacity building and training activities will focus on strengthening sector
policy and planning functions at the state level. These include strengthening the capacity
of sector institutions through training programs in sector policy and planning, program
management, policy implementation, skills development, financial management, M&E,
etc.
o District level. District functionaries have a key role in developing district-level programs,
as well as facilitating PRIs for planning and implementing RWSS schemes. Specific
capacity strengthening activities at the district level include training in policy and
planning, engineering design and implementation of schemes, project management,
financial and accounting management, procurement, community development, and health
and hygiene aspects.
o PRIs. Training PRIs on scheme design, implementation and maintenance, procurement
and financial management, health and hygiene aspects, etc., will be supported. These
activities will be coordinated with the on-going training programs under NRDWP and
NBA.
o Twinning arrangements. Twinning arrangements with successful, on-going Bank-
supported RWSS projects from other states in India, as well as outside the country, will
be supported.
A3. Program Information, Education, and Communications (IEC). This sub-component will
facilitate Project activities by disseminating relevant information among stakeholders:
o IEC for empowering PRIs to adopt their new role in planning and implementation of
RWSS schemes.
o IEC to promote behavioural change among stakeholders for improving sanitation and
hygiene practices. A communication strategy will also be developed and implemented.
o Development of manuals, hand books, field books etc., on Project activities and
implementation guidelines.
A4: Sector Development Studies and Pilot Innovations and Technologies. The Project will
support technical, institutional, economic, and social studies and workshops intended to inform
the state level policy decisions, including the following broad topics.
o RWSS Sector Program and Policies
o Cost Effectiveness and Sustainability Analysis
o Appropriate Technologies for RWSS Schemes
o Institutional Models for Service Provision
o Groundwater Management by Rural Communities
o Independent Assessments and Project Reviews
The Project will also support pilot testing of new approaches and technologies, including the
innovative use of solar energy, cost-efficient pumps, Reverse Osmosis plants, R&D for toilet
technologies, recycling technologies for SLWM, etc.
A5: Monitoring and Evaluation. This sub-component comprises the following activities:
(a) M&E. Establishment and operationalization of a computerized M&E System for monitoring
project achievements, including the type and cost of schemes, service levels, water quality,
O&M cost recovery and collection efficiency, etc. A benchmarking system will allow
comparisons amongst districts, GPs and across schemes. Impact evaluations will be carried out
24
to assess the effectiveness of project interventions. The Financial Management System will
facilitate on-line accounting and monitoring of fund flows and expenditures.
(b) Governance and Accountability Activities. This will include independent verifications,
technical audits, social audits and beneficiary assessments.
A6: Excellence Awards for Integrated Water Supply and Sanitation. The Project provide
awards to the best performing States, districts and GPs, based on implementing integrated water
supply and sanitation schemes, as per scheme cycle, and demonstrating full beneficiary
satisfaction.
Component B: RWSS Infrastructure Development (Cost USD 860 million, IDA contribution
USD 430 million)
7. This component includes investments required to improve RWSS services. Water Supply
investments would be made in an integrated manner with source strengthening and catchment
area management activities; Individual Household Latrines (IHHLs), Institutional toilets, Solid
Liquid Waste Management (SLWM) activities16
; health and hygiene awareness programs; and
community incentives for attaining ‘open defecation free status’. In addition, pilot programs will
include 24/7 water supply provision in select areas, and the introduction of new technologies,
including the use of solar energy. The project will support the universal provision of household
connections, meters for bulk water supply in all schemes, and the promotion of household
meters, where appropriate. The main sub-components are:
B1: New Investments. Project will finance new water supply schemes, supported by catchment
area management programs (B3 below, if required), and test new technologies. Public-Private
Partnerships will be supported as part of the new investment programs.
a) New investments in SVS, including SHS and SGS
b) New investments in MVS, including small and large MVS
B2: Rehabilitation and Augmentation of Existing Schemes. The following activities will be
undertaken to improve service delivery in existing schemes:
a) Rehabilitation and augmentation of SVS
b) Rehabilitation and augmentation of MVS
B3: Catchment Area Program. Source strengthening and catchment area management programs
will be integrated as part of SVS and MVS (B1 and B2), if required.
B4: Water Quality Management. GPs will carry out disinfection of water supply and will
regularly check for residual chlorine levels for the intra-village schemes. For all schemes, water
quality sampling and analysis will be carried out by the implementing Departments in their
laboratories and state referral laboratories as per NRDWP guidelines. These laboratories will
regularly analyze samples and report findings. A detailed Water Quality Management Program
will be prepared by each State.
B5: Household, Institutional and Environmental Sanitation. This sub-component will
complement the existing GoI led Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan (NBA) and will be carried out in an
integrated manner with water supply activities. The Project will focus on creating awareness and
demand for health, hygiene, and sanitation services, and motivating communities to attain open
defecation free status through IEC activities and building capacity of village level institutions. In
16
Sanitation activities will be carried out in convergence with NBA.
25
addition to the regular NBA funding for SLWM in all GPs, the Project will support an additional
amount of Rs 825 per capita for an estimated 65% of the population, with prioritization for large
villages.
B6: Infrastructure Support. This sub-component will support the design and implementation of
the infrastructure program, including the following activities:
(a) Engineering Support. Engineering support would be provided for designing and
implementing the RWSS facilities. This includes field surveys, geophysical surveys for
source selection, geotechnical investigations for determining safe bearing capacity, water
quality analysis, preparation of designs, drawings, estimates, bid documents, engineering
supervision during project implementation, O&M support, etc.
(b) District Support. Professional Agencies will be hired by the State RWSS Departments for
implementing the district and village infrastructure programs in Jharkhand and Bihar,
including technical support activities.
(c) Community Support. The services of SOs, NGOs and community based organizations will
be used for pre-planning, planning and implementation phase activities of the scheme-cycle,
including the formation of GP-WSCs and MVS-WSCs.
Component C: Project Implementation Support (Cost USD 47 million, IDA contribution USD
24 million)
8. The Project Management Units (PMUs) at the National and State levels, along with
sub-units at the district levels (D-PMUs) will support the following sub-components:
C1: Staffing and Consultancy Costs. The Project will support staff and consultancy costs for the
PMU at the National, State, and district levels, for the following tasks:
a) Implementing and managing the Project.
b) Facilitating the RWSS Program.
c) Coordinating with various stakeholders, especially SWSM and DWSMs.
d) Procuring services/consultants to support the implementation of the Project.
e) Internal and external financial audits.
f) Reviewing and reporting progress of Project activities.
C2: Equipment and Miscellaneous costs. These will include operational costs of the PMUs and
the DPMUs, covering office expenses (rent) and other costs (computers, stationary, fuel, etc.)
Component D: Contingency Emergency Response (Cost USD0 million)
9. Following an adverse natural event that causes a major natural disaster, the State
government may request the Bank to re-allocate project funds to support response and
reconstruction. This component would draw resources from the unallocated expenditure category
and/or allow the government to request the Bank to re-categorize and reallocate financing from
other Project components to partially cover emergency response and recovery costs. An
Operations Manual specific to Component D will be prepared.
10. Disbursements would be made against a positive list of critical goods or the procurement
of works, and consultant services required to support the immediate response and recovery
needs. All expenditures under this component, should it be triggered, will be in accordance with
paragraph 11 of OP 10.00 and will be appraised, reviewed and found to be acceptable to the
26
Bank before any disbursement is made. In accordance with paragraph 11 and 12 of OP 10.00,
this component would provide immediate, quick-disbursing support to finance goods (positive
list agreed with the Governments), works, and services needed for response, mitigation, and
recovery and reconstruction activities. Operating costs eligible for financing would include the
incremental expenses incurred for early recovery efforts arising as a result of the impact of major
natural disasters.
11. Goods, Works and Services under this component would be financed based on review of
satisfactory supporting documentation presented by the government including adherence to
appropriate procurement practices in emergency context. All supporting documents for
reimbursement of such expenditures will be verified by the Internal Auditors of the Government
and by the Project Director, certifying that the expenditures were incurred for the intended
purpose and to enable a fast recovery following the damage caused by adverse natural events,
before the Application is submitted to the Bank. This verification should be sent to the Bank
together with the Application.
12. Specific eligible expenditures under the category of Goods include: (i) construction
materials; water, land and air transport equipment, including supplies and spare parts; (ii) school
supplies and equipment; (iii) medical supplies and equipment; (iv) petroleum and fuel products;
(v) construction equipment and industrial machinery; and (vi) communications equipment.
13. Specific eligible expenditures under the category of Works may include urgent works
(repairs, rehabilitation, construction, etc.) to mitigate the risks associated with the disaster for
affected populations. Specific eligible expenditures under the category of Services may include
urgent studies (either technical, social, environmental, etc.) necessary as a result of the effects of
the disaster (identification of priority works, feasibility assessments, delivery of related analyses,
etc.).
27
III. PROJECT COSTS AND FINANCING
14. Tables below present the detailed Project Costs, including component-wise costs and
financing.
Table 6: RWSSP-LIS Cost Estimates
Base Costs USD Million
A Capacity Building and Sector Development
A1 Capacity Building of MoDWS 9.5
A2 Capacity Building of Institutions in Four States 32.3
A3 Program IEC for Water & Sanitation 22.3
A4 Sector Development Studies 17.9
A5 Monitoring and Evaluation 8.5
A6 Awards for Good Practices 2.2
A. Total Capacity & Sector Development 93
B Infrastructure Development
B1 New Investments- Water
a. SHS 27.5
b. SGS 252.5
c. Small MVS 122.5
d. Large MVS 257.0
Total New Investments 660
B2 Rehabilitation and Augmentation
a. SHS 0.1
b. SGS 33.4
c. Small MVS 2.8
d. Large MVS 1.5
Total Rehabilitation and Augmentation 38
B3 Catchment Area Program 3.4
B4 Water Quality Management 1.9
B5 Solid & Liquid Waste Management* 86.7
B6 Infrastructure Support
a. Engineering Support 20.0
b. District and Community Support 50.6
B. Total Infrastructure Development 860
C Project Management Support
C1 Staffing & Consultancy 32.9
C2 Equipment and Administration Costs 14.4
C. Total Project Management Support 47
Total Base Costs (A+B+C) 1,000
Total Project Costs 1,000
Total Financing Required (from WB) 500 Price escalation@7% per annum factored in the costs. * Regular NBA funds will be available for toilet coverage and SLWM in all GPs. The
Project will support an additional amount of Rs 825 per capita for SLWM coverage for estimated 65% population, with a prioritization for large villages. Totals may not add due to rounding.
28
Table 7: RWSSP-LIS Sources of Funds by Component
(USD million)
Component Total
Project
% to
total
Project
Sources of funds
World
Bank
%
World
Bank
GoI %
GoI States
%
States
Com
muni
ty
%
Commu
nity
A Capacity and
Sector
development
A1 Capacity
Building of
MoDWS
9.5 0.95% 4.73 50% 4.73 50% - - - -
A2 Capacity
Building of
Institutions in Four
States
32.3 3.23% 16.06 50% 10.3 32% 5.91 18% - -
A3 Program IEC 22.3 2.23% 11.17 50% 11.17 50% - - - -
A4 Sector
Development
Studies
17.9 1.79% 8.97 50% 8.97 50% - - - -
A5 Monitoring and
Evaluation 8.5 0.85% 4.25 50% 4.25 50% - - - -
A6 Awards for
Good Practices 2.2 0.22% 1.11 50% 1.11 50% - - - -
Total Capacity
Building* 93 9.3% 46 50% 41 44% 6 6% - -
B. Infrastructure
Development
B1 New
Investments- Water 659.5 65.95% 329.76 50% 199.20 30% 123.25 19% 7.25 1%
B2 Rehabilitation
and Augmentation 37.8 3.78% 18.90 50% 13.93 37% 4.56 12% 0.42 1%
B3 Catchment Area
Program 3.4 0.34% 1.70 50% 1.70 50% - - - -
B4 Water Quality
Management 1.9 0.19% 0.93 50% 0.93 50% - - - -
B5 Sanitation- Solid
and Liquid Waste
Management
86.7 8.67% 43.4 50% 30.10 35% 13.20 15% - -
B6 Infrastructure
Support 70.6 7.06% 35.31 50% 30.50 43% 4.81 7% - -
Total Infrastructure
Development* 860 86.0% 430 50% 276 32% 146 17% 8 1%
C Project
Management
Support
C1 Staffing &
Consultancy 32.9 3.29% 16.46 50% 9.35 28% 7.13 22% - -
C2 Equipment Costs 14.4 1.44% 7.24 50% 4.05 28% 3.15 22% - -
Total Project
Management* 47 4.7% 24 50% 13 28% 10 22% - -
Total Project Costs* 1,000.0 100% 500 50% 330 33% 162 16% 8 1%
Note: * Totals may not add due to rounding.
29
Table 8: RWSSP-LIS Average Unit Costs adopted in the Project Cost Estimates
(USD per capita)
Assam Bihar Jharkhand UP
SHS - 41 42 68
SGS - 47 76 64
Small MVS - 88 98 90
Large MVS 123 108 107 191
15. Table below presents the expected batch-wise coverage of habitations.
Table 9: RWSSP-LIS Batch-wise Coverage Habitations/Schemes
Batch Years SVS Schemes Small MVS Schemes Large MVS Schemes Total
State From To
No of
Sche
mes
Habitatio
ns
Coverage
No of
Schem
es
Habitatio
ns
Coverage
No of
Schem
es
Habitatio
ns
Coverage
No of
Schem
es
Habitatio
ns
Coverage
Batch-1 Feb-14 March -
17
Assam
0 0 0 0 3 1956 3 1956
Bihar 152 555 3 56 1 90 156 701
Jharkhand 326 766 6 94 3 122 335 982
UP 219 1300 13 176 0 0 232 1476
Batch-2 Feb-16 March -
19
Assam
0 0 0 0 4 3081 4 3081
Bihar 108 515 6 470 3 400 117 1385
Jharkhand 270 742 21 494 3 65 294 1301
UP 300 1800 19 450 2 180 321 2430
Batch-3 Feb-17 March -
20
Assam
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Bihar 56 450 1 60 0 0 57 510
Jharkhand 83 314 36 626 3 81 122 1021
UP 361 2313 10 250 0 0 371 2563
Total 1875 8755 115 2676 22 5975 2012 17406
* Estimates for new and rehabilitated schemes. The Batches could overlap, following the scheme cycle. These are tentative dates for overlapping
Batches.
30
Annex 3: Implementation Arrangements
INDIA: Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project for Low Income States
I. Project Implementation Arrangements
1. Following are the key implementation arrangements at the national, state, district and
village levels.
A. National Level
Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation (MoDWS). RWSSP-LIS will be implemented
through a special window of assistance under the on-going NRDWP. A Steering Committee will
be established at MoDWS under the Chairmanship of the Secretary, MoDWS. The Steering
Committee will provide guidance on sector policies and will be responsible for overall
monitoring of the project. The Steering Committee will comprise the Principal Secretaries of the
four States and the Joint Secretary MoDWS (Sanitation) as Members, and the Joint Secretary
MoDWS (Water) as Member-Secretary. It is proposed that the Steering Committee meet at least
once every quarter to review progress of project implementation.
National Project Management Unit (NPMU) and Technical Advisory Group (TAG). NPMU
will be established in MoDWS for implementing the project. NPMU will be staffed with experts
in technical, social, environmental, financial, procurement, etc., for policy guidance to the states.
NPMU will be supported by a Professional Support Agency. In addition, a Technical Advisory
Group (TAG) will be constituted, with primary responsibility for independently reviewing the
design and implementation of the project, guiding participating states on project activities, and
developing capacity building and institutional strengthening programs.
B. State Level
State Water and Sanitation Mission (SWSM). SWSM, under the RWSS Minister, is currently
responsible for overall policy guidance to the RWSS Sector. The Executive Committee of
SWSM, headed by the RWSS Secretary, assists SWSM in all its responsibilities, including
planning and policy formulation, capacity building, fund flow, approval of the annual plan and
budget allocation, and monitoring and evaluation of Sector and District Programs. SWSMs have
been established in the four states, but need capacity enhancements. The existing WSSO will be
strengthened as a facilitating agency to bridge the gap between State agencies and PRIs at the
district, block and GP levels, mainly for ‘software’ activities, including HRD and IEC activities,
monitoring and evaluation, and impact evaluation and impact assessment studies. The State
Departments such as PHED/ DWSD or Jal Nigam and RDD/PRD (in UP) will work primarily as
the ‘facilitator’ for all aspects of the District Program, including technical support for small
SVSs and small SLWM activities, along with capacity building and technical backstopping.
Technical Departments will continue to plan and implement large MVSs and large SLWM
schemes, with involvement of participating GPs for intra-village works and operations. The
project will support various institutions, including Vishwa in Jharkhand and Pranjal in Bihar, for
training and research activities in the RWSS sector.
31
State Project Management Units (SPMU). The Project will substantially strengthen SWSM and
WSSO through the establishment of a State PMU, with sector specialists for policy and
institutional aspects, social and community development, communication, capacity building,
financial management, procurement, environmental sanitation, technical, and M&E. SPMU will
be responsible for assisting SWSM and WSSO in monitoring and approval functions, as well as
guiding implementing agencies in all aspects of project implementation.
C. District Level
District Water and Sanitation Mission (DWSM). States have established DWSMs, headed by
the ZP Chairperson, as per the guidelines of the GoI NRDWP. However, many of these are not
fully functional and do not have adequate capacity. The proposed Project will strengthen
DWSM, so that these can be responsible for the district RWSS program, including approval of
schemes, fund flow, capacity building, IEC activities and M&E. DWSM will receive policy
guidance from SWSM and will be assisted by the District Water and Sanitation Committee
(DWSC).
District Water and Sanitation Committee (DWSC). DWSC, headed17
by the District Collector
(DC) / Chief Development Officer (CDO) / Deputy Development Commissioner (DDC), will be
the executive arm of DWSM for implementing RWSS policies and program at the district level.
District Technical Divisions of the State Engineering Departments. The District Technical
Divisions of PHED / DWS / UPJN will be responsible for designing and implementing MVS in
partnership with the participating MVS-WSC. All design, supervision or operational activities
will be undertaken through an agreement between the Technical Division, DWSC and the MVS-
WSC. The MVS-WSC will sign off on all activities related to intra-village activities in MVSs.
Multi Village Water Supply & Sanitation Committee (MVS-WSC). MVS-WSC at the district
level will be a representative committee of the group of GPs for an MVS. This will be a sub-
committee of the ZP and will work closely with the Technical Divisions of RWSSD Division in
planning, designing and implementing the MVS. MVS-WSC will endorse and sign off on
scheme design and on implementation stage payments.
District Project Management Units (DPMU). DPMUs will support district level DWSMs and
DWSCs. Each DPMU will have professional and technical staff, comprising technical staff (for
water and sanitation) and sector professionals for community mobilization, IEC, M&E, capacity
building, procurement, and financial management activities. These professionals will support the
design and implementation of the district program and policies, including communications and
capacity building, monitoring and evaluation projects, technical and social audits. These units
will coordinate with various departments at the district level.
D. Village Level
Gram Panchayat (GP). The GP is the key institution at the village level for all RWSS activities,
with the following responsibilities:
Providing guidance to GP-WSCs on village-wide RWSS activities.
17 States have different arrangements for the DWSC.
32
Passing resolutions at the Gram Sabha, as per scheme cycle.
Tariff fixation at the GP level, within the overall guidelines given by SWSM.
Gram Panchayat Water and Sanitation Committee (GP-WSC). GP-WSC, as GP sub-
committees, will be responsible for the design and implementation of the smaller water supply
schemes (single habitation and single GP with multiple habitations), GP level SLWM activities,
and the intra-village component of MVS. In particular, the GP-WSC will be responsible for
scheme planning, design, procurement, construction, O&M, tariff collection / community
contributions (capital and O&M), and accounts management. It will be responsible for all
IEC/BCC activities for water and sanitation programs. It will also be responsible for the
preparation of the comprehensive water security plan and the sanitation plan, with the help of the
SO and the State Technical Agency.
Support Organization. The GP / GP-WSC will work with SO / NGO for community
mobilization and IEC/BCC activities at the village level. The SO will provide technical expertise
in design, implementation and O&M of SHS/ SGS/ intra village MVS and SLWM activities, as
required. Block Resource Centers (BRC) will provide back-stopping support to the villages after
the phasing out of SOs. The Project will promote the convergence of water supply and sanitation
schemes in all States. A strong and dedicated DPMU, along with SOs at the village level, will
ensure that the intended demand-responsive, community-driven approaches are followed as per
the scheme cycle. Bihar and Jharkhand will appoint district level Project Management
Consultants (PMCs) to support and strengthen the district team.
2. The agreed National and State level institutional and implementation arrangements are
shown in Figure 2.
33
Figure 2: National, State, District, and Village Level Institutional and Implementation Arrangements
State SWSM
Headed by Dev. Commissioner/ Chief Secy/ Additional Chief Secy
(Member Secy: Secy / PS, RD/ PHED)
DWSD/ PHED/UPJN Planning, Design, Implementation of
MVS; Technical sanctions
SWSM Framing Sector policy guidelines,
Issuing GOs and directions
Overall Sector Monitoring
Sanctioning annual plans
SPMU*- WSSO*
Assistance in implementation and application of reform principles
Overseeing technical, financial and social audits
M&E, Capacity Building, Training, other Support Activities
DWSM/DWSC Implementation of district program,
Selection of SOs/DPMC
Admin. approval of all small schemes (Water/ Sanitation)
Capacity building and IEC with support from WSSO
Focus on District-wide approach
GP: Gram Sabha resolutions and approval of schemes, Tariff policies; GP-WSC: Design & Implementation of SHS/ SGS; O&M of SHS/ SGS and intra-village MVS; Tariff design and collection
IEC on sanitation/ hygiene
SO: Community Mobilization; IEC; BCC;
Support design and implementation of
SHS/SGS/intra village MVS; SLWM: Tech
Support at GP Level
PHED/DWSD/ UPJN Engineers
Support, Design, Implementation & Monitoring of MVS Schemes
Tech support to SHS/SGS/Env. sanitation
DPMU**Specialists
SO#
DWSD/PHED/Jal Nigam
DWSM Headed by ZP Chairperson
EE
G P
AE/JE
State Level
District Level
Village Level
DWSC Headed by DC/CDO/ ZP President
GP-WSC
Additional CE/ SE
Chief Engineer
EE is a member/ member Secy of DWSC
SPMU*- WSSO* Project Director
Specialists
** DPMU will be assisted by DPMC in
Jharkhand and Bihar # SO will be engaged by DWSC (part of DPMC, wherever DPMCs are deployed)
AEE
MoDWS
Steering Committee Headed by Secy, MoDWS
NPMU#
Project Director, Specialists
TAG Specialists
National Level
MoDWS Policy guidance, Overall Sector
Monitoring, Project roll-out, Capacity Building
NPMU* NPMU- Oversight and monitoring
TAG - Review of designs and implementation
34
Scheme Cycle for Integrated Water Supply and Sanitation Program
3. Implementation of the water supply and sanitation activities will be through an integrated
scheme cycle, covering activities at the GP / village levels. There will be two types of scheme
cycles, based on implementation responsibilities: (i) small water supply scheme (Single
Habitation (SHS)/Single GP-Multi Habitation (SGS)) integrated with sanitation and
environmental sanitation; and (ii) larger water supply schemes (MVS) integrated with sanitation
and environmental sanitation. A summary of the scheme cycle is presented below.
Table 10: Scheme Cycle for Integrated Water Supply and Sanitation Program
Summary
Key Activity18
SHS/ SGS and HH
Sanitation/Env
Sanitation
(Months)
MVS and HH
Sanitation / Env
Sanitation
(Months)
Pre-planning Phase 2-3 2-3
Mobilization of GP and Communities and Formation of GP Water and Sanitation
Committee (GP-WSC) 1 1
Formation of Multi Village Water and Sanitation Committee (MVS-WSC) NA 2
Gram Sabha Resolution “Agree To Do”, to take up RWSS schemes as per
guidelines and principles 2-3 2-3
Tripartite agreement for SVS and MVS signed between DWSC, Technical Dept./
Technical Agency and participating GPs NA 2
Names of Project GPs (Batch-wise) to be informed to MoDWS (Sanitation) for
priority allocation of NBA funds - -
Planning Phase 3-4 4-6
Baseline for water supply and sanitation – status and requirements 2 3
IEC/ BCC for water, hygiene, sanitation and environmental sanitation by SO and
GP-WSC - continues throughout planning and implementation phases periods 3-4 3-4
Preparation of Water Security Plan for the GP 2 3
Preparation of SHS/SGS preliminary designs by GP-WSC, with support from SO 3 NA
Preparation of MVS preliminary designs by Technical Agency NA 4
Preparation of a comprehensive sanitation plan (including environmental
sanitation) for the GP/ habitation. 3 3
Gram Sabha Resolution for scheme technology and estimates (for SHS/SGS) 1 1
Gram Sabha Resolution for Sanitation activities 1 1
Submission of SHS/SGS/SLWM proposals by GP to DWSC for administrative
approval 1 NA
Submission of MVS proposals by Technical Dept.to DWSC for approval and for
administrative approval as per Delegation of Powers NA 1
Preparation of detailed Technical and Cost proposals of SHS/SGS by GP-WSC
with assistance from SO and Technical Dept., and submission for Technical
Sanction
2 NA
Preparation of Detailed Project Report (DPR) by Technical Dept. for MVS NA 4
18 The detailed Scheme Cycle is presented in the Project Implementation Plan.
35
Key Activity18
SHS/ SGS and HH
Sanitation/Env
Sanitation
(Months)
MVS and HH
Sanitation / Env
Sanitation
(Months)
Preparation of Community Water and Sanitation Action Plans for water and
sanitation by GP-WSC, with assistance from SO 1 1
Gram Sabha resolution on accepting Community Water and Sanitation Action
Plan 1 1
Collection of initial community contribution by GP-WSC 2-3 2-3
Implementation Phase 6-10 18-24
Selection of construction contractor(s) by GP/GP-WSC for SHS/SGS and SLWM
Schemes, assisted by SO and Technical Department, 2
2
(Env San only)
Selection of MVS Contractor by Technical Dept. as per procurement process NA 2
Construction of HH toilets (IHHL) using NBA funds with checks on quality of
construction by Household and GP-WSC/ SO
3 3
IEC/BCC activities continue, coordinated by SO on construction
quality/monitoring, use/maintenance of toilets, hygiene promotion, solid waste
management and sanitation training
6-10 18-24
Quality of construction independent checks for MVS and SLWM 1 1
Preparation of Implementation Phase Completion Reports for SHS/SGS/SLWM
by GP-WSC with assistance from SO (and Technical Dept. if required)
1 NA
Preparation of Implementation Phase Completion Reports for MVS by Technical
Dept. N1A 2
Technical and Social Audits to check water and sanitation schemes; toilets are
used and maintained; villages are clean with no visible solid waste
2
4
ODF confirmed by SO/GP-WSC, with spot checks by external groups 1 1
O&M Phase
Continuous IEC/BCC activities with monitoring at household and community
level 6 18-14
Sanitation cross-checks by GP-WSC: households use and maintain toilets;
villages are clean: no visible solid waste thrown around. Checks confirmed by
external group
1 1
GP-WSC takes over O&M of schemes for SHS/SGS/intra-GP/SLWM 2 2 (SLWM only)
Technical Dept. takes over O&M from Contractor for inter-village works of MVS 2 4
Collection of user charges by GP-WSC 2 4
Exit of SOs from the GP 1 1
Continuous back-stopping by State Technical Department / Professional Agency - -
II. Financial Management
4. The FM risk is rated as Substantial based on assessment of the FM performance of the
ongoing NRDWP and the agreed mitigation measures. The key weaknesses observed are stated
in Section VI C of the main text of the PAD. The agreed financial management arrangements
summarized below are adequate to meet the Bank’s fiduciary requirements.
5. Budget and Release of Funds. GoI contribution (including the share to be financed by
the World Bank) will be budgeted in the Demands for Grants of the Ministry of Drinking Water
and Sanitation (MoDWS), as a separate budget line under the NRDWP. The budget for the State
contribution will be provided in the Demands for Grants of the Public Health Engineering
36
Department of the respective States (Drinking Water Supply Department in the case of
Jharkhand) as part of the States’ overall budget for NRDWP. The Project budget for each
financial year will be derived from the Annual Work Plan (AWP) of NMPU, SPMUs, DPMUs19
,
and GP-WSCs / MVS-WSCs in the four participating States. The annual planning process will
follow a ‘bottom-up’ approach, starting from GP-WSCs/MVS-WSCs, consolidated at each
DWSC, further consolidated at each SPMU, and finally consolidated at the NPMU. Allocation of
funds for Batch II and III schemes will be based on the performance scorecard.
6. The fund flow design is shown in the following diagram. The details are given in the FM
Manual.
Figure 3: Fund Flow Diagram
7. The fund flow arrangements in the Project will do away with the unnecessary parking of
funds with GP-WSCs/MVS-WSCs, and allow efficient cash management by the SPMU and
DPMU. It will address the issue of having a large float of idle funds across project bank
accounts, with no effective system to monitor these funds. This fund flow mechanism will
simplify the book-keeping requirements at the level of the GP-WSCs/ MVS-WSCs. Internal
19 DPMU budget in case of Uttar Pradesh will also include the budget of UP Jal Nigam.
World Bank
MoDWS
GOI
Flow of Funds
DWSCs-
DPMUs
SPMU,
Assam SPMU,
UP
SMPU,
Bihar SPMU,
Jharkhand
DWSCs-
DPMUs
DWSCs-
DPMUs
DWSCs-
DPMUs
GoUP GOA GOJ GOB
Allocation of funds by SPMU to UP Jal
Nigam / GP-WSCs/MVWSCs
GP-WSCs/
MVSWSCs
GP-WSCs/
MVSWSCs GP-WSCs
/MVSWSCs GP-WSCs/
MVSWSCs
UPJN
SWSM,
UP SWSM,
Assam SWSM,
Bihar
SWSM,
Jharkhand
UPJN
SSM
DSCs
37
controls will be strengthened since the DPMU will have online access to the bank statements of
all participating GP-WSCs/ MVS-WSCs in the State.
8. Financial Reporting. Each SPMU will submit consolidated quarterly Interim Unaudited
Financial Reports (IUFRs) comprising financial reports of all DPMUs and GP-WSCs/MVS-
WSCs along with its own to NPMU20
. NPMU will consolidate IUFRs received from the four
States along with its own, and submit a quarterly consolidated IUFR to the World Bank within
45 days from the end of each quarter.
9. Internal Control Framework. The internal control framework will consist of: (i)
Financing Agreements; (ii) Project Implementation Plan; (iii) Procurement and Financial
Management Manuals; (iv) delegation of administrative and financial powers mandated for the
Project, both at the Centre and the State;, and (v) relevant MoDWS/State departmental
circulars/GO/ Rules. The Annual Action Plan of the Project, approved by the competent
authority, will form the basis of implementation. Under the Infrastructure Component, technical
clearance will be given by SLSSC. The delegation of power for administrative and technical
sanction of all schemes is well laid out in each State. Additional key controls built into the
project design are:
Project M&E System, which includes Beneficiary Assessments at least once a year, and
independent construction quality supervision.
Approval of Batch II and III schemes on the basis of a performance scorecard for each
State, validated by TAG, and sample cross-checked by independent reviewers.
Annual Financial Audit by Chartered Accountant Firms empanelled with C&AG for
Major Audits.
Biannual Internal Audit.
Social Audit.
10. External and Internal Audits. NPMU will be responsible for submitting individual
audited project financial statements and audit reports of NPMU and SPMUs to the Bank for each
financial year. Audited statements and reports will be submitted within 9 months from the end of
the financial year. State level audit coverage will be extended to all spending units up to the level
of GP-WSCs/MVS-WSCs. The Annual External audit will be conducted by private firm/s of
chartered accountants, empanelled with the Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG) for Major
Audits for Implementing Agencies in States. Audits for Central Ministries will be done by the
C&AG. Terms of Reference and selection criteria will be agreed with the Bank. The Project will
be subject to a biannual internal audit by chartered accountant firms under Terms of Reference
agreed with the Bank. The Internal auditors will assess the effectiveness of internal controls and
provide independent assurance on the effective implementation of these controls. Internal Audit
will also cover procurement reviews. Findings of social audits, particularly asset verification by
communities, will be linked to financial audits.
11. Financial Management Manual. Detailed financial management processes, including
budgeting, funds flow, internal control framework, accounting, financial reporting and audit
arrangements are described in the Financial Management Manual.
20
In case of UP it will also comprise financial reports of SSM and DSCs.
38
12. Training and Capacity Building. The Project will provide training to finance staff at the
state, district and GP levels as required. On-going training will be conducted to maintain
appropriate books and records, and undertake other FM functions as envisaged in the Project
Implementation Plan. Appropriate staffing, commensurate with the size and nature of the Project,
has been agreed for NPMU, SPMU and DPMUs. Support Organizations (SOs) will help in
building the capacity of GP-WSCs/MVS-WSCs to maintain books and records.
13. Under the Capacity Building component, the Central Plan Scheme Monitoring System21
(CPSMS) will be rolled-out in all the four Project States.
14. Retroactive Financing. Expenditures incurred with the Bank’s concurrence on or after
March 31, 2013 and according to the Bank’s procurement guidelines will be eligible for
retroactive financing up to an overall ceiling of SDR 8,000,000.
III. Disbursements
15. The Bank will disburse funds to the designated account of the Borrower on the basis of
eligible project expenditures pre-financed by government budgets and reported by consolidated
quarterly IUFRs submitted by NPMU. The applicable disbursement method will be
Reimbursement. Funds will be disbursed by the Bank as per Table below.
Table 11: Project Disbursement Categories
Sl.
No Category
Amount of the
Credit Allocated
(expressed in
million SDR)
Amount of the
Credit Allocated
(expressed in
Million USD)
Percentage of Gross
Reported Expenditures to
be Financed
(Inclusive of Taxes)
1.
Goods, works, consultants’
services, training and
Operating Costs under Parts
A, B, and C of the Project
325.1 500 50%
2.
Goods, works, consultants’
services, training and
Operating Costs under Part
D of the Project
0 0 100%
Total Amount
325.1 500
IV. Procurement
16. The broad procurement categories expected in the Project are:
Component A: Capacity Building and Sector Development. Procurement of consultancy
services for capacity building of RWSS Sector institutions and PRIs of participating states.
Component B: Infrastructure Development. Procurement of goods and works for improving
water supply and environmental sanitation (SLWM) coverage in the project habitations,
21 The Planning Commission and the CGA (CPSMS Cell) piloted implementation of the Central Plan Scheme Monitoring System
(CPSMS) over the last two years. CPSMS aims at establishing an on-line financial management information system and a
suitable decision support system for approximately 1000 Plan Schemes of GoI. CPSMS has been fully implemented in all civil
ministries of GoI and transaction level details of all fund releases from GoI is available entity-wise with geographical tagging.
CPSMS has also been rolled out, on a pilot basis, in the states of Bihar, Punjab, Madhya Pradesh and Mizoram under
MGNREGS, NRHM, SSA and PMGSY and other states have also joined in, in the roll out.
39
including construction of new infrastructure or rehabilitation and augmentation of existing
schemes with safe disposal of wastewater.
Component C: Project Management Support. Procurement of goods and services to support
implementing agencies established under the project at the national and state levels.
Component D: Contingency Emergency Response. This component will be guided by the OP
10.00, Paragraph 11: Projects in Situations of Urgent Need of Assistance or Capacity Constraint.
Therefore, Paragraph 20 of OP 11.00 on use of simplified procurement procedures will be
applicable.
17. All goods, works and consultancy services required for the Project will be procured in
accordance with the World Bank’s ‘Guidelines: Procurement of Goods, Works, and Non-
Consultancy Services under IBRD Loans and IDA credits & Grants by World Bank Borrowers,’
dated January 2011 (Procurement Guidelines), and ‘Guidelines: Selection and Employment of
Consultants under IBRD Loans and IDA credits & Grants by World Bank Borrowers,’ dated
January 2011 (Consultant Guidelines). A Procurement Manual for the Project has been
developed by the Government of India, in consultation with the World Bank. Model Bidding
Documents will be developed under the Project and agreed with the Government.
A dedicated procurement management team will be established at the National level, comprised
of qualified technical staff with overall responsibility for developing, implementing and
managing project procurement functions. Similar teams, comprising of qualified procurement
professionals, will be set up in the State and District level Project Management Units.
Procurement staff of all implementing agencies will receive training on the World Bank
Guidelines under Component A of the Project. State and District level Project Management Units
will provide continuous handholding support to community institutions to carry out procurement
related activities.
18. A common procurement framework has been designed for the Project consisting of: (i)
community based procurement (CBP) for small single village schemes, where user groups will
implement through either community Force Account/ or Shopping and Local Competitive
Bidding; (ii) conventional single responsibility contracts issued by implementing agencies
through NCB & ICB procedures; and (iii) PPP methods, e.g., DBOT .
19. Procurement for the construction of piped water supply schemes will likely consist of
contracts on a turnkey basis. Small schemes (.e.g, SHS & SGS) will be implemented by
community based institutions.
20. Procurement at the State and District levels will follow NCB & ICB procedures for
procurement of goods and works. The project will use the e-GP system developed by NIC, with
appropriate customization in the participating states. The use of the e-GP system is compulsory
for all implementing agencies for procurement under NCB procedure. However, the use of the e-
GP system is optional for other procurement methods. Through the e-GP system, the current two
envelope system will be referred to as bid in two parts: the first part will determine the eligibility
and qualification of bidders; and in the second part technical and financial bids from qualified
bidders will be opened.
40
21. Public Private Partnerships (PPPs). The project will implement DBOT models through
PPPs in the participating states on a pilot basis. Bidding documents for PPPs will be prepared
and agreed with the Bank.
22. Procurement of Goods & Works. Table below indicates the methods of procurement
for goods & works with value thresholds applicable and prior/ post review arrangements.
Table 12: Procurement Thresholds: Goods, Works, and Non-Consulting Services
Expenditure
Category
Value Threshold per
Contract
Procurement Method Review Arrangement
Goods and
Non-
Consulting
Services
Contracts
Each greater than
US$ 3,000,000 or
equivalent
International Competitive
Bidding (ICB)
All contracts are subject to prior review by
the Bank.
Each less than US$
3,000,000 equivalent
and greater than US$
100,000 or equivalent
National Competitive
Bidding (NCB)
First contract irrespective of the value from
each state shall be prior reviewed by the
Bank.
All contracts valued above US$ 1,000,000
are subject to prior review by the Bank.
All other contracts are subject to post
review by the Bank.
Each less than US$
100,000 equivalent
Shopping / Limited
Tendering
All contracts are subject to post review by
the Bank.
All values Direct Contracting All contracts are subjected to prior review
by the Bank.
All values Framework Agreements All contracts are subject to prior review by
the Bank
Works
Contracts
Each greater than
US$ 40,000,000 or
equivalent
International Competitive
Bidding (ICB)
All contracts are subjected to prior reviewed
by the Bank.
Each less than US$
40,000,000 equivalent
and greater than US$
100,000 or equivalent
National Competitive
Bidding (NCB)
First contract irrespective of the value from
each state shall be prior reviewed by the
Bank.
All contracts valued above US$ 10,000,000
are subject to prior review by the Bank.
All other contracts are subject to post
review by the Bank.
Each less than US$
100,000 equivalent
Shopping/ Limited
Tendering
All contracts are subject to post review by
the Bank
All values Direct Contracting All contracts are subject to prior review by
the Bank
23. Community Based Procurement. Table below provides the procurement thresholds for
Single Village Schemes (SVS)/Single Habitation Schemes (SHS) implemented by community
institutions based on procurement under the March 2012 Bank Guidelines for Procurement
Management for CDD projects. Details of the process and procedures to be followed are detailed
in the Procurement Manual.
41
Table 13: Procurement Thresholds: Goods and Works for CDD Projects
Expenditure
Category
Value Threshold per
Contract Procurement Method Review Arrangement
Goods and Non-
Consulting
Services
Contracts
Each less than US$
100,000 equivalent
and greater than US$
20,000 or equivalent
Local Competitive Bidding First contract irrespective of the value in the
each state shall be prior reviewed by the
Bank.
All other contracts are subject to post review
by the Bank.
Each below US$
20,000 or equivalent
Shopping/ Force Account All contracts are subject to post review by
the Bank.
Works
Contracts
Each less than US$
150,000 or equivalent
and greater than US$
50,000 or equivalent
Local Competitive Bidding First contract irrespective of the value in the
each state shall be prior reviewed by the
Bank.
All other contracts are subject to post review
by the Bank.
Each below US$
50,000 or equivalent
Shopping/ Force Account All contracts are subject to post review by
the Bank.
24. Selection of Consultants. Consultants will be selected on the basis of the following
methods: Quality and Cost Based Selection (QCBS); Quality Based Selection (QBS); Selection
based on Consultants’ Qualification (CQ); Fixed Budget Selection (FBS); Least Cost Selection
(LCS); Single Source Selection (SSS); and Selection of Individual Consultants. For service
contracts, Bank’s Standard Bidding Documents will be used. Table below provides the
thresholds for procurement of consultancy services.
Table 14: Procurement Thresholds: Consultancy Services
Expenditure
Category
Value Threshold
per Contract
Procurement Method Review Arrangement
Consultancy
Contracts
Each greater than
US$ 300,000 or
equivalent
Quality and Cost Based Selection
(QCBS)
REOI to be published in UNDB
online
First contract in the each state shall be prior
reviewed by the Bank.
All other contracts valued above US$
500,000 are subject to prior review by the
Bank.
All other contracts are subject to post review
by the Bank.
Each less than
US$ 300,000 or
equivalent and
greater than US$
100,000 or
equivalent
Quality and Cost Based Selection
(QCBS)/ Quality Based
Selection(QBS)/ Least Cost
Selection (LCS)/ Fixed Budget
Selection (FBS)
First contract in the each state shall be prior
reviewed by the Bank.
All other contracts are subject to post review
by the Bank.
Each below US$
100,000 or
equivalent
Selection Based on Consultant’s
Qualification (CQ)/ Least Cost
Selection (LCS)/ Fixed Budget
Selection (FBS)
All contracts are subject to post review by the
Bank.
Each below US$
50,000 or
equivalent
Individual Consultants through
comparison of qualifications of at
least three individuals
All ToRs will be subject to prior review by
the Bank.
All other contracts valued above US$ 50,000
are subject to prior review by the Bank.
All values Single Source Selection (SSS) All contracts for SSS are subject to prior
review by the Bank.
25. Procurement Plan. The procurement plan for the first 18 months of the project has been
prepared by the Borrower and agreed with the Bank. For each contract to be financed by the
Bank, the procurement methods or the consultancy selection methods, estimated costs, prior
review requirements and the time frame have been indicated in the Procurement Plan. The
42
Procurement Plan will be updated annually or as required to reflect the project implementation
needs and improvements in institutional capacity.
26. Selection of NGOs and SOs. Bank Procurement Guidelines for Selection of Consultants
will be followed for the selection of Non-Governmental Organizations and Support
Organization.
Procurement Risks and Mitigation Measures
27. A procurement capacity risk assessment was carried out for implementing entities in the
four participating states and at the national level. The assessment shows that the e-procurement
system is already in use in Assam, Bihar, Jharkhand and Uttar Pradesh. PWD Codes are been
followed for works contracting across the states and there is adequate knowledge and expertise in
the lead engineering departments.
28. The assessment concluded that there is no uniform or predictable practice for
procurement of goods and services. Consultancy services were seldom used, except for a single
contract processed in Bihar under QCBS.
29. Poor bidder participation, often resulting in three to four bids, indicates a limited
catchment of bidders in the market and is recognized as a major weakness. Inadequate capacity,
transparency and grievance management in procurement were observed in all four states.
Weaknesses in the control environment were evident, especially in the post award contract
management stages, including processing of payments.
30. The assessment rates the procurement risk as Substantial. Table below summarizes
procurement risks and mitigation measures.
Table 15: Procurement Risks and Mitigation Measures
Procurement Risk Mitigation Measures
Fiduciary Risk relating to main principles of
Bank Procurement Guidelines
Procurement will be in accordance with the Procurement Manual
drafted in line with Bank Procurement Guidelines.
A Model Bidding Document will be prepared for works contracts.
Experienced procurement professionals/staff will be hired at the
national, state and district level PMUs to comply with the agreed
procurement guidelines & procedures.
Procurement/ technical staff dealing with procurement will undergo
training programs conducted by the Bank/ Implementing agencies.
The proposed procurement review arrangements will ensure that the
fiduciary requirements of the Project are met.
Procurement Accountability Risk Each state will retain relevant records of procurement documentation
of each contract as required in the Procurement Manual.
Procurement Transparency The Procurement Manual provides guidelines for Disclosure
Management of procurement information and Compliance Mechanism
System.
e-GP system will have public access to procurement information.
V. Environment and Social Management Framework
31. Social and environmental assessments were conducted by the States with the objective of
identifying social and environmental issues and to design appropriate management measures for
enhancing positive impacts and mitigating potential negative impacts. These assessments
43
included collection and collation of secondary data, primary surveys and field studies in a sample
of villages representing all six agro-climatic zones, analysis of the policy and legal framework,
and wide stakeholder consultations.
32. The program is not expected to have significant adverse environmental and social
impacts and has been classified as a Category B project. However, the program does have the
potential to offer significant opportunities to further environmental and social development
objectives. Safeguards Management Plans have been prepared following Social and
Environmental Assessments by independent consultants. Currently, the safeguards assessments
and management plans have not been planned for component “D” of the project. These will be
updated and applied, as and when the component “D” is made effective in the project.
33. Key Stakeholders and Consultations. Key program stakeholders were identified and
consultations were held with them. Grassroots level stakeholders include: (i) beneficiary
households (including women, poor, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and the hamlets); (ii)
GPs (men and women elected representatives); (iii) Junior Engineers of District Engineering
Agencies; and (iv) other community based organizations. Block/district level stakeholders
include the respective Panchayat Raj Institutions; other concerned line departments such as
health, rural department, power, irrigation; district/block administration; government water and
sanitation departments/ agencies; and non-governmental organizations, contractors/suppliers and
consultants. Stakeholders at higher levels include: Departments of Finance, Drinking Water &
Sanitation, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj, Science and Technology, Irrigation, Health,
political leaders, NGOs, consultants and other international agencies. Consultations were held
throughout project preparation by State and Central Governments as well as by the Bank.
34. Social and Environmental Assessments. The Social Assessment comprised: (i)
Beneficiary Assessment (BA); (ii) Stakeholder Analysis (SA); (iii) Institutional Analysis; (iv)
Impacts Assessments; and (v) Risk Analysis. The BA enabled building socio-economic profiles
at the national, district, sub-district and village levels, project beneficiaries’ assessment on the
current status of research/extension/marketing, and their linkages with governance/management
mechanisms. The SA resulted in identifying stakeholders at different levels and mapping key
expectations, issues and concerns of each stakeholder group and the sub-group. Institutional
analysis led to documenting and analyzing existing institutional arrangements, and formulating
inputs into the design of the decentralized extension delivery system in
consultation/collaboration with the stakeholders. This was followed by impact assessments and
risk analysis. The results helped in designing the delivery system and addressing safeguards, thus
ensuring positive and sustainable impacts; these are captured in the Social Management
Framework (SMF).
35. The Environmental Assessment (EA) study, which comprised an assessment of the
current status of rural water supply and sanitation in the state, status of water resources
availability for sourcing of drinking water in terms of quantity and quality, identification of
baseline environmental issues pertaining to rural water supply and sanitation, institutional and
policy assessment, expected environmental impacts of the proposed project interventions and
proposed mitigation measures, development of the Environmental Management Framework
(EMF), and institutional arrangements for implementation of the EMF. Findings of the EA study
indicate that while the proposed project interventions are expected to result in overall
44
environmental and public health improvements in the states, potential adverse impacts could
occur if the schemes are not properly designed, sited, implemented, and maintained.
36. Social Development Issues. Project interventions promise a significant potential for
positive health and environmental as well as social benefits through the supply of 'safe' drinking
water and the creation of sanitary conditions in villages. However, given the diverse conditions –
physical as well as socio-economic and cultural – it will be a challenge to translate the potential
into reality. Success of the project depends upon the project’s efforts in mobilizing local
communities to participate in the development of water supply and sanitation facilities and
enabling them to shoulder responsibility for operation and maintenance, in order to derive
benefits on a sustained basis.
37. Given this setting, the project identified the following significant social issues: (i)
participation; (ii) ensuring inclusion and enhancing equity; (ii) decentralizing service delivery,
underpinned by the principle of subsidiarity; (iii) customer base and demand generation –
marketing the program and driving home the health and hygiene benefits; and (iv) human and
institutional development. Other important issues are enabling participation of women; GP
strengthening; change management initiatives for changing the role of Government from
‘provider’ to a ‘facilitator’; improving accountability and transparency; and information,
education and communication (IEC) campaign along with capacity building programs. The
project will build capacity of the participating communities and local self-governments and
strengthen existing institutions at the grassroots level, in order to enable local communities to
participate in planning and construction of RWSS facilities and subsequently to operate and
maintain the systems.
38. Environmental Issues. The EA studies identify the following as significant
environmental issues: (i) Water Availability, (ii) Water Quality, (iii) Environmental Sanitation,
(iv) Solid and Liquid Waste Management and (v) Schemes in Forest Areas and Natural Habitat.
The screening of schemes will identify scheme specific issues and based on OP 4.01 on
Environmental Assessment, relevant Bank policies will be triggered to develop a mitigation plan
for a particular scheme. Appropriate institutional and implementation arrangements associated
with capacity building and capacity support also require focused attention.
Social Safeguards
39. Land. No land will be acquired involuntarily and hence Operational Policy (OP) 4.12
Involuntary Resettlement is not triggered. The program however does require land and the
mechanisms for securing land are detailed. In respect of OP 4.10 Indigenous Peoples, there are
‘tribals’ in Jharkhand state, hence a Tribal Development Plan (TDP) has been prepared.
40. When plots of lands are to be acquired for project installations, their ownership could
be either public or private. The normal prevailing practice in the state is to obtain such land plots
either through voluntary donation or by outright purchase. Most villages do have sufficient
public/Panchayat lands available for project installations. However, in case land acquisition
becomes inevitable, the local community will secure lands either through voluntary donations or
outright purchase.
45
41. Rules for land acquisition. The project will not resort to any involuntary land acquisition.
All donations and purchases will be voluntary. Voluntary land transactions will meet the
following criteria: (i) the land in question will be free of squatters, encroachers or other claims of
encumbrances; (ii) land will be chosen (by the community) after ensuring that water is available
there; (iii) verification of the voluntary nature of land donation in each case; (iv) land transfers
will be completed and land title will be vested in the community (GP/GP-WSC) through
registered sale deed or MOU; and (v) provision will be made for redressal of grievances (ROG).
DPMU will arrange for an examination of all land transactions by an independent agency before
according approval. Land will not be accepted from land owners whose holding is less than the
minimum economical viable stipulated size (2.5 acres).
Tribal Development (Indigenous Peoples Policy OP/BP 4.10)
42. All four states have sizeable Schedule Tribe population. However, barring Jharkhand,
there are no ‘tribals’ (meeting the Bank definition of Indigenous Peoples) in any of the other
project districts. In Jharkhand, state policies ensure safeguarding tribals’ interests in accordance
with the provisions of the Indian Constitution (i.e., Article 244), by recognizing a significant
geographical area as a distinct tribal territory (called ‘Scheduled Area’) where the constitutional
provision of the Fifth Schedule applies. Jharkhand’s scheduled area is spread across 14 districts
(out of a total of 24 districts). Of the six districts chosen for project coverage, four have
Scheduled Areas. Proposed project interventions are not likely to have any adverse impact on
tribal groups. However, a majority of the tribals are socially and economically weak, prone to
vulnerability, and are often excluded from development initiatives. Hence, to ensure that they
have access to project benefits on par with others and ensure ‘inclusion’ and ‘equity’, specific
targeting is essential. Accordingly in line with Bank OP 4.10, a Tribal Development Plan has
been prepared to ensure that the project reaches the Tribals. Simultaneously, GoI’s policies for
promoting RWSS activities for STs shall also be implemented in the four States.
Environmental Safeguards Management
43. Water Availability. Increasing levels of water contamination due to anthropogenic
activities is slowly becoming an area of concern. Open defecation, lack of means to dispose
animal waste, and garbage are major contaminating factors in all four states. Assam has annual
replenishable groundwater resources of 27.23 BCM, of which 22% is being utilized annually.
Assam does not have any zones classified as over exploited, critical or semi-critical. The
Brahmaputra River has an average water discharge of 19,830 cum/sec at its mouth, a maximum
discharge of 72794 cum/sec. at Guwahati, and a minimum discharge of 1757 cum/sec. Though
surface water is available, risk to intakes and other water supply infrastructure from floods is an
issue. Floods may create water quality issues, e.g., flood waters entering toilets, resulting in
contamination of surface and groundwater aquifers. Decreasing groundwater levels are observed
in some districts.
44. Annual replenishable groundwater resources in Bihar are estimated to be 29.19 BCM,
of which about 39% is being utilized. The state does not have any zones classified as over
e xploited, critical or semi-critical. Surface water resources in Bihar include 69,000 ha of
ponds and tanks, 9,000 ha of oxbow lakes, 7,200 ha of reservoirs, 3,200 km of rivers, and 1
lakh ha of riverine and other flood plains. Due to the general lowering of the groundwater
table, hand pumps run dry during summer months.
46
45. Annual replenishable ground water resources in Jharkhand are estimated to be 5.58
BCM, of which about 20% is being utilized. Jharkhand does not have any zones classified as
over e xploited, critical or semi-critical. Extraction of groundwater is an issue due to the rocky
terrain. Frequent drying of sources is reported.
46. Groundwater levels in Uttar Pradesh show a wide variation from less than 2 mbgl to
more than 30 mbgl. Annual replenishable groundwater resources in UP are 76.35 BCM, of which
about 70% is being utilized. In the 28 proposed project districts of eastern Uttar Pradesh,
utilization of replenishable groundwater resources is about 66%; 7 blocks are declared as over-
exploited, 13 blocks as critical and 44 blocks as semi-critical with respect to groundwater
utilization. The state is estimated to have 161.70 BCM (131.0 m.a.f.) of surface water.
Contamination of sources due to agricultural activities was observed during the EA study.
47. The EMF provides adequate management measures (under the Environmental Codes of
Practice) for compliance during the construction and laying of pipe-distribution networks.
Selection of the source for the water supply will be made after detailed examination of both
surface and groundwater sources in the region. These sources will be tested for water quality
prior to selection for water supply schemes. In order to ensure sustainability, groundwater will be
sourced from deep aquifers after scientific hydrogeological investigations. High Flood Levels
(HFL) of the source and nearby rivers will be taken into consideration during design. Water
requirements of the program are very small, compared to the present draft of replenishable
groundwater and available surface water. When water from deep aquifers is not potable due to
chemical contamination, surface water will be used with appropriate treatment.
48. Management Measures. Environmental management strategy, along with the technical
specifications required for effective implementation, is captured under eight Environmental
Codes of Practice (ECoPs):
1) ECoPs for Identification of Sources of Water Supply.
2) ECoPs for Protecting Surface Water Supply Source and Ensuring Sustainability.
3) ECoPs for Protecting Ground Water Supply Sources and in Ensuring Sustainability.
4) ECoPs for Water Quality Monitoring.
5) ECoPs for selection of Safe Sanitation Technology Options (Including Drainage) at
Individual Household and Community Level.
6) ECoPs for Selection of Location for Community Toilets.
7) ECoPs for Safe Sullage Disposal and Organic Waste Management.
8) ECoPs for Safe Solid Waste Management at Individual Household and Community
Level.
49. Water Quality. A robust Water Quality Monitoring mechanism has introduced through
institutional and capacity building of the existing systems and strengthening water testing
infrastructure. Water quality will be monitored at the time of site selection for tapping water
sources. A protocol for regular water quality testing and control has been developed by all four
states, which will be implemented during the operations phase of the water supply schemes.
50. Solid and Liquid Waste Management. Disposal of solid and liquid waste has been
addressed through Environmental Codes of Practice on Safe Disposal of Sullage and Organic
47
Waste Management and Safe Solid and Liquid Waste Management at Individual, Household and
Community Level. Efficient design of surface sullage drains and adoption of good construction
practices, along with a system of regular maintenance will ensure that stagnant pools of sullage
are eliminated. Placement of water supply pipeline at a safe distance from sullage lines on
different sides of the road would reduce the risk of cross contamination. Oxidation ponds/root-
zone treatment system would be constructed for treating sullage from the village and the treated
sullage can be used for agriculture, horticulture, aquaculture and agro-forestry purposes. Vector
control measures will be adopted for ponds and drains carrying sullage by avoiding stagnation
and spraying with non-hazardous insecticides, in accordance with Bank OP 4.09.
Forest Areas and Related Issues
51. EA studies have identified forest areas and ecologically sensitive areas in the
participating states. The EMF indicates that the project schemes should not be in close proximity
to (which may require a pre-forest or environmental clearance from State Forest Department /
Ministry of Environment and Forest (MoEF), Govt. of India) or inside National wild life
Parks/sanctuaries. If forest land is required, the clearance procedures as per existing laws of the
state and of MoEF will be followed before undertaking construction. The EMF also prescribes
actions to avoid any temporary minor impact related to construction. It includes guidelines on
working in forest areas and avoiding impacts on natural habitats.
52. Since the EMF is based on the Environmental Assessment (EA) conducted for sample
schemes of the four participating states, there is a possibility that some environmental and social
aspects that have not been identified and addressed in the EMF may arise during implementation.
The EMF is therefore envisaged as a living document and will be updated from time to time,
based on experience gained during project implementation.
53. Based on screening criteria described in the EMF, each proposed single and multi-village
water supply scheme will be categorized based on the sensitivity of the level of intervention
required. Category I schemes will have no or negligible environmental and social issues, and
designs can be finalized and tendered immediately, including screening, categorization and
mitigation plan. Category II schemes will require a brief scheme specific EMP to be prepared by
the concerned state implementation unit before works commence. Environmental management
and mitigation activities will be included in the specifications and conditions of the civil works
contract and will be appropriately costed by the contractor.
Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50)
54. OP 7.50 is applicable for the proposed project since rural water supply, drainage and
sanitation activities will be carried out in the watersheds of the Ganga and the Brahmaputra
Rivers, or their tributaries. These rivers and tributaries are considered international waterways
for the purposes of the policy. Project components, in the context of OP 7.50, will not adversely
change the quality or quantity of water, both upstream and downstream, and will not be
adversely affected by the water use of other riparian countries. In addition, proposed project
activities do not conflict with any of the agreements between the riparian countries. The Legal
Department and the Regional Vice President have approved the request for exception from the
riparian notification requirement under Paragraph 7(a) of OP 7.50.
48
Implementation Arrangements
55. Safeguards management will form an integral part of the overall scheme cycle, including
sub-project appraisals and monitoring and implementation. SMPU and DPMUs, under the
supervision of SWSM and DWSM, will be responsible for providing technical support on
safeguards management to GPs and communities.
56. SPMU and DPMU staff will include Environmental and Social Development Specialists
with overall responsibility for ensuring implementation of environmental and social development
aspects. They will, in particular, assist the PMUs in: (i) developing and disseminating alternative
mechanisms to reach and work with the communities on safeguards; (ii) drawing strategies and
implementation action plans for transparency, inclusion and accountability in relation to
safeguards; (iii) designing and adopting change management approaches and capacity building
programs for safeguards; and (iv) designing, rolling out and maintaining a web site reflecting
status and progress in the RWSS sector in the state. At the village level, support organizations
will be deployed for building capacity of the GPs and GP-WSCs, including the awareness and
capacity for environmental and social management. The Specialists will review screening forms,
EMPs, SMF, Lands, Tribal Development and other related documents, and monitor compliance
with the agreed procedures. Plans have been made to build the capacity of staff involved in
safeguards management.
57. In addition to internal environmental monitoring and evaluation, environmental and
social audits will be conducted at regular intervals by experts (typically by staff of the State and
National PMU, with assistance from specialists of the management and engineering consulting
firm).
VI. Monitoring and Evaluation
State Level (State–MIS)
58. An S-MIS for each State will be adapted from
national and international good practices, including the
Uttarakhand Rural Water Supply and Sanitation
Project, integrating MIS, M&E, and Audit Systems. It
will include PRI based monitoring, which facilitates
bottom-up data flow from the village/habitation level
to GP, District, and State levels; the use of web and
mobile technologies for data collection; output and
outcome monitoring, covering both access and usage,
supported by social audits, sustainability assessments,
and the Healthy Home Survey for personal hygiene, domestic hygiene, and environmental
sanitation. The State level MIS will be designed to ensure the addition of future GIS
functionality. Financial data and implementation data will be integrated in one database.
Sector Level (LIS-MIS)
59. S-MIS will be integrated across the participating states into a Sector level MIS for the
participating Low Income States (LIS-MIS). The LIS-MIS will be used for reporting on the
Figure 4 Monitoring and Evaluation Framework
49
detailed Project Results Framework and the Performance Scorecard of the participating States:
(i) Project Results Framework for reporting progress towards achievement of the Project
Development Objective, including implementation activities, outputs and outcomes (presented
below); and (ii) Performance Scorecard to facilitate an implementation performance review on
the basis of the scheme cycle, and to progress from one Batch to another.
60. A performance-based allocation mechanism will encourage implementation of the
decentralization reform agenda and efficient project execution. A Performance Scorecard will be
used to assess the performance of the participating States, against the following major elements
of the Project: (i) RWSS Decentralization Program; (ii) RWSS Infrastructure Program; and (iii)
RWSS O&M Cost Recovery and Sustainable ODF. Indicators and marks for the Scorecard can
be revised at the MTR stage, if required.
61. Funds for Batch I have already been allocated by MoDWS; however, States can move
from Batch I to Batch II only when they have achieved a minimum score22
. In addition, a Mid-
Term Review will be conducted by MoDWS at the end of Year 3, and available funds and
eligible States for Batch III will be reviewed based on the Performance Scorecard. Batch III will
be adjusted to accommodate additional funds for the more progressive States and a reduction in
funds for lagging States, taking into consideration realistic prospects for achievement in the
remaining three years of the project.
Table 16: Performance Scorecard
Performance Scorecard
Indicator Unit
Review at end
of first year of
the Project
Review at end of Y2 of each Batch Scores*
RWSS Decentralization Program 10
1. Government Orders
issued:
(a) RWSS Decentralization
Program and District-wide
approach in all Project
Districts;
(b) Policy on O&M Cost
Recovery
Yes/No
Yes/No
Yes if (a) and
(b) are
achieved,
otherwise No
Follow-up activities:
MIS established for decentralized
program (habitation upwards data
collection), with data entry
completed for previous Batch
10% or more schemes have
carried out: (a) independent
supervision quality checks; and
(b) community social audits.
2
2
2. GP-WSC and MVS-WSC
formed and functional
Number
of WSCs
30% or more
WSCs for the
Batch
70% or more WSCs for the Batch 2
3. Water Security Plans
completed for Project GPs
Number
of GPs
Plans completed for all GPs in Batch 2
4. Sanitation Plans completed
for Project GPs
Number
of GPs
Plans completed for all GPs in Batch 2
RWSS Infrastructure Program 10
5. Number of schemes
commissioned as per
scheme cycle
Number
of
Schemes
At least 30%
of Batch SVS
At least 50% of Batch MVS and at
least 60% of Batch SVS
4
22 The minimum score can be announced during the Project launch ceremony.
50
Performance Scorecard
Indicator Unit
Review at end
of first year of
the Project
Review at end of Y2 of each Batch Scores*
6. Number of GPs saturated
with water and sanitation
facilities (including
SLWM)as per agreed
targets
Number
of GPs
At least 30%
of Batch
target
At least 60% of Batch target 4
7. Agreed Capex contribution
collected from
communities in all Project
GPs which have completed
planning phase
Number
of GP-
WSCs
At least 40%
GP-WSCs of
the Batch have
completed the
planning phase
and collected
capex
contribution.
At least 90% GP-WSCs of the Batch
have completed the planning phase
and collected capex contribution.
2
RWSS O&M Cost Recovery and Sustainable ODF 10
8. O&M cost recovery from
user charges
Number
of
schemes
60% or more schemes in the Batch
are collecting 50% or more O&M
costs (O&M for SVS and intra-
village MVS) through agreed user-
charges.
5
9. Open defecation free GPs Number
of GPs
30% or more of GPs of the Batch
have achieved ODF Status
5
* Scores will also take into consideration the performance against Y 1 of the Project.
National Level
62. NPMU will be responsible for reporting on indicators in the Project Results Framework
to the World Bank every six months. In addition, NPMU will monitor the Performance
Scorecard for efficient flow of funds from MoDWS to the States. NPMU will also have data
quality assurance processes in place, including data verification procedures and audits. There
will be a qualitative review of the Project Results Framework and the Performance Scorecard at
the MTR stage for assessing the efficacy of these tools and the need for any changes. The Project
will support the strengthening of the National Level MIS to include a greater focus on ‘service
delivery’, comprising:
(i) Sector Performance Measurement Framework (PMF): Performance monitoring allows
service providers to self-evaluate, for government to have a strengthened basis for control and
supervision, and for the public to have greater awareness of water and sanitation services. The
process for developing the sector PMF is described by the following steps: (a) identification of a
representative group of key sector stakeholders; (b) conduct of a workshop to explore
international practices for sector-wide performance measurement; (c) producing an initial sector
analysis report to define the current state of the sector, analyzing sector performance trends, and
identifying performance gaps; (d) conduct of a PMF workshop to identify key objectives for
sector performance, and to translate these objectives into a streamlined system for measuring
performance; and (e) institutionalizing the process by ensuring that the NPMU, and thereafter the
proposed National Resource Center, manage the PMF on an ongoing basis. The Annual Sector
Report will be the most important product of the PMF and will provide a sector-wide perspective
beyond individual projects or programs, and will include topical research on key sector issues.
51
(ii) Capacity Building Monitoring and Evaluation. Institutions at all levels of the service
delivery chain (from GoI, to States, Districts, PRIs, and villages and habitations) will be
strengthened to promote the decentralization agenda through the strong capacity building
component. NPMU will support MoDWS in developing monitoring and evaluation capacity, and
sector-wide guidelines and policies to improve the effectiveness of capacity building
interventions.
(iii) Impact Evaluation (IE). A rigorous, independent IE will be designed in the early stages of
project and implemented. The IE will utilize mixed methods and a diverse set of data sources,
including primary data collection through the baseline study and follow-up household surveys,
and selected secondary data sources (census and other types of secondary information). The IE
will aim to determine the causal relationship between project interventions and socio-economic
outcomes.
52
Annex 4: Operational Risk Assessment Framework (ORAF)
INDIA: Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project for Low Income States
1. Stakeholder Risks Rating Moderate
Description
The project supports GoI policies and programs for
RWSS and is strongly supported by government at
national, state, and district levels, as well as PRIs. It
builds on on-going RWSS projects of the Bank and
other donors. There have been consultations with
various stakeholders, including NGOs and local
communities during project preparation and project
design takes into account their views. However,
difficulties may arise during implementation.
Risk Management
Consultations will be continued by project implementation agencies with all
stakeholders throughout project implementation to ensure continued support
for the project. The GoI and Bank will monitor continued stakeholder support
during implementation support missions through meetings with key
stakeholders, especially at the State level and below. The project mid-term
review will provide a formal opportunity to make any changes to the project,
based on stakeholder views.
Resp: GoI and
Bank
Stage:
Implementation
Due Date :
Continuous
Status:
Not yet
due
2. Implementing Agency Risks (including Fiduciary)
2.1 Capacity Rating High
Description
RWSS agencies at the national and state levels have
good technical capacity as they have been managing
RWSS program activities, including funds, for the
last five decades. However, their capacity to reach
PRIs and local communities to ensure effective
service delivery needs to be enhanced. Capacity at
the LIS, especially at the level of the districts and
PRIs, needs strengthening in technical areas and for
implementing Bank procurement and financial
management, as well as safeguards requirements.
Risk Management
The Project will focus heavily on building the capacity of all stakeholders,
particularly the PRIs and the RWSS Sector Agencies. For the PRIs, the focus
would be on project management. For the RWSS Sector Agencies, the
‘change management’ approach would be adopted to enable them to transform
from ‘providers’ to ‘facilitators’. Suitable institutional and implementation
arrangements have been designed to support the capacity building program.
Institutional assessment of procurement practices of the agencies have helped
in identifying and addressing issues and practices that need to be aligned.
Procurement will be implemented in line with the Procurement Manual and the
53
Procurement Plan. FM capacities have been assessed and the project includes
steps to strengthen the agencies by training or outsourcing, as appropriate. The
PMUs will also assist in building capacity of the Support Organizations
involved with the Project.
Capacity Building Programs are a regular feature of all Bank assisted RWSS
Projects. ‘Twinning’ arrangements, including exposure visits, with on-going
RWSS Projects will be useful for building capacity across various
stakeholders. Bank implementation support missions will monitor the
adequacy of the capacity building measures and agree with GOI and the States
on additional measures that may be required.
Resp: GoI,
participating States,
and the Bank
Stage:
Implementation Due Date : ongoing
Status:
Not yet
due
2.2 Governance Rating Moderate
Description The governance structure of the Project
builds on the GoI arrangements for implementing
the RWSS Program and takes into account Bank
experience in the sector in India. The NPMU,
supported by a Technical Advisory Group, has been
established at MoDWS to assist in implementing
this Project. Governance arrangements have been
established at the State and district levels: State
Water and Sanitation Mission and the associated
Water and Sanitation Support Organization (WSSO)
and district level project management units and
Support Organizations, who will support and
coordinate with the PRIs and concerned
stakeholders. However, decentralized arrangements
need to be effective for timely implementation of
project activities.
Risk Management The NPMU will monitor the effective functioning of the
governance structure and systems built into the project design (including in
particular the findings of independent reviews and internal and external audit
reports) through quarterly and ad hoc reviews. Bank implementation support
missions will also focus on implementation of the agreed arrangements and
will review findings and issues with the NPMU and the States to agree on
remedial measures.
Resp: GoI,
participating States,
and Bank
Stage:
Implementation Due Date : ongoing
Status:
Not yet
due
54
3. Project Risks
3.1. Design Rating High
Description: The overall project design is complex,
involving the implementation of a national program
addressing essential basic infrastructure issues in
four low income states in a decentralized manner.
The Project is designed to be implemented in three
Batches, with the first Batch to test the Project
model and learn early lessons; specific milestones
and indicators have to be met before the State moves
from one Batch to another. Project design also
includes flexibility to reallocate funds between the
four States based on performance, and also add new
low income States, if necessary. A Performance
Scorecard will incentivize sector institutions to
adopt the scheme cycle approach for sustainable
services. Changing the role of traditional sector
institutions from that of a ‘Provider’ to ‘Facilitator’
and fostering partnerships will be a challenge.
Proposed project interventions have been
successfully tried and tested under a number of
World Bank assisted projects during the last two
decades. The project also builds on lessons learned
from the earlier Bank assisted projects.
The project will focus on behaviour change
programs, especially in ensuring the usage of toilets
in order to achieve ‘open defection free’ status in
villages. This may be a challenge given the existing
coverage status.
Risk Management Project will have ‘twinning’ arrangements with successful on-going Bank
supported RWSS Projects in India. Project agencies, in particular the NPMU,
SWSM/WSSO, and DWSM/DWSC as well the various project consultants,
will monitor the effective implementation of the project as designed. The Bank
will assess the efficacy of the design through review of various progress and
other reports, implementation support missions, as well as periodic reviews
with the NPMU and the State level agencies. GoI and the Bank would use the
movement from one batch to the next and the mid-term review to revise the
project design as appropriate, including through reallocation between States
and bringing in additional low income states.
Resp: GoI,
participating States,
and Bank
Stage:
Implementation Due Date : ongoing
Status:
Not yet
due
55
3.2. Social and Environmental Rating Moderate
Description: Given the highly diverse socio-
economic and cultural setting, ensuring inclusion,
achieving equity and maintaining cohesion and
peace is always a challenge. Although four
safeguard policies are triggered, the potential
negative environmental and social impacts of the
project are manageable, and it is a Category B
project. Involuntary land acquisition is not
envisaged. An EIA acceptable to the Bank is in
place, and includes the EMF/ECOPs to be used
during implementation.
Measures to address social issues identified by the
Social Assessment are integrated in the project
design. A Social Management Framework (SMF)
and a Tribal Development Plan (TDP) have been
prepared to address Social Safeguards issues.
The key issue is to implement the agreed safeguard
instruments satisfactorily and to properly record any
voluntary land donation or market based land
acquisition.
Risk Management
Social
Implementation of measures to ensure inclusion (especially for women and
vulnerable people) will be monitored at district, State and national levels.
Implementation of the SMF, including procedures for voluntary land donation
and market based land purchases, will be monitored at district, State and
national levels. Implementation of the Jharkhand TDP will be monitored at the
Jharkhand State and national levels. The Bank will monitor satisfactory
implementation of social aspects of the project, including safeguards, through
review of reports, site visits, and discussions with implementing agencies at
State and national levels, as well as with selected districts.
Environment
Implementation of the EMF/ECOPs will be monitored at the district, State, and
national level. The Bank will review reports, visit sites, and discuss
environmental safeguards compliance at the national and State levels.
Resp: GoI and
participating States
Stage: Preparation
and Implementation Due Date : ongoing
Status:
Not yet
due
3.3. Program and Donor Rating Low
Description: RWSS is high priority program for GoI.
The Bank India CPS supports RWSS, especially in
low income States. The Bank and GoI have a long
standing successful partnership in implementing the
RWSS sector reform program over the past 20 years,
including ten RWSS projects in seven States.
Resp:
GoI and
Bank The Bank will continue the dialogue with GoI on RWSS,
especially in low income states.
56
3.4. Delivery Monitoring and
Sustainability
Rating High
Description: Project design includes capacity
building and consultant support for scheme design,
procurement, and implementation. Given the low
capacity of the sector institutions in the State and the
PRIs, delivery of the schemes in a timely manner,
with good quality and within budget will be a
challenge.
The project includes a results based approach to
M&E at the State, Sector, and national levels.
Compilation of M&E data from the community
level, and aggregating them at the district, State, and
project levels on a timely and regular basis, as well
as interpreting M&E reports and taking appropriate
follow-up action will require considerable effort.
Project design addresses sustainability at multiple
levels: financial; institutional; environmental; and
ODF villages. Critical factors for success –
implementation of institutional framework, capacity
building, changing mindset from provider to
facilitator, and proper monitoring - have been
identified. Implementation of these measures will
require a massive and coordinated effort on the part
of GoI agencies at national, State, district, and PRI
levels.
Risk Management
NPMU, State and district level agencies will monitor the timely and quality
delivery of project outputs, M&E reports, and implementation of measures to
ensure project sustainability. The Bank will also monitor these through review
of reports, discussions with project officials at various levels, and through
selected site visits. GoI agencies and the Bank will take corrective action, as
necessary, to address slippages and other issues.
Resp: GoI,
participating States,
and the Bank
Stage:
Implementation Due Date : ongoing
Status:
Not yet
due
57
4. Overall Implementation Risk: High
Comments: Project implementation faces the following major issues: (i) weak
capacity in the four states, including the PRIs at the district and the village
levels; (ii) the project’s convergence with NBA (including MNREGS) for the
household sanitation cash-incentive scheme and SLWM; (iii) effective
implementation of RWSS program and activities; and (iv) timely delivery and
monitoring of RWSS schemes. An additional risk is that certain areas may not
be accessible due to local disturbances which may possibly result in project
implementation delays. The risk will be addressed through careful selection of
project villages through ‘demand responsive’ participatory approach, involving
the PRIs, local NGOs and Support Organizations for effective implementation.
Project design has a strong focus on building the capacity of all stakeholders,
particularly PRIs and Sector Agencies. Strong Project Management Units will
be set up at the national, state and district levels, actively supporting and
coordinating with PRIs and concerned stakeholders to streamline project
implementation. The National PMU will be strengthened with a Technical
Advisory Group (TAG) for reviewing and guiding the implementation of the
RWSS Program.
GP-WSC headed by the GP President will lead implementation, hence any risk
associated with NBA (including MGNREGS) funding to be used as
convergent resources for toilet and SLWM schemes will be resolved at the GP
level. Any residual issue will be taken up by the DPMU at the district level.
The risk that the States do not all perform as programmed is addressed by
permitting reallocation of IDA funds between the States, based on the use of
Performance Scorecard tool to assess performance of the participating States.
The Bank will provide intensive implementation support, especially during the
initial years of the project.
58
Annex 5: Implementation Support Plan
INDIA: Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project for Low Income States
1. Experience from Bank assisted Multi-state and RWSS Projects. The Implementation
Support Plan (ISP) for the Project builds on the experience of various Bank assisted multi-State
projects23
and the successfully implemented RWSS Projects, including the Kerala, Uttarakhand,
Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Punjab RWSS Projects. The ISP reflects the decentralized nature of
the project. ‘Twinning’ arrangements will be established with the on-going Bank assisted RWSS
Projects for sharing experiences, including programs and processes at the State, district and
village levels.
2. Project Management. Based on lessons learnt from various multi-State projects, strong
support agencies will be established at the National, State, and District levels. A highly
specialized Technical Committee will be established at the National Level for review and
oversight of the entire Project. Joint Review Missions will be undertaken with the National
Ministry. The ISP will address requirements at four levels: (i) National; (ii) State; (iii) district;
and (iv) Village.
(i) National Level. A Steering Committee will be established at MoDWS under the
Chairmanship of the Secretary, MoDWS. The Steering Committee will provide guidance on
sector policies and will be responsible for overall project monitoring. MoDWS will set up a
NPMU, adequately staffed with expertise in technical, institutional, social, financial,
procurement, and M&E programs for providing guidance to the participating States as well as
establishing a strong monitoring arrangement. NPMU will have a specially constituted Technical
Advisory Group (TAG) with the primary responsibility of independently reviewing the design
and implementation of the program in each of the four states.
(ii) State Level. The participating States will have fully staffed State level SPMUs, with
sector specialists for policy and institutional aspects, social and community development,
communication, capacity building, financial management, procurement, environmental
sanitation, technical, and M&E. SPMU will be responsible for assisting SWSM in monitoring
and approval functions, as well as facilitating and guiding the implementing agencies in all
aspects of project design and implementation.
(iii) District Level. The participating districts will have fully staffed district level DPMUs for
building capacity, facilitating project activities, and providing continuous guidance to the
participating villages for implementing the decentralized RWSS program for water supply and
sanitation, as per the scheme cycle. District PMUs will be responsible for recruiting Support
Organizations for assisting the villages in scheme design and implementation.
(iv) Village Level. At the village level, professionally staffed Support Organizations (SOs)
will support the GPs and GP-WSCs in planning and implementing the SVSs. In all these small
23
Rural Roads Project (PMGSY), National Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM), Sarva Siksha Abhiyan (SSA),
Multi-State Health Projects, and the National Ganga River Basin Project
59
schemes, technical guidance will be available from the State Engineering Agencies as the back-
stopping entities on technical issues. The larger MVSs and other complex SLWM schemes will
be designed and implemented by the State Engineering Agencies, involving the village level GPs
and GP-WSCs.
3. Twinning Arrangements with Bank Assisted RWSS Projects. The participating States
will have ‘formal’ twinning arrangements with on-going Bank assisted RWSS Projects,
including Uttarakhand and Kerala. Twinning arrangements will include: (i) workshops on
implementing decentralized arrangements; and (ii) exposure visits. In addition, twinning
arrangements will be explored with Brazil and other countries for developing the M&E system at
MoDWS.
4. Implementation Supervision Missions. Bank supervision missions will be undertaken
at least twice a year. The mission will start with discussions at the MoDWS level, followed by
visits to the States and districts where sub-project interventions are underway. This twice yearly
supervision missions will include the TTL, co-TTL, procurement and financial management
staff, environmental and social safeguards staff, and technical and institutional specialists and
consultants, as appropriate. A team of Specialist Consultants will be recruited to support the
Bank in reviewing implementation progress in each State. In addition, interim implementation
review missions will be undertaken by Bank specialists, as required. The following are the major
areas to be covered in the Implementation Supervision Missions:
(i) Institutional Arrangements. The mission will review the implementation of the
decentralized arrangements, including roles and responsibilities of the different actors under the
project implementation arrangements (SWSM, SPMU, DWSM, DWSC, GP, GP-WSC, external
support agencies and other concerned State institutions), including Capacity Building activities.
(ii) Implementation Progress of Water Supply and Sanitation Schemes. The mission will
review progress in implementation of the RWSS schemes as per Batches / scheme cycle, and will
address related issues (if any).
(iii) Safeguards. Supervision of the safeguard aspects of the Project will entail verification
that the Environmental Management Plan is being appropriately implemented, and adjusted as
deemed necessary, and that the Tribal Development Plan, and the Project’s other features
designed to enhance its social development outcomes, are similarly being adequately
implemented and adjusted as appropriate.
(iv) Procurement. Implementation support will include: (i) ex-ante and ex-post reviews of
Project procurement; (ii) review of the Procurement Plan and procurement performance; and (iii)
providing information on training resources, preparation of training material and modules and
need-based training on the Bank’s procurement guidelines to the implementing agencies. In
addition, guidance will be provided by the Bank’s procurement specialist on any necessary
revisions to the Procurement Manual, the Procurement Plan and bidding documents, as deemed
necessary. The Bank will assist NPMU in identifying capacity building needs, and the Bank’s
procurement specialist will provide timely support on procurement issues. Procurement
supervision missions to the participating States will be carried out at least semi-annually and will
60
include visits to districts and GPs to verify implementation arrangements in situ and make
recommendations for their refinement as judged necessary.
(v) Financial Management. The Project would require an in-depth and intensive supervision
in the initial years, especially to ensure successful implementation of the agreed FM
arrangements. This will include field visits to districts and GPs every six months to review the
FM arrangements. Implementation support will also include review of periodic IFRs as the basis
for disbursements and reporting expenditures, and review of the audit reports, including
verifying the adequacy of the resolution of major audit observations.
(vi) Monitoring and Evaluation. The M&E System will monitor processes, inputs, outputs
and outcomes, and will include: (a) Sector M&E system that consolidates sector data at the
MoDWS level with regard to sector-policy implementation and project outputs; (b) Results
Framework which captures processes, inputs and outputs at the State level; (c) periodic review of
inputs and processes through targeted evaluation, to learn from field experience and suggest
strategic inputs for further strengthening (including audits by independent financial and technical
auditors); (d) sustainability monitoring and evaluation to track long-term technical, financial,
institutional, social, and environmental sustainability prospects of the schemes and assets
created; and (e) community monitoring to help community members track the progress of their
schemes in all phases of the project, for continuous use after scheme completion. The M&E
System will include independent reviews, social audits and third-party quality checks in each
phase of the scheme cycle. M&E data and information will be transparently disclosed. The
system will contain a set of suggested participatory monitoring tools.
5. Mid-Term Review. A comprehensive mid-term review would be conducted to review
implementation performance of all aspects of the Project and to discuss, agree and take any mid-
term course corrections deemed necessary.
6. Timelines and Skills. The main focus of support for implementation during the Project’s
major timeframes is presented below. The Bank team will be supported by Specialist Consultants
for assisting in reviewing project implementation progress.
Table 17: Project Implementation Requirements
Time Focus Skills Needed
Resource
Estimate Staff
Weeks (SWs)
per year
Consultant
Support
Weeks per
year
First
Year Project mission and launch workshop
focused on project program and
implementation arrangements,
subproject scheme cycles, staffing up at
the different levels (MoDWS, State,
district, GP).
Review of Institutional and
Implementation arrangements.
Review of technical/engineering aspects
of water supply and sanitation
Reviews of EMF
Reviews of TDP and other Social
TTL
Co-TTL
Institutional Specialist
Engineering Specialist
Environmental
Specialist
20 SWs
16 SWs
12 SWs
12 SWs
10 SWs
16 Weeks
8 Weeks
12 Weeks
10 Weeks
61
safeguards
Review of Procurement Plan, Bidding
Documents, Training Requirements
Review of FM arrangements, Training
Requirements
Establishing M&E Systems
Social Development
Specialist
Procurement Specialist
FM Specialist
M&E Specialist
10 SWs
10 SWs
10 SWs
10 SWs
10 Weeks
10 Weeks
10 Weeks
10 Weeks
Second
– Fifth
Year
Review of Project Implementation
Progress
Review of Project Implementation
Progress
Review of Institutional and
Implementation Arrangements
Review of Technical/Engineering
aspects of subproject implementation –
water supply and sanitation
Review of Sanitation Program
Review of EMF
Review of TDP and other social
safeguards
Review of Procurement Plan, Bidding
Documents, training requirements
Review of FM arrangements, Training
Requirements
Review of M&E Systems
TTL
Co-TTL
Institutional Specialist
Engineering Specialist
Sanitation Specialist
Environmental
Specialist
Social Development
Specialist
Procurement Specialist
FM Specialist
M&E Specialist
20 SWs
16 SWs
12 SWs
12 SWs
10 SWs
10 SWs
10 SWs
10 SWs
10 SWs
10 SWs
16 Weeks
8 Weeks
12 Weeks
10 Weeks
10 Weeks
8 Weeks
10 Weeks
10 Weeks
10 Weeks
Last
Year Review of Project Implementation
Progress
Finalizing Impact Evaluation Studies
Preparation of Implementation
Completion Report preparation
Review of Project Implementation
Progress
Review of Institutional and
Implementation Arrangements
Review of Technical/Engineering
aspects of subproject implementation –
water supply and sanitation
Review of Sanitation Program
Review of EMF
Review of TDP and other social
safeguards
Review of Procurement Plan, Bidding
Documents, training requirements
Review of FM arrangements, Training
Requirements
Review of M&E Systems
TTL
Co-TTL
Institutional Specialist
Engineering Specialist
Sanitation Specialist
Environmental
Specialist
Social Development
Specialist
Procurement Specialist
FM Specialist
M&E Specialist
20 SWs
16 SWs
12 SWs
10 SWs
10 SWs
10 SWs
10 SWs
10 SWs
10 SWs
10 SWs
20 Weeks
12 Weeks
8 Weeks
12 Weeks
10 Weeks
10 Weeks
8 Weeks
10 Weeks
10 Weeks
10 Weeks
62
Annex 6: Economic Analysis
INDIA: Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project for Low Income States
1. Cost-benefit analysis has been carried out for the States of Assam, Bihar, Jharkhand, and
Uttar Pradesh, based on a representative household survey covering 5,522 households, as shown
in Table 18. A questionnaire, which was designed specifically for this survey, was administered
by the respective State RWSS Departments. The survey was undertaken from November 2012 to
March 2013.
Table 18: Profile of the Survey Sample
Assam Bihar Jharkhand Uttar Pradesh Total
Districts (nos.) 6 10 6 10 32
Talukas (nos.) 17 51 23 48 139
Gram Panchayats (nos.) 53 66 44 59 222
Households (nos) 1,493 1,977 1,063 989 5,522
Population (nos.) 8,246 12,521 9,140 6,938 36,845
PROJECT BENEFITS
2. The Project estimates a total of 7.8 million direct rural beneficiaries. The likely
quantifiable benefits of the Project, based on both primary survey data and secondary sources,
are: (i) value of time saved in water collection; (ii) value of incremental water supply; and (iii)
value of health benefits due to the reduction in the incidence of diseases, particularly diarrhoea,
malaria, encephalitis, and dengue, which are widely prevalent in the Project areas.
3. Other benefits include improved sanitation resulting from an improved community
environment and better health and hygiene practices. Efficiency gains are likely to result from
the decentralised service delivery approach. Savings are also expected in capital and recurring
costs incurred to maintain the existing supply of water in the ‘without’ project scenario. The
strong social cohesion of the project will generate spill overs in project communities. These
benefits are harder to quantify, and are not included in this analysis.
4. Time Saved in Water Collection. Time saved per household is based on the analysis of
field data on time currently spent for collecting water. Hand pumps, wells and ponds are the
predominant sources of water supply in the project habitations. Time saved in water collection is
assumed to be the weighted average of time spent by households using hand-pumps, well, and
ponds. The phasing of benefitted households has been established on the basis of the proposed
Batches in the Project: 0% until year3, 25% in year 3, 35% in years 4 and 5, 70% in year 6, 85%
in year 7, and 100% from year 8 onwards. It is assumed that 80 percent of the Project households
will be supplied through household connections and 20 percent will continue to be supplied from
stand-posts.
63
5. The expected time saving is 1.59 hours/household/day.24
The value of time saved is
calculated on the basis of the wage rate or income foregone. The daily wage rate for unskilled
workforce has been obtained from the latest available State Gazette Notifications.25
6. Benefits from Incremental Demand for Water. The project will improve water
availability and reduce time spent in collecting water. The average daily per capita consumption
of water in each of these States, as per the survey findings, are: 26.0 liters in Uttar Pradesh, 23.9
liters in Jharkhand, 38.3 liters in Bihar, and 35.6 liters in Assam. Incremental water consumption
after the schemes are operational is estimated to be the difference between the designed supply
of 70 lpcd and present water consumption. The incremental water available on account of the
Project is valued as the ‘future cost of water’, i.e., the cost of water per liter with the Project. The
future cost of water is based on the design capacity of 70 lpcd. The future cost of water is
estimated as USD 0.19 per kilo-liter of water produced.26
These costs have been used to arrive at
the value of incremental water in each of the participating states.
7. Health Benefits from Improved Water Supply. The Project aims to improve water
supply and sanitation services, including environmental sanitation. The World Health
Organization (WHO) carried out an assessment of the global disease burden from unsafe water,
sanitation and hygiene (WSH).27
The study notes that: (i) drinking water can transmit pathogens
and toxic chemicals; (ii) the lack of access to safe drinking water, adequate sanitation and solid
waste management services increases the risk of disease; and (iii) water associated behaviors,
including water used for personal and domestic hygiene, can increase or decrease disease risks.
The WHO report further notes that several studies that have examined WSH and diarrhea, have
looked at changes in water supply, excreta disposal or hygiene practices, and have assessed the
effects on diarrhea morbidity. In a large volume of studies examining the impact of sanitation on
disease transmission, twenty one studies found a 22 percent reduction in diarrhea morbidity, with
even rigorous studies showing much greater median reduction in diarrhea of 36 percent. Patients
with diarrhea were less likely to have an improved latrine. In addition, the report further notes
that it is not only water contaminated at source or during distribution that is an issue, but water
stored within the home where it may become contaminated, although arguably this is a matter of
water quality management and domestic hygiene. Numerous epidemiological studies and
outbreak investigations have also found an association between poor water quality and infectious
diarrhea (Hunter et al 2003)28
.
8. With respect to hygiene a number of studies have attempted to examine the role of
personal and domestic hygiene, although in many cases some of the hygiene measures or
interventions could also impact on sanitation and hygiene interventions; these ranged from 14 to
24 The expected time saving for the different states is: 1.55 hours in Uttar Pradesh, 1.02 in Jharkhand, 1.80 hours in Bihar, and
1.74 hours in Assam. 25 The wage rates per day used for different States are: USD 1.63 in Uttar Pradesh (2012), USD 2.38 in Jharkhand (2011), USD
2.24 in Bihar (2011), and USD 2.11 in Assam (2011). 26 The future cost of water for each State is estimated as follows: USD 0.17 in Uttar Pradesh, USD 0.20 in Jharkhand, USD 0.16
in Bihar, and USD 0.26 in Assam. 27 World Health Organization (2007), “Quantifying the health impact at national and local levels in countries with incomplete
water supply and sanitation coverage”, Public Health and the Environment, Environmental Burden of Disease Series, No. 15. 28 Drinking Water and Infectious Disease: Establishing the Links, General of Royal Society of Medicine, June 1996 (6); 311-312.
64
48 percent, with a median reduction of 33 percent. Curtis and Cairncross (2003)29
conducted a
systematic review and analysis of the impact of hand washing with soap on diarrhea morbidity.
The results of the analysis suggested that hand washing with soap could reduce diarrhea
morbidity by 47 percent.
9. This economic analysis combines both literature review and estimates of possible cost
savings due to improved health resulting from improved sanitation. Of the methodologies to
quantitatively assess health impacts due to unsafe WSH proposed by WHO, this analysis adopted
systematic literature reviews of the nature and magnitude of the association between water
resources development and vector-borne diseases. The Project is therefore expected to have
significant health benefits. For purposes of segregating health benefits on account of water and
sanitation, it is assumed that 40 percent would be on account of sanitation initiatives and 60
percent on account of water supply:
Expenditure Incurred on Treatment. Reduction in expenditure on diagnosis and treatment
(including medication, hospitalization charges etc.) for diarrhea, dengue, malaria, and
encephalitis is assumed to be the benefit. The incidence, proportion of households affected,
and expenditure per household on each of these diseases has been derived from the survey.30
Benefits accrued due to reduction in expenses incurred on treatment are based on the
difference between expenses incurred ‘without’ the project and ‘with’ the project. Expected
benefits from reduction in medication expenses are 67 percent over the analysis period.31
Disability Adjusted Life Year (DALY) is taken as the summation of Years Lost Due to
Disability (YLD) and Years Lost Due to Premature Mortality (YLL). As per WHO, the
DALY for Malaria, Dengue, Encephalitis and Diarrhea are 0.2, 0.06, 0.12, and 5.72 percent,
respectively. It is assumed that with the implementation of the Project, DALY on account of
bthe four diseases in the project population (derived in proportion to the India figures) will be
reduced to 25 percent of the present levels for these four diseases. This is on account of the
specific focus on improving the quality of water in the project and emphasis on improved
sanitation, which are envisaged to have a significant benefit in terms of reduced incidence of
these diseases. The reduction in DALY is valued at the labor opportunity cost for the days
lost due to illness32
.
Indirect Person days Lost. Reduction in frequency of diseases has a direct impact on the
well-being of the household, leading to a reduction in person days lost. The person days lost
on account of a disease has an impact on the income foregone for the period. The number of
person days lost for various diseases is based on discussions with health professionals: three
days for diarrhea, three days for malaria, ten days for dengue, and ten days for encephalitis.
Reduction in indirect person days lost has been valued at the opportunity cost of labor. The
29 Effect of Washing Hands with Soap on Diahorrea Risk in Community, A Systematic Review, May 2003, LANCET. 30 It is assumed that in the first two years there would not be any benefit from reduction in incidences of diseases, followed by 15
percent in 3rd Year, 30 percent for the 4th, 40 percent in 5th Year, 65 percent between 6th and 9th year, and 75 percent thereafter. 31 UP 66 percent; Jharkhand 67 percent; Bihar 67 percent; and Assam 66 percent. 32 The analysis has been carried out using the India DALY figures. The DALY figures for the 4 Project States are expected to be
significantly higher than the India average DALY figures. Therefore the benefits on account of reduction in DALY are a
conservative estimate. In addition, only four diseases have been considered.
65
opportunity cost of labor is calculated as per the wage rate declared in the respective State
Gazettes, outlined in earlier paragraphs.
10. Total Benefits. The following Table presents the benefits related to the Project.
Table 19: Benefits (USD million)
Year 2014-2024 2025-2035 2036-2043 Total Percentage
Opportunity cost of Time saved 1642 3520 2996 8158 88.1%
Total value of incremental water 153 303 256 712 7.7%
Total reduction in medication expenditure 48 93 78 219 2.4%
Opportunity cost of reduction in person days lost 11 22 19 52 0.6%
Total opportunity cost of reduction in DALY 0 105 14 120 1.3%
Total benefit 1855 4043 3363 9261 100.0%
PROJECT COSTS 11. The Project costs in the four States, excluding the community contribution, is presented
in Table 20. The O&M for SVSs (Single Habitation and Single GP) is estimated to be USD 0.08
per KL and that for MVSs (Small and Large) is estimated to be USD 0.11 per KL. The O&M
cost for sanitation is estimated to be 5 percent of the capital expenditure on SLWM activities.
O&M has been extrapolated to the period 2043 for purposes of the economic analysis and is in
addition to the Project Cost33
outlined below.
Table 20: Summary of Total Project Cost in the 4 States (USD million)
Assam Bihar Jharkhand UP MoDWS Total
Capacity Building and Sector Development 14 19 16 28 15 93
Infrastructure Development 218 230 122 291 0 860
-Hardware 211 208 107 263 0 789
-Other Support 6 22 15 27 0 71
Project Management Support 8 12 8 12 6 47
Total Project Cost 240 261 146 331 21 1000
* considers inflation of 7 percent per annum.
ECONOMIC RATE OF RETURN AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
12. The Economic Rate of Return for the Project and its various components is based on the
above costs and benefits. The Benefit Cost ratio has been calculated as part of the analysis.
13. The ERRs and Benefit Cost Ratio for the Project (all four states) and for each State are
presented in the following Table:
Table 21: ERR and Benefit Cost Ratio
State UP Jharkhand Bihar Assam Overall Project
ERR 26% 27% 39% 25% 30%
Benefit Cost ratio 4.8
5.5
8.3
5.6 6.1
33
For the purposes of Economic Analysis, the Project Costs have been considered without inflation (as also the
Benefits).
66
14. ERR Sensitivity - Total Project Cost. A sensitivity analysis has been carried out for
various risk factors. These are summarized in the following Table.
Table 22: Sensitivity Analysis- Total Project Cost
Criteria ERR
Base Value 30%
Increase in costs
10% Increase in total cost 27%
20% increase in total cost 25%
50% increase in total cost 20%
Decrease in benefits
10% decrease in benefits 27%
20% decrease in benefits 24%
40% decrease in benefits 18%
Combined increase in total cost and decrease in benefits
Increase in costs and decrease in benefits by 5% 27%
Increase in cost and decrease in benefits by 10% 25%
Increase in cost and decrease in benefits by 30% 16%
Combined decrease in total cost and increase in benefits
Decrease in cost and increase in benefits by 5% 32%
Decrease in cost and increase in benefits by 10% 35%
Decrease in cost and increase in benefits by 30% 51%
Decrease in wage
Decrease of 10% 27%
Decrease of 20% 25%
Decrease of 30% 22%
Schemes failing after 15 years
10% of the schemes fail 29%
30% of the schemes fail 28%
50% of the schemes fail 26%
15. ERR and Benefit Cost Ratio- Infrastructure (Hardware) Cost. ERRs and Benefit
Cost Ratio for each state and for the Overall Project (all four states) by type of schemes are
presented in the following Table.
Table 23: ERR – Scheme-wise for the Four Project States (Infrastructure/Hardware)
State Scheme Type ERR BC ratio
Overall
SHS 45% 8.3
SGS 44% 8.2
SMVS 35% 6.8
LMVS 28% 6.8
67
Annex 7: Governance and Accountability Action Plan (GAAP)
INDIA: Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project for Low Income States
1. The Governance and Accountability Action Plan (GAAP) is meant to mitigate
governance and fiduciary risks (as identified in the ORAF) and enhance the development
effectiveness of the Project by strengthening the institutional framework, accountability and
fiduciary systems. Based on Bank experience of RWSS projects across India, fiduciary risks are
high and the governance risks are moderate. The GAAP aims to mitigate these risks through the
establishment of robust and effective institutional arrangements, accountability and fiduciary
systems.
I. Institutional Effectiveness
2. The most critical implementation agencies are local governments. In the four targeted
states, these need to be strengthened for providing efficient RWSS services within their
jurisdiction. The project will operationalize the MoDWS’s commitment to “provide enabling
environment for Panchayati Raj Institutions, Gram Panchayats/Village Water & Sanitation
Committees, other local communities, Self Help Groups and other groups to manage their own
drinking water sources and systems, and sanitation in their villages” as per its draft Result
Framework Document for FY13-14. Although decentralization is a State prerogative, MoDWS
can support the following: (i) “enabling recognition and award to Panchayats for excellent work
in rural drinking water and sanitation” as it is committed to in its Result Framework Document,
and (ii) building capacity of local governments and communities for the implementation of the
Project in the four target states.
3. Under the project, Support Organizations (SOs) will be appointed by District Project
Management Units to assist Gram Panchayats and their Water and Sanitation Committees to
design and implement the schemes. The SOs will be responsible for community mobilization and
IEC/BCC. The National Management Information System will allow the assessment of the
institutional effectiveness of decentralized service delivery by capturing the
perception/satisfaction/unmet needs of members of targeted communities and local
representatives through social accountability mechanisms (grievance redressal, social audits,
etc.,). NPMU will benchmark institutional effectiveness for project implementation across the 33
targeted districts and identify and promote good practices.
4. At the local level, project implementation includes a number of institutional reforms, laid
out in an integrated scheme cycle that will ensure institutional readiness prior to and during
implementation. The project addresses the critical challenge of inter-agency coordination at the
local level by mainstreaming tripartite MoUs between the local governments, the local
administration (District Water and Sanitation Committees headed by the District Collector) and
the state technical department for RWSS. Such formal agreements are a potent and indispensable
tool to allocate responsibilities and leverage synergies between implementing agencies at the
local level.
68
II. Accountability
5. Given the multiplicity of agencies in the RWSS sector, the GAAP aims to strengthen the
accountability by clarifying roles and responsibilities across institutions along the delivery chain;
and consolidating mechanisms to ensure project performance down to end users.
6. The Project will improve transparency and enhance governance and accountability
through the following processes: (a) RWSS district-wide program, agreed with each State and
concerned district, for transition to decentralized service delivery, irrespective of sources of
financing across the district. (b) Clarification of roles and responsibilities for the RWSS
functionaries at each level. (c) Independent construction quality surveillance through technical
experts. (d) Social audits and civil society oversight, through PRIs, NGOs and community
organizations. (e) Grievance redressal measures at the Gram Panchayat, district and State level.
(f) Service Delivery Assessment through household surveys. (g) Technical and financial audits to
confirm and validate technical aspects and expenses incurred for the schemes and programs
under the Project. (h) Transparent and robust procurement processes, including competitive
bidding processes, with on-line contract management and monitoring system. (i) M&E Systems
for capturing project baseline and implementation progress, with clearly defined indicators. (j)
Public disclosure of all project documents and reports at the web-site of the SWSM. The
Governance and Accountability Action Plan (GAAP) has been integrated as part of the Project
design for mitigating the risk of F&C.
7. The use of a rigorous M&E system, including third party checks, will provide the
ongoing performance monitoring of physical works. Social audits conducted by community will
be an integral part of the overall design.
8. The above processes have been successfully implemented in other Bank assisted RWSS
Projects, including Uttarakhand RWSS Project which has twice received the RTI Award for
good governance and transparency. ‘Twinning’ arrangements with Uttarakhand will help in
designing and implementing the above governance and accountability practices to address fraud
and corruption issues.
9. The Bank’s fiduciary safeguards will be applied rigorously, as has been the case with the
earlier Bank supported RWSS Projects. The Project activities will be made a part of AG Audit.
An internal auditor will be appointed for the project and will undertake procurement audit.
10. MoDWS will establish an integrated grievance redress mechanism for the project,
capturing all grievances submitted to community organizations, local governments, local or state
level administrations, and ensuring adequate follow-up. This system will be established within
the first six months of project implementation and will subsequently be independently audited, as
committed to by MoDWS under its draft Result Framework Document for FY13-14. The
grievance redressal system will ensure easy access for complainants, prompt follow up of
grievances, systematic recording and traceability of complaints and responses, and adequate
appeal mechanisms and monitoring. It will be compliant with GoI guidelines at the national
level and modeled on good practices, including the system introduced in Uttarakhand under the
Bank-funded RWSS project. This will allow for prompt follow up of individual complaints and
69
identification of recurrent issues pertaining to project implementation, which may require
systemic remedies.
III. Fiduciary Systems
11. Fiduciary systems across beneficiary states are uneven and cannot be equally and
effectively mobilized to mitigate the risks of fraud and corruption. To mitigate the risks of fraud
and corruption, the GAAP relies on the vigilance function of MoDWS.
12. The establishment and functioning of the MoDWS Vigilance Unit will comply with the
Central Vigilance Commission’s (CVC) guidance, as laid out in its Vigilance Manual. It will
extend to (i) preventive vigilance; (ii) punitive vigilance; and (iii) surveillance and detection.
Details of each of these three functions are provided in Chapter 2 of the Vigilance Manual. The
MoDWS Vigilance Unit will carry out its role as defined by the CVC.
13. Allegations or complaints of fraud and corruption will be handled by MoDWS as
specified by the CVC in Chapter 3 of its Vigilance Manual. Given the specifics of project
implementation, most allegations or complaints related to RWSSP-LIS in the targeted states will
be followed up at the state level. However, MoDWS and the participating States are accountable
for the integrity of the program as a whole.
14. MoDWS’s vigilance function (including handling of allegations and complaints of fraud
and corruption) will be detailed on its website prior to project effectiveness. Within the first six
months of project implementation, the participating State Governments will roll out a plan for
ensuring awareness among the project implementing agencies (down to PRIs), to be designed
prior to project effectiveness.
15. MoDWS has committed to report annually and publicly on the functioning of its
vigilance function. Under the GoI performance management system, MoDWS is committed to
“implement mitigating strategies for reducing potential risk of corruption” (draft Result
Framework Document for FY 2013-14). Its initiatives in this respect will be publicly reported
annually as part of the MoDWS vigilance report. Provisions of the GAAP are integrated in the
Project design and are detailed in the Project Implementation Plan; their implementation will be
reviewed during supervision missions.