Document of The World Bank

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Report No: 53757-TZ.

PROJECT PAPER

ON A

SECOND ADDITIONAL FINANCING CREDIT

IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 23.1 MILLION ( U S 3 5 MILLION EQUIVALENT) IN PILOT CRISIS RESPONSE WINDOW RESOURCES

TO THE

UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA

FOR THE

. SECOND SOCIAL ACTION FUND PROJECT

May 13,2010

Eastern Africa 1 Human Development Social Protection Unit Africa Region

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

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS

(Exchange Rate Effective March 31,2010)

AF BA CAS

CCT CDD CE CMC CMO COMSIP CPPR CRW csc EL4 E-PRA ESMF FI IDA JAST LGA MIS NSC NVF PDO W F SDR SP SPIF TAMFI TASAF TMU VG

CB-CCT

Currency Unit = TSh TSh1,357.50 = US$l US$1.51824 = SDRl

FISCAL YEAR July 1 - June30

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

Additional Financing Beneficiary Assessment Country Assistance Strategy Community Based Conditional Cash Transfer Conditional Cash Transfer Community Driven Development Capacity Enhancement Community Management Committees Chief Minister’s Office Community Savings Investment Promotion Country Portfolio Performance Review Crisis Response Window Community Score Card Environmental Impact Assessment Extended Participatory Rural Appraisal Environmental and Social Management Framework Food-Insecure International Development Association Joint Assistance Strategy for Tanzania Local Government Authority Management Information Systems National Steering Committee National Village Fund Project Development Objective Resettlement Policy Framework Special Drawing Right Service-Poor Community Subproject Interest Form Tanzania Association of Microfmance Institutions Tanzania Social Action Fund TASAF Management Unit Vulnerable Group

Vice President: Obiageli Katryn Ezekwesili Country Director: John Murray McIntire

Acting Sector Director Tawhid Nawaz

Task Team Leader: Ida Manjolo Sector Manager: Lynne D. Sherburne-Benz

1

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA

SECOND ADDITIONAL FINANCING FOR TANZANIA SECOND SOCIAL ACTION FUND

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I . INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1 I1 . BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE FOR ADDITIONAL FINANCING .......... 1 111 . PROPOSED CHANGES ......................................................................................... 5 IV . CONSISTENCY WITH THE COUNTRY ASSISTANCE STRATEGY .............. 7 V . APPRAISAL OF SCALED-UP PROJECT ACTIVITIES ...................................... 8

A . Economic and Financial Analyses ...................................................................... 8 B . Technical ............................................................................................................. 8 C . Fiduciary Analysis .............................................................................................. 9 D . Safeguards ......................................................................................................... 10 E . Expected Outcomes ........................................................................................... 11 BENEFITS AND RISKS ....................................................................................... 11 FINANCIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE ADDITIONAL FINANCING ......................................................................................................... 12

VI . VI1 .

Annex 1: Revised Results Framework and Monitoring and Evaluation Arrangements ........ 13 Annex 2: Support for the Food-Insecure Group of Beneficiaries .......................................... 21 Annex 3: Support for Vulnerable Groups .............................................................................. 26 Annex 4: Risk Assessment ..................................................................................................... 28 Annex 5: Summary of Components Financed by the Original Project, First and Second

Additional Financing ............................................................................................. 29 Annex 6: TASAF NSC Composition, Original and Current .................................................. 30

Annex 8: Draft Action Plan for Completion of the Outstanding Subprojects ........................ 34 Annex 7: Procurement Plan for AF-I1 for FY2010/1 1 ........................................................... 31

Annex 9: Country at a Glance ................................................................................................ 36 Annex 10: Map ....................................................................................................................... 40

Table 1 : Key Project Data and Performance of TASAF-I1 (April 2 1. 201 0) ........................... 3 Table 2: Subproject Interest Forms Submitted and Subprojects Funded ................................. 4 Table 3: Allocation of Additional Financing to the Original Project (US$ Million) ............... 6

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

TANZANIA

SECOND ADDITIONAL FINANCING FOR TASAF I1

PROJECT PAPER

AFRICA

Source BORRO WERRECIPIENT International Development Association (IDA) Total:

AFTSP Basic Information (Original Project)

Project Name: Tanzania Second Social Action Fund Expected Closing Date: June 30, 2013 Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan

Local Foreign Total 0.00 0.00 0.00

35.00 0.00 35.00

35.00 0.00 35.00

Project ID: PO85786

Team Leader: Ida Manjolo Environmental category: B Partial Assessment

Date: May 13,2010 Country Director: John Murray McIntire Sector ManagerDirector: Lynne D. Sherbume- Benz Project ID: PI20881 Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan

Basic Information (Additional Financing) Team Leader: Ida Manjolo Sectors: Other social services (1 00%) Themes: Social safety nets (1 00%)

Environmental category: B-Partial Assessment Additional Financing Type: Scale Up /Cost Overrun

Borrower: United Republic of Tanzania, Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs P.O. Box 91 11 Dar es Salaam, Tanzania Tanzania Tel: 255-22 21 1-2854 Fax: 255-22 21 1-7090 / 21 1-0326 www.mof.go.tz Responsible Agency: TASAF Management Unit Old Kilwa Malindi Street PO Box 9381 Dar es Salaam Tanzania

info@tasaf.org Tel: 255-22 212-358314 Fax: 255-22 212-3582

iii

Does the project require any exceptions from Bank policies? Re$ Section Appraisal of Project Activities Have these been approved by Bank management? Does the project include any critical risks rated ?substantial? or ?high?? Re$ Section Project Risks and Mitigating Measures Project development objective Re$ Section Bank Response

The Development Objective of the Second Additional Financing is the same as the revised project development objective of the Original Project, namely, to improve access of beneficiary households to enhanced socioeconomic services and income-generating opportunities.

Project description Re? Section Bank Response

The Second Additional Financing for TASAF I1 will be implemented under the two components of the Original Project, namely, the National Village Fund and Capacity Enhancement.

a) food-insecure households, vulnerable groups, and service poor communities. Under this component, funds will be channeled to the food-insecure households to help them cope with food shortage and food-price emergencies. The vulnerable groups will receive support to implement small-scale economic subprojects, which will generate income to help them cope with the risks they face. Community Savings and Investment Promotion will be carried out to facilitate savings and investment in poor community groups. For the service-poor communities, the component will fund completion activities for subprojects (including provision of furniture to schools) that were funded under TASAF 11.

[ ]Yes [XI No [ ]Yes [ ] No [ ]Yes [XI No

The National Village Fund Component (US$3 1 .O million) will finance interventions for

b) communication, technical assistance and capacity building, project management, participatory monitoring and evaluation, transparency, and accountability.

Which safeguard policies are triggered, if any? Re$ Section Appraisal of Project Activities The safeguard policies triggered by the Second Additional Financing are: Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) and Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12), which are the same as in the original Project.

The Capacity Enhancement Component (US$4.0 million) will support development

iv

I. INTRODUCTION

1. This Project Paper seeks the approval of the Executive Directors for a proposed credit in the amount of SDR23.lmillion (US$35 million equivalent) from the Pilot Crisis Response Window (CRW) resources to the United Republic of Tanzania for the Tanzania Second Social Action Fund (TASAF-11), ID PO85786 consisting of Credit Nos.4002 TA for SDR87.9 million (US$129 million), 46360 TA for SDR20.2 million (US$30 million), and Grant No. H134TA for SDR14.4 million (US$21 million).

2. The proposed Second Additional Financing (AF-11) will scale up TASAF-I1 activities in vulnerable districts in the Mainland and in Zanzibar as determined by the Rapid Vulnerability Assessment Report of October 2009. According to this report, the number of food-insecure districts increased from 42 (40 in the Mainland and 2 in Zanzibar) in 2008/2009 to 63 in 2009/2010, leaving 1.6 million people in need of assistance. The AF-I1 will also fund the cost overruns that have arisen because beneficiary communities have not been able to make available the expected contribution for the subprojects due to the negative impacts of the financial and food crisis, as well as natural calamities such as drought and floods on their livelihoods. There have also been price increases for materials and transportation which have contributed to the subproject cost overruns. Completion of the subprojects is required in order to achieve the intended outcomes in the targeted communities.

3. The proposed AF-I1 will support all three beneficiary groups that are supported under TASAF-11; name1 the food-insecure (FI), vulnerable groups (VGs) and service-poor communities (SP) . It will finance social protection initiatives such as public works, and support interventions aimed at reaching these three groups to minimize the negative effects of the global financial and food crisis, drought, and flash floods. Since May 2005, TASAF has received 102,5 17 subproject interest forms (SPIFs) from communities. To date TASAF-I1 has financed 485 public works subprojects for the FI and 2,327 subprojects for VGs, at a total value of US$35.8 million, as well as 3,225 subprojects for SP, valued at US$ 94.6 million (See Table 2). The first Additional Financing (AF-I) approved on June 9, 2009 will finance approximately 1,000 additional subprojects, and the proposed AF-I1 is expected to support another 467 subprojects; and completion of about 1,000 subprojects that were funded under TASAF 11.

?,

11. BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE FOR ADDITIONAL FINANCING

4. Background. The Tanzania Social Action Fund is a community-driven development (CDD) operation launched by the government of the United Republic of Tanzania in 2000 as one of the instruments for fighting poverty. TASAF delivers critical basic infrastructure services and social assistance to the urban and rural poor while addressing institutional, organizational, and capacity-building needs at village and district levels. TASAF-I1 was approved by the Board on November 30, 2004, and became effective on May 11, 2005. The International Development Association (IDA) support for TASAF-I1 consists of a credit of

' TASAF-I1 has three beneficiary groups: (i) service-poor communities (Le. those that lack health, education, and other social infrastructure services); (ii) able-bodied but food-insecure individuals; and (iii) vulnerable groups (which include orphans, widows and widowers, people affected and infected by HIV/AIDS, unemployed youths and the elderly).

SDR 87.9 million (US$129 million equivalent) and a grant in the amount of SDR14.4 million (US$21 million equivalent). Additional financing (AF-I) in the amount of SDR 20.2 million (US$30 million) was approved for scaling up TASAF-I1 activities on June 9, 2009. The TASAF is funded by the IDA, the participating communities, and the United Republic of Tanzania. Its coverage is nationwide, operating through the local government authorities (LGAs) in the Mainland and Zanzibar (Unguja and Pemba).

5 . Project objectives and components. The project development objective (PDO) of the Original Project (referred to as TASAF-I1 and AF-I in this paper) is to improve access of beneficiary households to enhanced socioeconomic services and income-generating opportunities. The Original Project has two components: The first is the National Village Fund (NVF) (US$145.5 million), which enables communities to: (i) access resources that can stimulate economic activity and enable poor households to increase their incomes; (ii) reduce their vulnerability by empowering them with instruments to protect against the risks they face; and (iii) improve their access to and use of social services. The second component is capacity enhancement (CE) (US$34.5 million), which builds the capacity of sector staff at the district, ward, and community level to undertake activities that help realize the PDO.

6. Project Status and Performance. The project is making satisfactory progress towards meeting the development objective. Both the implementation progress and development objective ratings in the Implementation Status and Results Report ratings have been rated satisfactory throughout the project’s life, with the exception of the first year. Initially, there was a slow uptake because it took a long time to put the projects’ roll-out systems in place. A Beneficiary Assessment (BA) Report (January 2008) indicated that 87 percent of sampled communities expressed satisfaction with the improved access to services because of the project. Furthermore, in September 2008, the analysis of the baseline data of the ongoing TASAF I1 Impact Evaluation Study indicated that the project has targeted the right beneficiaries as per the project design and selection criteria. A more thorough impact evaluation report will be available in April 201 1.

7. The first project component, namely the NVF, provides support to communities for implementation of subprojects that enhance their access to services, increase employment opportunities, and increase incomes for able-bodied but food-insecure individuals and vulnerable groups. To date, the NVF component has supported 6,037 community subprojects, valued at US$130.5 million. This has led to substantial increases in the number of people with improved access to socioeconomic service facilities, as follows:

increase in the number of people with access to improved socioeconomic services by: 10 million people for access to basic package of health, meeting the target; 1.2 million people for access to improved water sources, meeting the target; 880,000 people for access to improved sanitation, against a target of 889,250;

. 2.2 million people for access to all-season roads, against a target of 2.7 million; 202,000 people for access to irrigation, against a target of 381,000; 326,000 people for access to markets, against a target of 158,000;

an improvement in the student-classroom ratio in targeted areas from 1 :70 to 1 :45; 14.8 million increase in person-days provided in labor intensive public works against a target of 14.3 million; 85% of citizens satisfied with the quality of delivery of basic social services according to the community members from sampled areas; and

2

(v) 15.3 million direct project beneficiaries (of whom 55 percent are female) reached over a target of 15.9 million.

(a) Key Data Total grant and credit amount: US$I80m (Credit: USS129m; Grant: US$2lm; AF-I Cr.: US$30m)

8. TASAF has developed a robust outreach capacity over the years, and both the organizational infrastructure that has been developed and the management and monitoring approach that it uses are much in demand for reaching more communities. The Government has channeled part of the proceeds from other sources, including three IDA-funded Projects, through TASAF to use its implementation infrastructure to support community interventions*. In addition to 6,037 subprojects financed by the TASAF I1 project, these ring- fenced funds under TASAF I1 total US$33.6 million, providing support to about 1,400 communities.

(b) Project Performance Legal covenants: substantially complied with Development Objective: Satisfactory

9. The second component-the CE-provides support for building capacity among communities, as well as district and national stakeholders, in technical skills required for NVF implementation. A total of 137,784 community implementers and 5,522 district-level facilitators have been trained since TASAF-I1 began. The Project has developed the use of community scorecards (CSC) as a social accountability tool for service delivery by providers, which is quickly being replicated at the district level. TASAF is also managing the implementation of a four-year Community-Based Conditional Cash Transfer (CB-CCT) Pilot, funded by the Japanese Social Development Fund in the amount of US$1,879,915. The overall objective of the pilot is to test how a conditional cash transfer program could be implemented through a social fund using a CDD approach, and develop systems that need to be in place for scaling up to achieve positive results. As of March 3 1, 201 0, the effectiveness of the pilot project?s delivery systems was assessed and found to be satisfactory to handle a scale-up planned under the AF- 1.

Effectiveness date: May 1 1,2005 Closing date: June 30, 2012

Table 1: Key Project Data and Performance of TASAF-I1 (April 21,2010)

Implementation Progress: Satisfactory Financial management: Satisfactory

Current disbursement: Credit-US$l2 7. lm; Grant-US$22.18m; AF-I Cr.: $6.lm

Procurement: Moderately Satisfactory

Remaining balance: * Credit-US$5.27m; Grant-US$O. 3m; AF-1 Cr.: $23.9rn

Environmental and Social Safeguards: Satisfactory

10. Rationale. An assessment of income-poverty levels in Tanzania since 2001 shows that in Mainland Tanzania the reduction in income poverty was moderate, decreasing from 35.6 percent of the population in 2000/01 to 33.4 percent in 2007 (Household Budget Surveys 2008). However, this gain could be offset due to the impact of the food and financial crisis of

These include the Tanzania Multi-Sectoral AIDS Project, the Tanzania Forestry Community Management Project, the Marine and Coastal Environmental Management Project as well as the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries Fund.

3

the last two years. Real Gross Domestic Product growth has dropped from 7.4 percent in 2008 to 6.0 percent in 20093. Many sectors of Tanzania’s economy have been affected by the global crisis. Tourism, manufacturing, and agriculture have all experienced declines due to a drop in both demand and prices. In the case of agriculture, the coffee and cotton subsectors were the most affected by the global crisis. This has led to many people losing their jobs and livelihoods, falling below the poverty line, and requiring support for survival. The October 2009 Rapid Vulnerability Assessment indicated that 1.6 million people in 63 vulnerable districts (61 on the mainland and 2 in Zanzibar) are in dire need of assistance. In FY08/09, the economy faced enhanced and sustained inflationary pressures even though the international commodity prices had declined significantly. The rising inflation was driven by the food prices reflecting the effects of the drought, the situation led to annual inflation of 10 percent in 2008 and 1 1.9 percent in 2O0gn4 Consequently, food prices have increased in both rural and urban areas, and the social impacts are estimated to be considerable, negatively affecting nutritional status-particularly for children and the elderly. The welfare impacts of high prices are especially serious for poor and food-insecure people.

(4 Estimated

of “IFs Received

(‘000 us S)

1,426,900.0

508,920.0

11. There is a significant demand for TASAF I1 safety net interventions among communities across the country which remains unmet. During preparation of TASAF-I1 in 2004/05, the government estimated a financing requirement of about US$400 million for 121 LGAs, of which only US$120 million was secured from IDA. During implementation a surge in demand resulted in a total of 102,5 17 Subproject Interest Forms (SPIFs) being submitted to the TASAF Management Unit (TMU) for funding consideration. Less than five percent of the community demand for FI and VG subproject interventions has been financed. Based on experience in assessing SPIFs readiness for financing, about one third of the unfunded submissions (Le,, 20,931 SPIFs), with a monetary value of US$626 million, would have qualified (see Table 2). An analysis by the LGAs indicates that about 1,000 SP subprojects funded are incomplete due to either communities not being able to meet their contributions or due to the high price escalations for materials and transportation that have led to the cost overrun. The LGAs estimate that the total amount needed to complete these subprojects is US$21 million, out of which US$14.2 million is required for education sector, US$5 million for the health sector, and the remainder for subprojects for water, roads, markets, and vulnerable groups. The number of the uncompleted subprojects and resources required will be verified by the TMU.

Table 2: Subproject Interest Forms Submitted and Subprojects Funded

(€! ) (h) Number of Estimated

SPIFs not can pass for passing for

(0 (e) (d) Number Value of of sub sub- Number of SPIFs that Value of SPIFs

Projects Projects Funded Funded .Funded Funding out Funding

(b) - (d) of (0 as Per (9) (33.3% of (0) (‘000 us $ )

(‘000 us $)

485 11,806.7 31,224 10,408 468,360.0

2,327 24,073.2 31,601 10,523 1 57,845 .O

‘ (a)

Beneficiaries Group

(b) Total SPIFs

Received

Groups ~~~

Subtotals 65,637 1,935,820.0 I 2,812 I 35,879.9 I 62,825 1 20,931 I 626,205.0

Economic Survey 2009, Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs. Tanzania Eighth PRSC, 201 0.

4

Service Poor Communities 1,659,600.0 3,225 94,569.0 33,655 1 1,207 504,315.0 36,880

12. The government has responded to these situations by increasing budgetary allocations to expand safety nets to reach deserving individuals and groups. At the request of the government, the Bank has also responded by supporting emergency projects, including the Accelerated Food Security Program and Supplemental Financing for the Seventh Poverty Reduction Support Credit. As part of the Accelerated Food Security Program, a US$30 million IDA Additional Financing Credit (AF-I) to TASAF I1 was approved by the Board on June 9,2009. This amount is used to finance subprojects for both FI households and VGs (see Table 3).

Total

13. The proposed AF-11, to be funded under the Pilot Crisis Response Window, is a response to the impacts of the global financial and food crisis and natural calamities. It is intended to provide an effective safety net for targeted poor people who are food-insecure and have limited employment opportunities. The safety net schemes will do so by promoting labor-intensive activities, thereby creating job opportunities, improving food security, and creating community assets. The AF-I1 will also fund completion of SP subprojects so as to increase access by the poor to services in order to improve education and health outcomes. In so doing, the proposed AF-I1 as a multisectoral Project is in line with the CRW objective of providing financial assistance for initiatives to protect core spending on health, education, social safety nets, infrastructure, and agriculture.

102,517 3,595,420.0 6,037 130,448.9 96,480 32,138 1,130,520.0

111. PROPOSED CHANGES

14. AF-I1 proposes no changes in the project objective, components or other design features. The Development Objective of the Second Additional Financing is the same as the revised project development objective of the Original Project, namely, to improve access of beneficiary households to enhanced socioeconomic services and income-generating opportunities. The project will fund the cost overruns for the subprojects completion activities. The project will also scale up safety net interventions in selected food-insecure districts on the Mainland and in Zanzibar. The number of food-insecure districts increased from 42 in 2008/09 to 63 in 2009/2010, according to the Rapid Vulnerability Assessment Report on food shortage areas in Tanzania (October 2009). AF-I supports the initial forty districts on the Mainland and two in Zanzibar. The proposed AF-I1 will finance the additional 25 districts identified in the 2009 report (see Annex 2), in addition to the original vulnerable district^.^ The Results Framework has slightly been revised to include one of the IDA15 core indicators on Direct Project Beneficiaries. Similarly the wording of indicators has been aligned to the core sector indicators (see Annex 1).

15. the National Village Fund and Capacity Enhancement.

The AF-I1 will be implemented under the two components of the Original Project-

The October 2009 Rapid Vulnerability Assessment Report confirmed that, out of 40 districts in the Mainland and 2 in Zanzibar identified in the 2008 survey, all but four were still food-insecure. Four districts were removed from the list because they are in better condition. However, 25 new districts were labeled food-insecure, bringing the total number of food-insecure districts for 2010 to 63.

5

a) The National Village Fund Component (US$31.0 million) will finance interventions for FI households (US$8 million), VGs (US$3 million) and SP communities ( U S 2 0 million). (Details of the kind of support given to these beneficiary categories under the NVF are provided in annexes 2 and 3.) Under this component, funds will be channeled to the FI households to help them cope with food shortage and food-price emergencies. The VGs will receive support to implement small-scale economic subprojects, which will generate income to help them cope with the risks they face. Community Savings and Investment Promotion initiative will facilitate savings and investment in poor community groups. For the SP, the component will fund completion activities (including the provision of furniture to schools) for the subprojects that were funded under TASAF I1 but had cost overruns or financial shortfalls so that the anticipated benefits to the targeted communities are realized. In order to ensure completion of the remaining activities in these 1,000 subprojects, the Government is required to submit to the Association by June 30,2010 a final action plan, acceptable to the Association, identifying all the remaining activities and the associated costs as well as the proposed actions. The Government will be further required to implement this action plan by no later than December 3 1, 2010, before any new subprojects can be funded under Category 1 (c). The National Village Fund component supports a combination of public works subprojects for the food-insecure, income-generating activities for the VGs, savings and investment promotion for savers, and infrastructure for the service-poor communities.

b) The Capacity Enhancement Component (US$4.0 million) will support development communication, technical assistance and capacity building, project management, participatory monitoring and evaluation, transparency, and accountability.

10.0 16.5 8.0

11.0 3 .O

(a) Food Insecure

(b) Vulnerable Groups

Table 3: Allocation of Additional Financing to the Original Project (US$ Million)

34.5

18.5

1. National Village Fund

(c) Service Poor (d) Cornmunity-

Based Conditional Cash Transfer'

120 I

99.0 0 20.0 119.0

0 4.5 0.0 4.5

25.5 1

2. Capacity Enhancement Total

31.0 I - 176.5 1

30 4.5 4.0 38.5

150.0 30.0 35.0 215

4.5 I

As mentioned in paragraph 9, the ongoing Pilot Community-based Conditional Cash Transfer is financed with the US$] .9 million grant from the Japanese Social Development Fund

6

16. The Implementation Arrangements will remain the same as that of the Original Project. The project will be organized in a decentralized manner to facilitate greater autonomy and empowerment to local government structures and the community. It will operate within the three spheres of government, namely national, LGA, and village levels.’ At the national level, the project will be administered under the President’s Office with oversight being vested in the National Steering Committee (NSC), appointed by the President of the United Republic of Tanzania. The government has indicated that the following changes will be made in the composition of the NSC to improve its effectiveness: (i) include a member from the Ministry of Agriculture Food Security and Cooperatives; (ii) include representation from the Tanzania Association of Microfinance Institutions; (iii) remove representation by the Planning Commission of the Vice President’s Office because this portfolio is now under the Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs and this Ministry is already represented; and (iv) remove the Presidential Trust Fund for Self-Reliance (see Annex 6). These changes in the NSC’s composition reflect the operation’s focus on enhancing food security and livelihoods.

17. The implementation of the project will be managed by the TASAF Management Unit (TMU) and will follow the TASAF-I1 methodology of delivery without any changes. Guidelines developed over the years and the operational procedures currently in effect will apply. Communities will manage subprojects with oversight from the LGAs, supported by the TMU.

18. Credit Closing Date. The Credit Closing Date for AF-I1 would be extended to June 30,2013, which thus becomes the new Closing Date for the Original Credit. With the original closing Date of June 30, 2010, the cumulative period extended is within the three-year limit stipulated in OP13.20, Additional Financing for Investment Lending.

19. partners.

Partnership Arrangement. The project is not co-financed by other development

IV. CONSISTENCY WITH THE COUNTRY ASSISTANCE STRATEGY

20. The current Joint Assistance Strategy for Tanzania (JAST) Report No. 38625 (2007- 2010) of March 2007 is aligned to the National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty (the MKUKUTA) of the Government of Tanzania through the three Clusters: (i) growth of the economy and reduction in income poverty; (ii) improvement of quality of life and social well-being; and (iii) governance and accountability. The social protection objective under Cluster I1 particularly focuses on reaching the poorest and most vulnerable groups and reducing inequalities across geography, income, age, gender, and other strata. The JAST also supports one of the five main goals of this cluster, namely, provision of adequate social protection and the rights of vulnerable and needy groups to basic needs and services. One

’ In Zanzibar, the operational set up is at national, island (Unguja and Pemba), and Shehia levels. Whereas on the Mainland, funds are disbursed directly to communities or through the LGAs for compliant or non-compliant LGA to Local Government Development Grant, disbursement to Unguja and Pemba is done through the Chief Minister’s Office (CMO) designate for each island, who in turn disburses 90 percent ofthe subproject budget to respective Community Management Committees (CMCs) accounts. The CMO retains the entire 10 percent for supervision and monitoring as the Shehia Advisory Councils do not have fiduciary powers to operate bank accounts. In practice therefore, unlike the case for LGAs on the Mainland, subproject implementation, supervision, and monitoring is paid for by the respective CMO-in-charge officers for Unguja or Pemba.

7

way the JAST addresses these issues is through its support for TASAF and extensive use of the social protection initiatives that empower communities to request, implement, and monitor subprojects that improve their livelihood. Consistent with the JAST goals, the Original Project and the AF-I1 serve the needs of households with limited access to and use of specified service packages, vulnerable individuals needing assistance, and FI households with limited employment opportunities.

V. APPRAISAL OF SCALED-UP PROJECT ACTIVITIES

A. Economic and Financial Analyses

2 1. The economic and financial analysis carried out for TASAF-I1 and AF-I fully apply to AF-11.' AF-I1 will continue to use the existing implementation strategy to secure the economic and financial benefits discussed in the TASAF-I1 Project Appraisal Document and AF-I Project Paper (PP). The same resource allocation formula, which is based on population, physical size of the district, and poverty indicators, will be used to broaden and deepen the poverty reduction objective of the project in the targeted districts. According to the recent baseline data analysis for the project impact assessment, a significant number of grassroots community assets for social service provision have been created. The demand-driven nature of the selected subprojects has ensured that TASAF funds allocated for such interventions flow to where they are most needed. The direct involvement of communities has generated significant cost-savings when compared to the cost of similar interventions executed by other public sector agencies. This is especially true for interventions in the education, health, and water sectors. For instance, the Technical Audit (October 2007) found out that TASAF- funded subprojects were implemented at a cost of US$102 per square meter in contrast to US$132 per square meter, achieved by public sector implementers under the Secondary Education Development Program.

22. Communities have improved their incomes through income-generating activities in crop and livestock production and are highly motivated to undertake the project activities, While the grant is a one-time support, the communities contribute five percent towards the investment cost and they take full responsibility for operation and maintenance. The active role that communities take in subproject selection and implementation engenders a strong sense of ownership, which helps to improve quality and the likelihood of the investment's sustainability. A recent rapid assessment of the public works program concluded in March 2010, revealed that investing in a public works program for the food insure households yields positive results as indicated below and is therefore economically justifiable:

i.

ii.

About 90 percent of all respondents who received wages from the public works program spent their income on food purchases. Public Works Program beneficiaries have acquired skills. For example, about 28 percent indicated having acquired skills in batching and mixing of concrete during road construction, 28 percent in cement-block making, 25 percent in road construction, 7 percent in culvert making and 12 percent in other unspecified skill areas.

B. Technical

The TASAF-I1 Project Appraisal Document and AF-I PP discuss the economic and financial aspect of the project in detail.

8

23. The design of TASAF-I1 has benefited from the experience of implementing the first phase of TASAF. Project interventions have been tested and lessons integrated in the design of TASAF-11, AF-I, and, now AF-11. To further ensure technical viability, communities are advised to embark on schemes that are simple, small in size, labor intensive, and economically and socially viable. Subprojects are also expected to be of the type that the communities can maintain and operate in a sustained way, and comply with the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) and the Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) approved for the Project. Communities get technical assistance from the relevant departments of LGAs, or contractual service providers, to ensure conformity with the sector norms and standards. All subprojects are first screened and approved at the LGA level and finally reviewed at the national level by the sector expert teams before funding approval can be given by the NSC.

24. A technical audit conducted at mid-term (March 2008) examined whether the allocated resources are being used in a cost-effective manner and for the intended purpose including: the quality of works; the conformity of construction works to the designs; the appropriateness of the contract price; the implementation of environmental mitigation measures against the identified negative impacts; the effectiveness of community supervision; the performance of local service providers; and the relevance of the selected intervention. The audit showed that subprojects implemented by communities are technically sound and that the works are also of acceptable standard. Grassroots communities, according to the report, have demonstrated the capacity to manage large sums of development funds on their own, illustrating the high level and depth of community participation under the project. Therefore, the interventions supported by the AF-I1 will use the existing technical guidelines and procedures while addressing the challenges identified by the technical audit report, namely transition issues that include functionality, sustainability, and completion.

C. Fiduciary Analysis

25. Financial Management. The most recent financial management review was carried out in March 2010 and covered budgeting, staffing, account systems, internal and external audits, flow of funds, and banking arrangements. The findings show that the financial management of TASAF-I1 is adequate and rated as satisfactory. Annual audited financial statements have been received on a timely basis. The Controller and Auditor General issued an unqualified opinion on the project’s financial statement. Audit observations included in the management letter of the audit for the period ending December 2009 are being followed up with at the LGA level. There are no outstanding audit issues pending from previous years. Format, content, and the frequency of Financial Monitoring Reports have been adhered to as agreed. Financial covenants with regard to the submission of audit reports and Financial Monitoring Reports have been complied with. Taking these factors into account, thejinancial management risk associated with the project has been rated as moderate, and the same system will be used for AF-11. To handle the additional funds that will flow to target districts, the TMU will assess the absorptive capacity of the additional allocation to the districts and make provisions to strengthen the capacity of the LGAs to deal with the additional demands. Adequate provision is made under the CE component to cover capacity-building expenditures arising from new demand. In addition, the findings and recommendations of the Field Review of Decentralized Investments (July 2009) will be taken on board in order to strengthen impact on the ground.

9

26. Procurement. Procurement for the Original Project, the AF-I and the AF-I1 would be carried out in accordance with the World Bank's "Guidelines: Procurement under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits'' dated May 2004, revised October 2006; "Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants by World Bank Borrowers'' dated May 2004, revised October 2006; Guidelines on Preventing and Combating Fraud and Corruption in Projects Financed by IBRD Loans and IDA Credits and Grants", dated October 15, 2006; and Guidelines and the provisions stipulated in the Financing Agreement. Procurement for all International Competitive Bidding will be carried out using the Bank's current Standard Bidding Documents (SBDs) and Standard Evaluation Forms. The Government's SBDs for National Competitive Bidding procedures have been found acceptable to the Bank except for the provision of domestic preference to domestic suppliers/contractors, which is not as per the Bank's Guidelines. In accordance with paragraph 1.14(e) of the Procurement Guidelines, each bidding document and contract financed out of the proceeds of the Credit shall provide that: (i) the bidders, suppliers, contractors, and subcontractors shall permit the Association, at its request, to inspect their accounts and records relating to the bid submission and performance of the contract, and to have said accounts and records audited by auditors appointed by the association; and (ii) the deliberate and material violation by the bidder, supplier, contractor, or subcontractor of such provision may amount to an obstructive practice as defined in paragraph 1.14(a)(v) of the Procurement Guidelines. For each contract to be financed under the project, the various procurement methods or consultant selection methods, the need for pre-qualification, the estimated costs, prior review requirements, and time-frames have been agreed on between the Borrower and the Bank, and are presented in the Procurement Plan (Annex 7). The Procurement Plan will be updated at least annually or as required to reflect the actual Project implementation needs and improvements in institutional capacity.

27. Implementation of procurement activities under TASAF-I1 and AF-I has been successful and procurement for AF-I1 will continue under the same arrangement. According to the Country Portfolio Performance Review 2009 Survey and the Public Procurement Regulatory Authority, TASAF's procurement performance is commendable. Nevertheless, the performance rating is moderately satisfactory because the TMU failed to fill the key position of procurement manager for over a year. The TMU has now identified a person for the position and the IDA has provided a No Objection. Under the ongoing project, the bulk of the procurement is carried out by communities through CDD procurement. Procurement under the AF-I1 will also be CDD procurement and will benefit from past experience. There will be a need to continue to broaden and strengthen the capacity enhancement activities at the LGA and community levels, particularly for the latter. Additional procurement training will be provided to participants in the target districts and supervision and monitoring capacities will be strengthened. The TMU at the national level will be responsible for oversight while the LGAs will continue to provide support at the subproject level. Given the demand-driven nature of the subprojects; community-level procurement cannot be planned up front, However, key rules, procedures, and process steps have been agreed on and are incorporated in the Project Operational Manual. The Procurement Plan for the Original Project, as well as for AF-I have been updated, and the Procurement Plan for the AF-I1 is in Annex 7.

D. Safeguards

28. Environment. The Original Project has an Environmental Category B classification and this remains the same for AF-11. An Environmental and Social Management Framework is in place, which will also be used for AF-11. At the community-planning stage, where

10

Extended Participatory Rural Appraisal (E-PRA) takes place, potential environmental impacts will be identified and a limited impact assessment will be conducted by LGA staff trained in environmental issues. Where no negative environmental impacts are identified, the LGA officer will sign off at appraisal and confirm that the assessment has been conducted for subprojects. Subproject proposals that require an environmental impact assessment (EIA) will be sent to the NSC for evaluation by the Sector Experts Team, which will assign environmental specialists to conduct the assessment. The additional financing allocated for public works will target subprojects that enhance communities’ natural resource management awareness and skills. Implementation of these public works subprojects will take measures to mitigate the negative impacts on the environment, with a view to promoting sustainable livelihoods and development.

29. Social impacts. Social impacts are expected to be positive, with Project activities gradually leading to an improved quality of life for food-insecure and vulnerable groups by enhancing their access to social and economic opportunities. In addition to the benefits accruing to the target beneficiaries, there will be increased economic activity in the area surrounding the subprojects and in the rural economy. Beneficiaries will be selected through community-based participatory methods as in the Original Project, which have been found to reach the intended beneficiaries successfully, as confirmed in the TASAF-I1 Impact Evaluation baseline analysis. The Original Project triggered OP 4.12, which necessitated putting the Resettlement Policy Framework in place. This instrument facilitates the mainstreaming of community involvement at each appropriate subproject implementation stage. In this regard, the RPF provides detailed social safeguards policies and procedural guidance. The same arrangements will continue to apply under the proposed AF-I1 as needed.

E. Expected Outcomes

30. The results framework for AF-I1 is similar to that of the Original Project. The additional activities to be financed by the AF-I1 will reinforce achievement of the PDO. Key performance indicator targets of the Original Project are revised, taking into account the effect of the scaled-up interventions. The following improvements will be realized as a result of the scaling-up: (i) improved access to basic socioeconomic services leading to improved learning environment; increases in rural access roads, irrigation infrastructure, and markets; (ii) increased access to income-generating opportunities in targeted districts leading to a 5 percent increase in the income of targeted vulnerable beneficiaries; and (iii) improved quality of basic services, leading to 80 percent citizen’s satisfaction with the delivery of basic social services in targeted areas. AF-I1 is estimated to directly benefit an additional 155,738 people, increasing the total number of direct TASAF I1 beneficiaries to 9.9 million (See Annex 1, Table A 1.1. indicator number 6).

VI. BENEFITS AND RISKS

3 1. The proposed AF-I1 is expected to benefit about 155,738 individuals directly, leading to about 778,690 indirect beneficiaries among urban and rural vulnerable groups. It will achieve this by (i) increasing physical assets and natural community resources through completion of construction and rehabilitation works; (ii) enhancing sources of livelihood through income-generating activities; and (iii) empowering people through earned wages, capacity building, skills development, and community-institution building. The interventions will engender employment opportunities, enhance incomes, and reduce food insecurity. The AF-I1 will open opportunities to people with different social, cultural, and economic standing

11

so they can participate in decision-making on their own development. This will also increase social capital among the community members, improve the provision of social services, increase skills among the target beneficiaries, and improve the community’s ability to manage risks at the household level.

32. Recent reviews identified a few operational challenges. The financial management and technical supervision need improvement at the district level to ensure effective and timely support to communities as they implement their subprojects. To address this, TASAF is deploying its staff from the national and cluster levels to augment the capacities at the districts and urging the LGAs to engage local service providers to augment the capacity at that level. Some projects remain incomplete due to price escalation of construction materials, while some completed subprojects need more resources to have all the required inputs to make the subprojects functional. TASAF management is currently undertaking a functionality exercise to determine the scope of the financial implication and appropriate measures to complete all subprojects and make them fully functional.

33. The implementation risks of the additional financing are similar to what was identified for the Original Project. These include limited capacity of the LGAs and inadequate organizational and technical capacity of communities where intervention will be scaled up. In the past, these were mitigated through capacity-building interventions and assistance from the TMU for technical support. The same mitigating measures will be carried out for AF-11, focusing on the districts targeted through the additional financing. To overcome these challenges, a strong link will be forged between communities, public sector agencies, civil society organizations, and the private sector working in natural resources management. The TMU will provide technical backstopping and ensure that the handbooks are simplified and copies of the Operational Manual are available to communities. These manuals (translated into the local Swahili language) are already in place (See Annex 4 for the Risk Identification Worksheet). Extensive sensitization on the project rollout activities will be conducted to ensure a level playing field for successful subproject implementation in the 25 districts which are additional to the 42 covered by the AF-I.

VII. FINANCIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE ADDITIONAL FINANCING

34. years’ grace period and 40 years’ maturity.

The additional financing will take the form of IDA Credit on standard terms of 10

12

Annex 1: Revised Results Framework and Monitoring and Evaluation Arrangements

543 1,992

78%

7,192,269

54

Table A1.1: Results Framework

14,822,080

85%

16,198,355

5 5

1 .Number of people with access to: (i) Basic package of healthg (ii)Improved water sources (iii) Improved Sanitation (iv) All-season Roads (v) Irrigation (vi) Markets

2.Student classroom ratio (in targeted areas)

3.Increase in income of targeted vulnerable beneficiaries (%)

1. Person-days provided in labor intensive public works program (number)

5 . Citizens satisfied with the delivery of basic social services (YO)

(Number)" (IDAIS) 5. Direct Project Beneficiaries

Df which YO Female

*EOP = End of Project

6,146,533 350,000

0 612,000 33,000 48,000

10,388,861 1,284,461

879,583 2,240,591

201,587 325,500

70:l I 45: 1

10,449,859 1,3 10,256

889,250 2,688,822

247,105 348,115

45: 1

5 Yo

16,8 13,797

85%

16,888,328

55

Project

2013)

ts and incl me generating

10,449,859 1,3 10,256

889,250 2,823,263

248,291 348, I82

45: 1

5 Yo

17,833,797

85%

17,044,066

5 5

Document contribution

to MKUKUTA

indicator target

For indicator I(i) to (iii) target values will not change as no new subprojects will be funded. l o Figures will be made available when the study is completed. I ' This figure includes SP, VG and CB-CCT beneficiaries

13

9,210 10,306

148 5

177 608 475

148 5

' 177 608 475

intermediate Outcome Indicators

6,037 6,500 6,967

6,500 6,967 i Assess impact of assets created on

improved services; and review

sustainability strategies

1,483 1.1 Communities receiving subproject grants (number)

I .2 Community Management Committees for Service Poor and Food Insecure beneficiaries who have at least 50% of elected women (number)

permanent maintenance mechanism in place (%)

1.3 Subprojects with

1,940 6,037

90% 95%

1.4 Health facilities constructed, renovated and/or equipped (IDA15) (number)

312 843

2,586 9,210 1.5 Additional classrooms built and/or rehabilitated (IDAIS) (number)

1.6 Other facilities built and/or rehabilitated for improved learning environment (IDAI 5) (number)

(i) Hostel/dormitory (ii) Laboratory (iii) Library (iv) Administration block (v) Staff office; (vi) Teachers' house 1.7 Markets rehabilitated/

constructed (number) 1.8 Roads rehabilitated/

constructed (km) 1.9 Irrigation systems

constructed (number)

T 13 18 0

26 468 335

121 148 5

177 608 475 70 70 1 70 16

2,174 5,245 5,295 I 5,325

51 I 1 O I 123

11

5 00 49000 I 4,000

1. I O Hectares of land conserved in target areas

0

14

1.1 1 Improved water sources constructed or rehabilitated

2.4 Trained Community Management Committee members in subproject implementation (number)

1.12 Vulnerable individual 2,736

1.13 ShweofPWPwage 40%

I . 14 Beneficiaries of public

getting support (number)

biiVtotal subproject cost (%)

works program 113,414

Men 60,000 Women 53,414 1.15 Beneficiaries of Conditional 0

Cash Transfer (CCT) (number )

2.1 Individuals participating in 0 community savings (number)

22,687

2.2 Communities’ satisfaction with support provided by LGAs/CMO (%)I2

137,784

0

142,000 1 142,284 1 2.3 Trained trainers facihating

the LGAs and communities on subproject cycle management (number)

2.6 Subprojects completed according to design (number)

732

1,483

2.7 Subprojects completed within time of subproject cycle (number)

I o 2.5 O&M committees members trained (number)

1,483

1,754 I 1,800 I 1,800 I 932,339 1 932,450 I

8713772 I

217,315 1 238,635 1 238,635 I 114,124 124,900 124,900

33,600 I 33,,600 1 229192 I

90% 85% 85%

5,522

549000 I 51,207 I 50,000 I

6’ooo 1 7’300 I 3,490

5’500 I 6’958 I 3,490

Assess impact of individual skills on

emciency of subprojects

implementation by communities and

institutions; review effectiveness of public-private partnerships in responding to

community needs

This indicator is captured using Community Score Card. With the inadequate support from LGAs the target value for EOP 2013 has been maintained at 85%

15

- 3

r. 3

-

.- In w

r

3

- 0 h

-

.- E

0 0

k- z e 00

2

E 00

c % m In P

%- e n

-

w

w -

w -

In In

In In

-

w

n n

z

c

z

z f

2

2

2

f

P c1

- i Is, ;E i

3 E

i 3 E = ;F 2

n 5 -

IC 0 x

f -

0 s

c c N

-

c P

0 0

e OD

0 0

c s

I 3 r

W 0

3 r

Q 0

r N

-

0 z: c

r 2

-

r P

F 0 0 u.)

(D m

-

0 W

0

-

0

-

0

M 2

a f -. r

R -. c)

t c? ct

t r c

C -- f

i i

i

N

J N c

$2 m

B r c N

5- In W

B In-

s m 0

$2 0)

h W

W -. 0 0 0

0 0 0

C .-

0 D

2 0 0

2

%- 2

%-

2 OD OD

* '4

-4- In

:- n

In

5

OD In

3

0

0 0 x

' n P F

m W. n OD

In In

2

P %-

P %-

Annex 2: Support for the Food-Insecure Group of Beneficiaries

1. The Food-Insecure (FI) beneficiary group is one of the three groups under the National Village Fund component in TASAF-11. This subcomponent is designed to specifically provide an effective safety net for poor persons with limited employment opportunities.

2. The objectives of supporting this beneficiary group are to increase their cash income, enhance their skills and opportunities for future employment so they can improve their food security and other basic needs, and prevent them from falling even deeper into poverty. The interventions supporting the FI beneficiaries will promote labor-intensive activities that provide jobs for the poor and, in the process, create or improve community assets.

3. The following principles will guide the interventions for this beneficiary group: a) Making poverty ranking the main instrumentfor targeting. The ranking will give weight

to communities with: (i) low literacy rates and a high share of children who drop out of school; (ii) a high percentage of female-headed households and a marked lack of job opportunities; and (iii) a high incidence of shocks, such as seasonal droughts and crop failures (with their resulting food shortages), and other disasters. Additional criteria that are important for targeting communities in Mainland and Zanzibar Island districts include (iv) inaccessibilityhemoteness; (v) whether the communities are persistently short of food; and (vi) whether they lack access to cash income.

b) Having subprojects promote labor-intensive technologies, with at least 50 percent of the subproject budget allocated for wages for unskilled labor.

c) Protecting prevailing employment opportunities in targeted areas by paying less than the average wage in the area (a self-targeting wage that is 10 percent less than the prevailing market wage rate for unskilled labor).

d) Adhering to sectoral work norms and technical standards in all subproject activities. e) Complying with safeguardpolicies. f ) Implementing within local government structures. g) Creating active community participation in identifying subprojects, targeting beneficiaries,

and implementing the subsequent subproject activities. h) Ensuring gender inclusiveness.

4. Food insecurity. Locally grown crops are the major source of food in Tanzania. Food security among rural and urban households is generally stable in the aggregate term nationwide, and a variety of food is available in local markets. Even so, pockets of food insecure areas exist. Food prices remain higher than the five-year average and higher than last year’s prices. These high prices continue to constrain access to food, particularly among households that greatly depend on buying their goods in the market. As food prices begin to rise again, which typically occurs between September and January, these poor, market-dependent populations face increasing pressure, and especially as high transportation costs and general inflation contribute to higher food prices.

21

5 . Food insecurity and vulnerability are present everywhere in rural Tanzania, but these problems vary by region. The central band of the country has the highest proportion of FI households. In regions such as Dodoma, Singida, and Tabora, 45-55 percent of households are food-insecure. In the Mwanza, Manyara, and Kagera regions, food insecurity affects 20-30 percent of households. In some areas traditionally considered food secure, a 2007 survey by the World Food Program found that a large proportion of the population was in fact food-insecure-notably, 15 percent of households in the Ruvuma and Iringa regions. The most food-insecure and vulnerable groups are: (i) groups with low incomes, mainly derived from food crop production; (ii) small-scale farmers, whose income comes mostly from subsistence food production; (iii) wage laborers, whose income is from agriculture or unskilled labor; (iv) people who rely.on remittances and grow food crops as well; and (v) people who rely mainly on growing food crops but supplement their income by selling natural resources,

6 . Rapid Vulnerability Assessment. Based on the Rapid Vulnerability Assessment carried out in October 2009, 61 districts on the Mainland and Pemba and Unguja in Zanzibar, which are widely viewed as food-insecure, were selected for the intervention under TASAF Additional Financing in the first year of the Project (see Table 2A.1). Within each district and community, households will be selected for participation in the public works program and safety net schemes on the basis of criteria developed for this purpose.

7. Targeting and selection criteria. Within a district, a target group consists of poor households with able-bodied persons. As noted, these households share many characteristics. They have high levels of illiteracy, are often headed by women, and lack job opportunities. The children often must drop out of school, and the household is affected by shocks such as natural disasters (droughts, earthquakes, and floods) and crop failure. The procedure for selecting eligible households will be based on the subproject interest forms, which demonstrate community interest in initiating a subproject. The Village Fund coordinator will sort and compile the forms by sector for presentation to the TASAF Management Team for review, targeting, and decision by E-PRA. The targeting of resources within an LGA will be guided by poverty and service coverage indicators as well as by community demands in line with their capacities. Interested communities will be notified if an E-PRA team will be deployed from the district.

8. The community members targeted under public works investments will identify the FI households among them (using a participatory process using the wealth-ranking tool). Targeting will also occur through the self-targeting wage rate discussed previously. Female-headed households and youth groups will be particularly taken into consideration.

9. LGAs will target local areas for funding based on chronic food insecurity, poor access to services, and conformity to the guiding principles discussed in paragraph 3. Subprojects will be appraised by the LGA and approved by the Village Council or LGA, depending on the NVF contribution. The CMCs will manage implementation with the support of a local service provider, while technical supervision will be carried out by the Village Council, LGA, and (at the national level) by the TASAF Management Unit.

10. Service packages. Potential service packages to be funded under the AF-I1 will include:

a) Works that conserve and restore the natural resource base for livelihoods, including food production, such as water-shed restoration, reforesting degraded areas, setting wind breaks,

22

stabilizing gullies, constructing dykes in flood-prone areas and setting up waste disposal pits. Water retention structures like community earth dams and structures adapted for fish breeding and small-scale irrigation. Economic infrastructure, including community markets with associated facilities such as water supply, storm water drainage, waste disposal pits, and latrines. Improved accessibility to marketplaces, health centers, schools, and other social services, including community earthlgravel roads with associated small structures like culverts, footbridges, and drifts.

I 1. Degraded natural resources and reduced biodiversity directly threaten food supplies and the incomes of FI people, unleashing a vicious cycle of poverty, environmental degradation, and hunger. Some agricultural practices harm soils, biodiversity, and water resources-for example, land clearing and mono-cropping negatively affect biodiversity. Poverty and population pressure fuel deforestation and overharvesting of vegetation. To reduce hunger and malnutrition, it is vital to explicitly integrate agricultural production, soil conservation, and nutritional goals to the greatest possible extent. Given the rationale for the AF-11, the public works program will focus on ways of coping with risks and disasters that can cause food insecurity. Investments to sustain the natural resources that are essential to food security generate important synergies with other actions to reduce food insecurity. Natural resource management enhances biodiversity and raises agricultural production and productivity by increasing the supply of natural inputs. Such investments improve the availability of micronutrients while reducing the impact of natural climatic risks and disasters on food security.

12. Monitoring. The LGMsland technical staff and the TMU conduct monitoring to ensure that intended objectives are achieved within the set time frame in the subproject management cycle. A format provided in the Community Subproject Management Handbook requests specific information on physical progress and the corresponding expenditures, and compares them with the original plan. Additional information for monitoring includes:

0 Adherence to planned cash transfers to the beneficiaries with the set gender balance. 0 Adherence to technical standards and work norms as per sector ministries’ specifications.

Impact assessment in regard to poverty alleviation. 0 Value of the asset created (to assess whether the undertaking is cost-effective).

13. Synergies with other interventions. GOT has other rural and urban programs that are aimed at improving the livelihoods of the poor. These interventions are managed under different sectors and institutions, but most make efforts to reach the vulnerable and food-insecure groups. TASAF-11, through LGAs, has a depth of experience in working with these sector institutions and their programs, and at times manages their interventions through a ring-fenced financing arrangement. In all these cases, an effort is made to combine these sector-led programs with TASAF-I1 interventions so that benefits to the target beneficiaries are maximized. AF-I1 will continue this tradition and make a special effort to coordinate with other programs, particularly with the Accelerated Food Security Project. This project aims to contribute to higher food production and productivity by improving farmers’ access to critical agricultural inputs. The food-insecure farmers participating in the public works program activities will earn wages and they might decide to use the income they get to access subsidized agricultural inputs through the National Agricultural Inputs Voucher scheme.

23

Table A2.1: Food-Insecure Districts in the Mainland and Zanzibar

Region

Arusha

Subtotal 4 Lindi Kilwa

Lindi Tc Lindi DC Liwale Nachingwea

Subtotal Kil imanj aro

Rombo

Subtotal 3 Manyara Babati Dc

Kiteto Hanang Mbulu Simanjiro

Subtotal 5 Mara Bunda

Rorya Musoma

Subtotal Mor ogoro Morogoro

Mvomero

I H Subtotal I 4

1

4

iew list of Regions and Districts Region I Numberof I District

- 1 Districts 1 re: Arusha Lon ido

Monduli 1 I Ngorongoro I

-I-,- Subtotal

Musoma

Kilosa I 3 Shinyanga

Kishapu Maswa Meatu Shinyanga DC Kahama

Subtotal 6

24

Subtotal 11 Tanga

Subtotal Dodoma

2

Bahi

n

I

6

Chamwino Kondoa Kongwa MDwaDwa

2 42

Kibaha DC Mafia

Nanvumbu

Unguia '

_1 Pemba

- 12

17

18

- - -

Mtwara Masasi Nanyumbu

Handeni Kilindi Korogwe V Lushoto

Subtotal I 2 I I TOTAL 1 63

25

Annex 3: Support for Vulnerable Groups

1 . Objective. The main objective of the support provided to vulnerable groups is to empower them and their foster families to manage subprojects that will enable them to respond to vulnerability associated with different risks and shocks and thus improve their quality of life and social well-being. The specific objectives are to: (i) support sustainable income-generating activities for vulnerable groups through financial grants and technical resources, and (ii) increase the capacity of vulnerable groups to cope with and mitigate risk. The following principles will guide the selection and implementation of subprojects:

a) Subprojects will be supported if they are in line with the sector norms and standards listed in the community service packages.

b) Funds will not be used to make transfers for immediate consumption-for example, buying food, paying school fees, and buying clothes, except in the case of CB-CCT.

c) Subprojects to be funded will be selected by the beneficiaries (target group). d) Income-generating subprojects will be financed if they are projected to break even within five

years, (In other words, if the subproject will have recovered all of the money invested over the first five years and continue to generate a profit.)

e) Women and men must participate equally in managing subprojects. f ) Transparency and accountability are required in all activities and operations. g) Beneficiaries and community members must participate effectively in designing and

implementing subprojects. h) Adherence to the Environmental and Social Management Framework and the Resettlement

Policy Framework are mandatory. 2. Targeting and selection criteria. The eligibility of vulnerable persons and foster families requesting support from the National Village Fund will be assessed once a subproject interest form is received by the Village Finance Committee and the particular vulnerable group is targeted for E-PRA. Confirmation of such eligibility will be made in a participatory and transparent manner through village/Shehia/Mtaa assembly meetings, which will be organized on the first day of the E-PRA. In selecting the most vulnerable households, food insecurity and inability to meet other basic needs are the basic criteria. Vulnerable persons to be supported will include orphans, the chronically ill, persons infected and affected by HIV/AIDS, the elderly, people with disabilities, malnourished children, and children who head households. Other vulnerable individuals include abandoned children, street children, widows and widowers, unemployed youth, and single mothers.

3. Delivery methodology. Subprojects will be appraised by the LGA, and depending on the size of the NVF contribution, Village Council or LGA will approve them based on vulnerability and conformity to guiding principles. The CMCs, supported by a local service provider, will manage implementation. The Village Council and LGA will supervise. At the national level, the TMU will provide technical backstopping to the LGAs.

26

4. Service package. Resources will be provided to vulnerable persons and foster families for increasing their household income. The service packages defined by respective sector ministries will guide communities on the kinds of activities that are eligible for support. Examples of typical community subprojects to be supported include: alternative income-generating activities based on fisheries, agriculture and raising livestock; and training in carpentry, masonry, tailoring, and other vocational skills, as well as the provision of start-up kits.

5. Monitoring. The LGNIsland technical staff and the TASAF Management Unit monitor to ensure that the intended objectives are achieved within the set time frame. The format in the Community Subproject Management handbook specifies the information required on physical progress and corresponding expenditures for comparison against the original plan. Additional monitoring information includes: (i) verification of the existence of the operation and maintenance plans to ensure sustainability; (ii) adherence to technical standards and work norms as per sector ministries’ specifications; (iii) an assessment of impacts with respect to poverty alleviation; and (iv) the availability of markets for the products and the potential to break even.

27

Annex 4: Risk Assessment Risk Identification Worksheet Appraisal Stage

Risk

Capacity development in LGAs is too low to adequately respond to community demands

Village Councils fail to become accountable to the Village Assemblies over use of resources

CMCs continue to resist being fully accountable to Village Councils Local service providers are not readily available to meet demand for subprojects needing support Government counterpart funds are not available on time

Implementation of decentralization in the :ountry slows down

Overall risk rating

H

N

M

M

N

S

M

Risk bhgat ion Measure

i) Extensive simplification of handbooks and operational manual with resources to support capacity-building work is ongoing ii) TASAF is deploying staff from national and cluster levels to augment LGA capacities iii) TASAF will conduct extensive technical workshops to level ground for implementation i) Disbursement of funds split between Village Councils and CMCs and resources available for capacity building. ii) Use of community scorecards to enhance the governance and accountability structure CMCs only receive fbnds once the Village Councils approve subprojects and reports on the accounts

The menu for local service providers has been widened to include non- governmental organizations, community-based organizations, and skilled individual consultants and firms

Under the President’s Office, TASAF has a budget line in government expenditure schedules from the Ministry of Finance Clear division of responsibilities between LGAs (supported under the Local Government Support Project and Village Councils (under TASAF-11)

M

N

N

M

N

M

M

Note: Risk rating H (High), S (Substantial), M (Modest), N (Negligible or Low)

28

Annex 5: Summary of Components Financed by the Original Project, First and Second Additional Financing

Components Supported c Beneficiaries

Coverage

Original Project ~~

- CreditUS$129

- Grant US$21 million

million

- National Village Fund

- Capacity Enhancement

- Food-insecure

- Vulnerable groups

- Service-poor communities

Nationwide

Additional Financing Credit US$30 million

- National Village Fund

- Capacity Enhancement

- Food-insecure

- Vulnerable groups, including CCT beneficiaries

Districts targeted yearly using Food Vulnerability Assessment reports

Second Additional Funding Credit US$35 million

- National Village Fund - Capacity Enhancement

- Food-insecure

- Vulnerable groups. (CCT not included)

- Service-poor communities

- Districts targeted yearly using Food Vulnerability Assessment reports

- Districts with recent disasters (floods and flash floods)

- Selected districts targeted with the

, Voucher Scheme under the Accelerated Food Security Project

incomplete subprojects - Districts with

29

Position NSC Composition at Start of Project

Chair

Current NSC Composition

Secretary Planning Commissioner in the President’s Ofice

Representatives Ministry o f Agriculture Food Security and Cooperatives (1)

Annex 6: TASAF NSC Composition, Original and Current

Ministry of Community Development, Gender, and Children (1)

Ministry of Community Development, Gender, and Children (1) I

PS, Prime Minister’s Office I PS, Prime Minister’s Office ~~ I

Prime Minister’s Office Regional Administration and Local Government (1) President’s Offices, State House (1) Ministry of Labor and Youth Development (1)

Executive Director for TASAF 1 Executive Director for TASAF 1

Prime Minister’s Office Regional Administration and Local Government (1) President’s Offices, State House (1) Ministry of Labor Employment and Youth Development (1)

Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs (1) I ‘Affairs (1)

Ministry of Finance and Economic

1 x Regional Administration (1) 1 Regional Administration (1) I Tanzania Association of

Chief Minister’s Office (2) Chief Minister’s Office (2)

30

Annex 7: Procurement Plan for RF-I1 for FY2010/11

Details of the Procurement Arrangements Involving International Competition and other Methods

(a) List of consulting assignments with short-list of international firms and other selection methods.

Ref. No.

1

Table 7A.1: Consulting Services

Description Estimated Selection of cost US$ Method Assignment

AF I1 500,000 QCBS Impact evaluation

survey follow up

1 1 2 1 3 14

1

- - 2010/11 (US $)

Completion and functionality of Subproiects 20,000,000.00

5

Review by Bank (Prior / Post) Prior

2 3

6 1 7

Food Insecure Households Subprojects 3,750,000.00 Vulnerable Groups Subprojects 2,250,000.00

Expected Proposals Submission Date November 20,2010

Comments/ Implementin g Agency

(b) Consultancy services estimated to cost above US$200,000 equivalent per contract for firms and single-source selection of consultants will be subject to prior review by the Bank. Prior review of the evaluation process for individual consultant contracts above US$ 1 00,000 will be done in exceptional cases only (e.g., when hiring consultants for long-term technical assistance or advisory services for the duration of the Project).

(c) Short lists composed entirely of national consultants: Short lists of consultants for services estimated to cost less than US$200,000 equivalent per contract may be composed entirely of national consultants in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 2.7 of the Consultant Guidelines.

Table 7A.2: Subprojects

1 Ref. I Category I Estimated Total Amount FY I

31

Table 7A.3: Thresholds for Procurement Methods and Prior Review

Expenditure Contract Value Categorv Threshold(US$)

Procurement/ Contracts Subject to Prior Selection Method Review Y ,

Works

I

I I I Consulting ~>100,000 IIC - Qualification /None (Post Review) unless

>5,000,000 ICB /All <5,000,000 NCB /None (Post Review) unless

- Services - Individuals (IC)

specified in the PP3. <100,000 IC - Qualification None (Post Review)

NOTES: General - TOR for all contracts shall be cleared by the Bank 1 . Shortlists for consultancy services for contracts estimated to be less than US$200,000 equivalent per contract may be composed entirely of national consultants in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 2.7 of the Consultant Guidelines. 2. QBS, FBS, and LCS for assignments meeting requirements of paragraphs 3,2, 3.5, and 3.6 respectively of the Consultant Guidelines. 3. The selection of Individual Consultants will normally be subject to post review. Prior review will be done in exceptional cases only, e.g., when hiring consultants for long-term technical assistance or advisory services for the duration of the project and prior review of these contracts will be identified in the procurement plan. 4. Procedures for CDD Components Subprojects are as per paragraph 3.17 of the Procurement Guidelines. Specific subproject thresholds under the National Village Fund Component will be according to Table 7A.4, with further details in the Project Operational Manual.

Subproj ects4

32

All Values IC - sss All

>45,000 Community All Participation

Table 7A.4: National Village Fund Revised Subproject Thresholds by Beneficiary Category and by Subproject Type

1. Food Insecure Ceiling in

USD Type of subprojects

I .

ii.

Irrigation, earth dams, dykes, stabilization of gullies

Watershed restoration. reforestation. setting windbreaks 45,000 35.000

iii. iv. Tree nursery

Fish ponds and valley tanks 25,000 15,000

33

2. Vulnerable Group Support Type of Subprojects

1. Fishing subprojects ii. Fish farming iii. Tailoring, poultry, horticultural gardening, dairy goat,

beekeeping

20,000 15,000

10,000

3. Service Poor Type of subprojects

1.

ii. Administration block iii. Boreholes, other water points

Classrooms, dispensary unit, teachers’ house 45,000 40,000 25,000

Annex 8: Draft Action Plan for Completion of the Outstanding Subprojects

Responsible Su b-Activities

. Compile list'of all funded sub projects per district, Ward & village. Prepare TOR for an Engineering Verification . Submit a report to IDA

TMU

. Review district subproject budgets and costing . Timely production of quarterly reports and processing of Financial Monitoring Report

There are about 1,000 subprojects funded under the National Village Fund component (Part A of the Project described in the Original Financing Agreement) that were supposed to be completed by February 2010 but still not completed as of March 31, 2010. These subprojects have not been completed for the following main reasons: a) inability of the Beneficiary Communities to make available the expected contribution for the Subprojects due to the negative impacts of the financial and food crisis and other calamities on their livelihoods; b) price escalations for materials and transportation; and c) inadequate technical capacity of Local Government Authorities to support Beneficiary Communities in the implementation of the subproject within the Subprojects' cycle benchmarks. As a result, completion of these Subprojects is necessary in order to achieve the intended outcomes in the targeted communities. To ensure successful completion of these outstanding activities, the Government *is required to submit to the Association by June 30, 2010 an action planI6, acceptable to the Association, identifying those remaining activities as well as the proposed actions. The Government will be further required to implement this action plan by no later than December 3 1,2010.

Time frame

June 30, 2010

Action Plan to Ens '

SN Issue

Delayed completion of sub-proj ects

Subprojects under- budgeting and price escalations

re Completion of St Actions

Undertake an engineering verification of all infrastructure sub- projects with a view of ascertaining the resources required to complete sub-projects Ensure adherence to standard Bills of Quantities and unit prices of common items

Timely disbursement of subproject funds

. Stop financing new subprojects except those under AFl. . Based on the verification report, estimate the cost of completing subprojects and making them functional within the project guidelines

TMU

Submit a report to IDA I I

On going, to be

reviewed quarterly

l 6 This is a draft Action Plan which will be finalized with the Government by June 30,2010.

34

SN

3.

4.

5 .

6 .

7.

Issue

Inadequate technical supervision by LGAs

Unauthorised change of designs and technical specifications at implementatio n stage

Inadequate attention to post completion activities

Inadequate monitoring of social and environmental safeguards during implementatio n

Need to strengthen levels of accountability

Actions

Provide quarterly technical backstopping /supervision of district level technical staff

Carry out quarterly inspectiodsupervise the use of standard designs, drawings and technical specifications

Form and train O&M committee at sub project inception

. Provide for O&M in village/ mtdshehia budgets

Increase technical support to communities in implementation of social & environmental safeguards

. Conduct Rapid Results Initiative to improve district accountability status . Strengthen internal audit at LGA level

Su b-Activities

. Prepare and execute supervision plan . Conduct technical backstopping at all levels

. Disseminate standard designs and technical specifications to district

stages of sub project implementation and during completion . Augment TMU capacity by out sourcing . Unpack O&M and clarify activities and process that need to be undertaken

committees

projects

include provision for O&M training and implementation of environmental activities

environmental safe guard for old sub project . Undertake an environmental assessment . Intensify information education and communication campaign on implementation and monitoring of the mitigation measures

status

accountability status in the media Constitute a team to visit districts with outstanding accountabilities Make available internal audit staff at LGA level

. Conduct quality assurance at

. Form & train O&M . Commission completed sub

. Sub project budgets to

. Assess social and

. Update district accountability

. Publicize district

.

Responsible Entity

TMU

TMU

LGA, TMU

LGA, TMU

. TMU

GOT

Time- frame On going, to be reviewed on quarterly basis

On going, to be reviewed on quarterly basis

On going, to be reviewed on quarterly basis

On going, to be reviewed on I

quarterly basis

On going, to be reviewed on quarterly basis

35

Annex 9: Country at a Glance TANZANIA: Second Additional Financing for Second Social Action Fund Project

Tanzania a t a glance $3. 'G

35

3 2 5.4 3.1 ' 98

8.7 68

5. I 53 --D E, I .ti5 86

... C. -.- -..

93 5.: 3.9 6J

36

B aiance o f P aymen ts a n d T r a d e

( U S mi#ons) T 0 tal m eroh andl se e wort s (to b) Total merohmdiseimports (cif) Net tradeingoodsmdservices

Currern aocoum balance as a %ofGDP

Workers' remittances and compensation otemplo~~w-(reoeiptts)

Reserves. Including gold

C e n t r a l Gowernment F inance

p/. of GDP) Cuirem revenue (including grams)

Current ewenditure

Overall surplusldefioil

Highest marglnaltaxrate(%)

Taxrewcnue

lndlv idua I C crpo m e

E x t e r n a l D e b t a n d R e s o u r e e F l o w

( U S minoris) Total d e h outstandinganddisbursed Total d e h seruioe D@M relief (H fp C , M D R I)

Tctai d e h (%of GDP ) Total debt senrioe (%cf erports)

Foreigndirect imvestmem(netinflo\ne) Porttolfo equky(na2 inf low)

2000

883 1534 -923

-83 8 -10.3

8

97 4

10.8 9 5 11 1

-5 4

3 0 30

7138 l72

2828

79 7 12 4

483 0

2008

30 70 -5887 -2597

-2333 -12 5

b

2880

15 0 14 7 22 8

-8 9

30 30

5938 82

2P38

29 Q 12

823 0

P r i w a t e S e c t or D ew el0 pmen t

Timerequiredto starta business (days) Cost t o start abusiness (%of GNl pQr oapna) Time required10 register propeny(days)

Ranked as ama]orconstraim t o business (%of managers surveyed who agreed)

ElecItichq A c c e s s t o k o ~ offinrnoing

Stock markbcapitalizatlon (%ofGDP) Bank capnalto asset ratlo (%J

2000 2008

- 29 - 415 - 73

2000 2007

. 729

. 9 3

28 3 8

Techno logy a n d Infra s t ruc tu re

Paved ro ads (%of total) Fixedline and mobilhphone

High teohnologyewons subscribers (per 100 people)

(%of m a nufact ured e v o rt s)

Env i ronmen t

Agriouhural land (%of land area) Forest area(%of landarea) Nationally protected areas (%oiland area)

Freshmer rerources per capta (cu.m eters) F r e s h m er vjthdraval @i I1 io n cu bio m et ers)

C02 em Issions per oapita (mt)

GDP perunt cfenergywe (2005PPP 5 perkgofoilequwalent)

Energyusepercapta @.gofcilequiualern)

World Bank G r o u p p o r t t o t i o

(US$ m i h ns)

18R 0 Total debt outstanding and disbursed D isbursem ems P nncipal repayments Interest payments

IDA Total deh outstanding and disbursed D i s b u n m oms Total debt servioe

IFC (fhsoelysear) Total disbursed and outstandmgponfolio

0 isbunem ems fo r IF C o w account Portbl icsales prepaymemsand

repaymentsior IFC omacoount

o f which IFC o m acccum

M IGA Gross ewosure

2000

4 2

1

12

38

2,359 5 2

0 08

22

397

2 000

n 0 4 1

2.593 142 24

43 43 8

4

2 0 0 7

8 6

21

15

39

2.078

0 12

2 1

527

2007

0 0 0 0

1585 529 22

28 28

4

1

0 175 172 0

Note Figuresinnailos arefor parsotherthanthose specified 2008dataare prelimlnary fndtcatesdata are not available -indicateso bservation IS not applicable

Develcpm em E co nom ics. Developm em Data Gro up (0 EC D 0)

37

Mi l len nium Development Goa Is T3?2at?ia

Wth selected fargets to achieve betkeen i990 and 20i5 (c3bmate ck sest to date shown, V- 2 years)

G o a l 1: h a l v e t h e r a t e s f o r ex t reme p o v e r t y a n d m a l n u t r i t i o n 1990 Povenyheadoournratio at $125aday(PPP.%ofpopulation) 72 6 P overty headcount ratio at national povertyline(%of population) 5? 1 Share of income or oonsumpion to thepooresl qunitile (%) Preualenceofmalnutnrion(7bofchildrenunder5) 28 9

G o a l 2: ensure tha t chi ldren a r e a b l e t o c o m p l e t e p r imary s c h o o l i n g P nrnayschoolenrotlment (net .%) Pnrnaycornpleionrate(%ofrelenantagegroup) Seoondarysohool enrollment (net.%) YoUthliteraoyrate (%ofpeople ages15-24)

G o a l 3: el iminate gender d i s p a r i t y i n e d u c a t i o n a n d empower w o m e n Ratio ofgidsto boysin pnrnayandseoortdaryeducation (0 Women employed lnthenonagriouhural seeor (%of nCmgrioukural ernploymem) Proponlonofseata held bymmenlnnational parliamern(%)

Goa l 4: reduce under-5 m o r t a l i t y b y t w o - t h i r d s I

Under-5 rnortalnyrate (per 11300) Infant monalnyrate(per1PW livebirths) M easles irn rnunimion (proportion of o ne-par olds irnrn unizd.%J

G o a l 5: reduce ma te rna l m o r t a l i t y b y t h r e e - f o u r t h s Maernal monalnyratlo (modeledenirnate.per10040011ve births) Births attendedbyskilledhealth na f f (7bo ftotal) Contraceptive prevdence (%ofwmenages 1549)

62 5

Goa l 6: hal t a n d b e g i n t o reve rse t h e sp read o f H I V / A I D S a n d o t h e r m a j o r d i seases P revalence of H IV (%of po pulatlo n ages 16-48)

Tuberculosis cases detected under D OT S @)

48 228 lnoldenoe of tuberculosis (per 100,000 people)

Goa l 7: ha l ve t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f p e o p l c w i t h o u t sus ta inab le a c c e s s t o bas i c needs Acoesstc animprcvedwterscurce(%ofpopulatlon) 49 Acoessto lmprovedsanitation faoilitios &of population) 35

48 E

C02ernissionsf.metriotonsperoapna) 01 GDP perunn ofenergyuse(0onnam 2005PPP $ perkgofol l eqUlValent) 2 2

F o rest area (%oft ot al lend area) Natlonallyprotected areas(%cftotal landarea)

Goa l 9: deve lop a g l o b a l pa r tne rsh ip f o r deve lopmen t Telephonernainlines(per 100 people) Mobile phonesubsonbers(per100people) Internet users (per 100 people) P erronaloomputers(per100 people)

03

on o n

i oa

75

50

f i

0

1995

6 8 30 6

47

5

i3 7 88 78

7 4 226

81

50 35

44 d

0 1 22

03 on

0 0 0 2

2 0 0 0 2007

35 4 33 2

44 0 38 0

88 6

53 99 55 85

6 28 77 78

1

736 91 85 68 78 go

578 44 25 28

7 1 8 2 238 9 2

52 51

53 55 34 33

42 A, 389

0 1 0.1 2.2 2. i

0 5 0 4 0 3 208 0 1 1D 0 3 09

Tanzania

Note Figuresmkahcsare for yea rsotherthanthose specified

Developm ern Econo mics, D evelo prn ent Data Group (DE CD G)

rndicatesdalaarenotavarlable

38

Millennium Development Goals Tanzania

- a - ~ r j o f ~ ~ ~ a m s m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c m ~ m t ( M i C l l a r

Wih selected targets to ach!eve between I990 and 20f5 (estimate cbsest to dateshown, U-Zyears)

E T ~ ~ W mauo+a)i.m A ~ U

G o a l 1: h a l v e t h e ratesforextrrmepovertyandmalnu(rit ion P oueny he~ecoum ratio at $125 aoay(PP P .Xo tpopd ia~on) Poverty heaJcoLm ratic at natlonal povertyIine(%of popdlnqon) Share of income or consumptionto tnepocres! qUnitie (%) Prevalence o t n d ~ n t i o n ( % o t c h l c r e n ~ i o e r 5 )

199 0 72 6 511

28 9

G o a l 2: ensu re tha t ch i l d ren a r e able to c o m p l e t e p r imary s c h o o l i n g P nmayschoolenmllment (net. %) P rmaycompletlonrare(%ofrelevam age grow) 62 Secondary sohool enrollment (net, g Youth Iltemoyrate (%of people ages 15-24)

5

Goal 3: el iminate gender d i s p a r i t y i n e d u c a t i o n a n d empower women Ratio ofgirlsto boysm pnmayandsecorrdaryeducallon(9(3 Women employed In thenonagrioultwal senor (%of nonagrkukural employment) P m ponion o f seats held by wrn en In national parliam em (7Q

Goal 4 reduce under-5 m o r t a l i t y b y t w o - t h i r d s Under-5 monalnyrare (per1ROO) lntarn monalnyrate (perlPOO IlvebInPs) M easles im munirnio n (proportion of o ne-par old5 imm unized. %)

G o a l 5: reduce ma te rna l mortalitykythree-fourths Matemalmonaluyratlo f-nodeled enlmre,per100R00llve births) Bulhsattendedbyskilledheafth SaffQLoftotal) Conlnoeptive prevalence (%of w m e n a g e s 1549)

154 88 80

G o a l 6: ha l t a n d begin t o reuerse t h e sp read o f H l V l A l D S and o t h e r major d i s e a s e s P revalenoe ofHIV(%of populationageel5-48) 4s Incidence of tuberculosis (p@r 100.000people) 228 T u b e m u l o s i ~ c a ~ ~ d e t e o t e d underDOTS (9&)

G o a l 7: ha l ve t h e proportion of peop le without sus ta inab le a c c e s s to bas ic needs Aocessto anmproved mersoume(%ofpopulatton) 49 Aocessto improvedsanitnion facilities (%o f population)

CO2emissioos (metriotonsperoapita) 0 1 GDP perunRofenergyuse(ocns!am 2W5PPP 0 perkgolollequivalent)

35 46 S Forest awa (%of total land area)

Nationally pmteoted areas (%of total landarea)

2 2

G o a l 8: deve lup a g loba l pa r tne rsh ip f o r deue lopmen t Telephonemainlines(per 100 people) Mobile phonesubscnbers(per 1Wpeople) Internet users (per 100 people) P ersonal oomputers(per 100 people)

03 OD OD

1995

6 8 30 6

47

5

13 7 8s 78

7 4 228

e1

50 35

445

0 1 22

03 OD 00 0 2

2000 88 5 35 4

44 0

53 55 6 77

136 85 7 8

678 44 25

7 1 238 52

53 34

42 1

0 1 2 2

0 5 03 0 1 0 3

2007

332

38 0

99 85 28 78

1

91

90 68

28

8 2 Q2 51

55 33

38 s

0 1 2 1

0 4 20 B

I D 0 9

1/29/10

39

KilimanjaroKilimanjaro(5895 m)(5895 m)

Iwem

bere

Ste

ppe

Nguru M

ts.

Mbeya Range

A R U S H AA R U S H A

M A R AM A R A

R U V U M AR U V U M A MTWARAMTWARA

I R I N G AI R I N G A

L I N D IL I N D I

D O D O M AD O D O M A

K I G O M AK I G O M A

M WA N Z AM WA N Z A

S H I N YA N G AS H I N YA N G A

R U K W AR U K W A

M B E Y AM B E Y AP WA N IP WA N I

TA B O R ATA B O R A

KAGERAKAGERA

SINGIDASINGIDATA N G ATA N G A

MOROGOROMOROGORO

Mbemkur

u

Matandu

Rufiji

Great Ruaha

Rungwa

Wam

iW

ami

Simiyu

Ruvuma

Mara

Kagera

Moyow

osi

Ugalla

Pangani

Kilo

mbe

ro

YalovaYalova

KaliuaKaliua

KasuluKasuluKondoaKondoa

ManyoniManyoni

KibondoKibondoKahamaKahama

NzegaNzega

BuoenBuoen

NjombeNjombe

MpuiMpui

MpandaMpanda

TundumaTunduma

SameSame

TunduruTunduru

MasasiMasasi

UteteUtete

MbeyaMbeya

MoshiMoshi

SongeaSongea

IringaIringa

KibahaKibaha

DODOMADODOMA

TaboraTaboraKigomaKigoma

ArushaArusha

MwanzaMwanza

SingidaSingida

MorogoroMorogoro

ZanzibarZanzibar

ShinyangaShinyanga

Kipengere Range

BabatiBabati

MANYARAMANYARA

MasaiMasaiSteppeSteppe

K E N Y AK E N Y A

UGANDAUGANDA

ZAMBIAZAMBIA

MOZAMBIQUEMOZAMBIQUE

RWANDARWANDA

BURUNDIBURUNDI

DEM

. R

EP.

OF

CO

NG

OD

EM.

REP

. O

F C

ON

GO

To To NakuruNakuru

To To MalindiMalindi

To To KasamaKasama

To To KasamaKasama

To To KasunguKasungu

To To LichingaLichinga

To To MarrupaMarrupa

To To ChiúreChiúre

To To NakuruNakuru

To To TororoTororo

To To KampalaKampala

To To KampalaKampala

To Kama

To Kama

Yalova

Kaliua

KasuluKondoa

Manyoni

KibondoKahama

Nzega

Buoen

Njombe

Mpui

Mpanda

Tunduma

Same

Tunduru

Masasi

Utete

KilwaKivinje

Wete

Lindi

Mbeya

Koani

Tanga

Moshi

Songea

Mtwara

Iringa

Kibaha

DODOMA

Mkoani

TaboraKigoma

Arusha

Mwanza

MusomaBukoba

Singida

Morogoro

Zanzibar

Mkokotoni

Shinyanga

Sumbawanga

Babati

Dar es Salaam

K E N Y A

UGANDA

ZAMBIA

MOZAMBIQUE

RWANDA

BURUNDI

DEM

. R

EP.

OF

CO

NG

O

A R U S H A

MANYARA

M A R A

R U V U M A MTWARA

KILIMANJARO

I R I N G A

L I N D I

D O D O M A

K I G O M A

M WA N Z A

S H I N YA N G A

R U K W A

M B E Y AP WA N I

TA B O R A ZANZIBARNORTH

PEMBANORTH

PEMBASOUTH

ZANZIBARSOUTH &CENTRALZANZIBARWEST

DAR ES SALAAM

KAGERA

SINGIDATA N G A

MOROGORO

Mbemkur

u

Matandu

Rufiji

Great Ruaha

Rungwa

Wam

i

Simiyu

Ruvuma

Mara

Kagera

Moyow

osi

Ugalla

Pangani

Kilo

mbe

ro INDIAN

OCEAN

Lake

Victor ia

LakeTanganyika

LakeMalawi

LakeRukwa

LakeNatron

LakeEyasi Lake

Manyara

To Nakuru

To Malindi

To Kasama

To Kasama

To Kasungu

To Lichinga

To Marrupa

To Chiúre

To Nakuru

To Tororo

To Kampala

To Kampala

To Kama

Iwem

bere

Ste

ppe

MasaiSteppe

Nguru M

ts.

Mbeya Range

Kipengere Range

Kilimanjaro(5895 m)

30°E

0°

2°S

8°S

10°S

0°

2°S

4°S

8°S

10°S

12°S

32°E 34°E 36°E

32°E 34°E 36°E 40°E

TANZANIA

This map was produced by the Map Design Unit of The World Bank. The boundaries, colors, denominations and any other informationshown on this map do not imply, on the part of The World BankGroup, any judgment on the legal status of any territory, or anyendorsement or acceptance of such boundaries.

0 50 100 150

0 50 100 150 Miles

200 Kilometers

IBRD 33494R1

NOVEMBER 2007

TANZANIAMAIN ROADS

RAILROADS

PROVINCE BOUNDARIES

INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARIES

SELECTED CITIES AND TOWNS

PROVINCE CAPITALS

NATIONAL CAPITAL

RIVERS