implementation completion and results...

Document of

The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Report No: 132121 - BZ

IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT

ON A

SMALL GRANT

IN THE AMOUNT OF USD 2.8 MILLION

TO THE

GOVERNMENT OF BELIZE

FOR

JSDF BZ PROMOTING SUSTAINABLE NATURAL RESOURCE-BASED LIVELIHOODS PROJECT (P132098/TF012901)

NOVEMBER 14, 2018

ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES GLOBAL PRACTICE

LATIN AMERICA AND CARIBBEAN REGION

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

Regional Vice President: Jorge Familiar

Country Director: Tahseen Sayed

Senior Global Practice Director: Karin Kemper

Practice Manager: Valerie Hickey

Task Team Leader(s): Keiko Ashida Tao

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

BAHA Belize Agricultural Health Authority

BEST Belize Enterprise for Sustainable Technology

CPBL Citrus Products of Belize Ltd.

CPF Country Partnership Framework

CPS Country Partnership Strategy

ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework

ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan

FM Financial Management

GDP Gross Domestic Product

ISR Implementation Status and Results Report

JSDF Japan Social Development Fund

LBA-CSL Los Buenos Amigos Cooperative Society Ltd.

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MED Ministry of Economic Development

NGO Non-governmental Organization

NPV Net Present Value

NRM Natural Resources Management

NTFP Non-timber Forest Product

PDO Project Development Objective

PIU Project Implementation Unit

PSC Project Steering Committee

RETF Recipient-Executed Trust Fund

TAC Technical Advisory Committee

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DATA SHEET ....................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES ....................................................... 4

II. OUTCOME ...................................................................................................................... 9

III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME ................................ 17

IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME .. 19

V. LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................. 22

ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS ........................................................... 24

ANNEX 2. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT ........................................................................... 29

ANNEX 3. RECIPIENT, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS ...... 30

The World Bank JSDF BZ Promoting Sustainable Natural Resource-based Livelihoods (P132098)

Page 1 of 30

DATA SHEET

BASIC INFORMATION

Product Information

Project ID Project Name

P132098 JSDF BZ Promoting Sustainable Natural Resource-based

Livelihoods

Country Financing Instrument

Belize Investment Project Financing

Original EA Category Revised EA Category

Partial Assessment (B) Partial Assessment (B)

Organizations

Borrower Implementing Agency

Government of Belize Belize Enterprise for Sustainable Technology (BEST)

Project Development Objective (PDO) Original PDO

The PDO is to promote viable and sustainable natural resource-based livelihoods for Participating Communities in Belize and therebyreducing anthropogenic pressures on key natural resources.

FINANCING

FINANCE_T BL

Original Amount (US$) Revised Amount (US$) Actual Disbursed (US$)

Donor Financing

TF-12901 2,800,000 2,800,000 2,633,626

Total 2,800,000 2,800,000 2,633,626

Total Project Cost 2,800,000 2,800,000 2,633,626


Page 2 of 30

KEY DATES

Approval Effectiveness Original Closing Actual Closing

05-Jun-2012 31-Jan-2013 15-Nov-2016 14-May-2018

RESTRUCTURING AND/OR ADDITIONAL FINANCING

Date(s) Amount Disbursed (US$M) Key Revisions

16-Nov-2016 1.29 Change in Results Framework Reallocation between Disbursement Categories

23-Jun-2017 1.57 Change in Legal Covenants Change in Institutional Arrangements

KEY RATINGS

Outcome Bank Performance M&E Quality

Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Substantial

RATINGS OF PROJECT PERFORMANCE IN ISRs

No. Date ISR Archived DO Rating IP Rating Actual

Disbursements (US$M)

01 09-Jul-2013 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 0.35

02 07-Nov-2014 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0.45

03 18-Apr-2015 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 0.45

04 07-Mar-2016 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 0.93

05 30-Jun-2016 Moderately

Unsatisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 1.29

06 17-Oct-2016 Moderately

Unsatisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory 1.29

07 26-May-2017 Moderately

Unsatisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory 1.53

08 27-Dec-2017 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory 2.18


Page 3 of 30

ADM STAFF

Role At Approval At ICR

Regional Vice President: Hasan A. Tuluy Jorge Familiar Calderon

Country Director: Francoise Clottes Tahseen Sayed Khan

Senior Global Practice Director: Laura Tuck Karin Erika Kemper

Practice Manager: Karin Erika Kemper Valerie Hickey

Task Team Leader(s): Enos E. Esikuri Keiko Ashida Tao

ICR Contributing Author: Maja Murisic


Page 4 of 30

I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES

A. Context

1. Belize’s natural capital has held the key to its sustainable growth and poverty reduction among the most vulnerable segments of the population. In 2011, Belize was a small, upper-middle income country with a population of 329,000 and a Gross National Income per capita of US$4,140. Belize's growth prospects and main economic activities, including tourism, agriculture, and fishing, were strongly linked to the country's environment and natural resource base which gave the country its key inherent comparative advantages. The livelihoods of the rural poor in Belize depended largely on access to land and natural resources. The Country Poverty Assessment in 20091 showed poverty was more prevalent in rural areas (56.6%) than in urban areas (30.3%). The overall poverty rate increased from 34% in 2002 to 43% in 2009. Extreme poverty increased from 11% to 16% during the same period. A further 14% of households were deemed vulnerable to poverty. Income inequality was high, with a Gini coefficient of 0.42 in 2009. Sharp regional and ethnic differences in poverty existed, ranging from 32.5% in the Belize district to 64.6% in Toledo with its heavy concentration of indigenous Mayan communities. Poverty and indigence increased in all districts, though the sharpest increase was in Corozal. High poverty rates persisted despite the devotion of a significant amount of resources to social protection (5.7% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP)).

2. Belize’s natural resource base was facing mounting pressures from unsustainable practices. The highest poverty levels tend to occur in areas with the highest (e.g. Toledo) or lowest (e.g. Corozal) levels of biodiversity, thus presenting a critical poverty-environment linkage. Forest cover in Belize continued to decrease from 72.9% in 1989 to 61.6% in 2012 due to increasing anthropogenic pressures such as slash-and-burn agriculture, illegal logging, and coastal development. If these trends were to continue unabated, the forest cover would decrease to 58% by 2020 and would be largely depleted within the next 40 years. Also, marine and coastal ecosystems continued to deteriorate due to overfishing, pollution, erosion, and sedimentation, exacerbated by impacts of climate change. The largest coral barrier reef in the Americas and its associated ecosystems provided livelihoods for local communities and contributed to the national economy through fisheries and growing tourism revenues (over 15% of GDP). Fishing is an important cultural tradition, as well as a safety net, source of protein and livelihood for many poor communities in the coastal areas. The decline in fisheries posed a major challenge for these communities. A collapse of the reef system would also negatively affect these communities as it shelters the coastal zones from intense tropical storms and high-velocity winds that cause erosion and coastal damage.

Rationale for Bank Involvement and Higher-level Objectives to which the Project Contributes

3. The grant funding from Japan Social Development Fund (JSDF) was crucial for supporting impoverished rural communities since Belize’s fiscal space was severely constrained due to the vulnerability of the public debt trajectory to various external shocks including terms of trade and climate-related natural hazards. The Belizean economy grew by only 2.1% in 2011 mainly because of continued decline in oil production and weak agricultural output, especially sugarcane and citrus. Beyond economic and social losses, climate-related natural disasters contributed to large fiscal deficits and debt accumulations that required Belize to restructure its public debt in 2007. These severe budget constraints, in turn, limited Belize's ability to secure funding for much needed social and environmental investment projects.

4. The Project was aimed at promoting viable and sustainable natural resource-based livelihoods for the rural poor to contribute to reducing anthropogenic pressures on the key natural resources. Recognizing that poor socio-economic conditions were drivers of environmental degradation, any successful natural resources management (NRM)

1 Halcrow et al., Belize Country Poverty Assessment, Final Report, August 2010.


Page 5 of 30

initiative had to involve local communities and aim to empower people, especially women, by providing them with the necessary skills, know-how, and financial resources required to improve their conditions.

5. Direct Project beneficiaries were the rural poor living in forest and coastal communities close to Key Biodiversity Areas in Belize. The targeted forest communities were located in the buffer zones of five protected areas in Cayo, Orange Walk and Toledo Districts, and the fishing communities were in Corozal, Stann Creek, and Toledo Districts, totaling eight project areas, directly benefiting a target of 3,250 people. Most of the beneficiaries comprised ethnic groups. These groups included the Mestizos in Corozal and Cayo, the Creoles in Belize and Stann Creek, the Mayas in Toledo and Orange Walk, and the Garifunas in Stann Creek. The targeted communities were extremely poor, and women in particular were marginalized. The baseline survey conducted under the Project in 2013 indicated that most of these villagers were subsistence farmers and fishers. The highest academic qualifications of most villagers were at the primary (59%) and secondary (24%) education levels. More women (7.1%) than men (3.7%) did not have any formal education. The baseline income of these communities was on average BZ$1,100 per month. Of the survey respondents, 59% said they had a job (including farming and fishing) and 41% said they did not. Males were almost twice as likely to have a job as females (75% males, 41% females). The 2007 Belize labor force survey showed that women accessed far less credit from formal banking institutions than men, which was attributed to not having collateral and not being the head of household.

6. The project objective was fully aligned with the Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) for FY2012-2015 for Belize (Report No. 63504-BZ, discussed by the Executive Directors on September 8, 2011). The Project was specifically mentioned to support its Results under Area 2 "Enhanced human resilience and capital for a natural resource-based economy." The PDO has continued to be fully aligned with and relevant to the current Country Partnership Framework (CPF) for FY18-22 for Belize (Report No. 106630-BZ, discussed by the Executive Directors on May 30, 2017). The PDO specifically contributes to Focus Area 1 “Fostering Climate Resilience and Environmental Sustainability,” including Focus Area 1’s second objective aiming to enhance sustainable natural resource management. During interviews, stakeholders raised the importance of protecting natural resources, which is considered essential by many rural communities, given the impact of environmental and natural resource degradation on the resilience and productivity of their livelihoods. The CPF aims to address the needs of the bottom 40% and most vulnerable populations and highlights the JSDF Project as an example of Bank support to vulnerable groups in Belize.

7. The PDO was also well aligned with Belize’s medium-term development plan, the Growth and Sustainable Development Strategy (GSDS) which outlines the country’s development strategy for the 2016-2019 period under the long-term development vision, Horizon 2030: National Development Framework 2010-2030. Specifically, the PDO contributes to the GSDS's goal "A better quality of life for all Belizeans, living now and in the future" through "Wise stewardship of natural resource assets."

Project Development Objective (PDO)

8. As per the Grant Agreement, the PDO was to promote viable and sustainable natural resource-based livelihoods for Participating Communities in Belize and thereby reducing anthropogenic pressures on key natural resources. The PDO was not changed during implementation.

Key Expected Outcomes and Outcome Indicators

9. The Project was approved in June 2012 prior to the 2017 Guidance Note on Small Recipient-Executed Trust Fund (RETF) Grants. Therefore, the Project followed the templates and procedures designated by JSDF. Some of the requirements following the 2017 Guidance Note, including for the Results Framework and economic analysis, were not applicable to this Project at the time of project preparation.


Page 6 of 30

10. Key Expected Outcomes: The Project had two key expected outcomes:

• Outcome 1: Viable and sustainable natural resource-based livelihoods promoted among the targeted rural communities; and

• Outcome 2: Reduced anthropogenic pressures on the natural resources in the project area.

11. The livelihood activities supported by the Project aimed to be financially and socially viable in order to ensure the long-term impacts of investments. This means that the livelihood business would not only be capable of producing a profit, but also equitable for the community, especially among its members. At the same time, a livelihood would be considered sustainable when it could maintain its assets into the future while not undermining the natural resource base.

12. In the long-term, it was expected that the viable and sustainable livelihoods with enhanced social, human, physical, and financial capital would contribute to build robust natural capital. There are five types of capital assets that are fundamental elements of sustainable livelihoods, i.e. natural capital (e.g. water, environment), social capital (e.g. membership of groups, market), human capital (e.g. skills, knowledge), physical capital (e.g. equipment, transport), and financial capital (e.g. cash, savings). The Project intended to address all five elements in the order of (i) social capital promoted through participatory development and management; (ii) human capital fostered through training and technical assistance, (iii) physical capital that are necessary to start up the natural resource-based enterprises, (iv) financial capital gained through the viable enterprises, and (v) natural capital maintained as a result of sustainable practices. Given the small scale and time horizon of the Project, the expected outcome would be to reduce anthropogenic pressures on the natural resource base. This would be achieved by a change in practices such as shift from slash-and-burn agriculture among inland communities and overfishing among coastal communities. Also, community awareness of the natural capital would be an important foundation for the shift.

13. Outcome Indicators. The Project had five outcome indicators included in the JSDF Proposal. Through the first project restructuring in November 2016, five outcome indicators included in the JSDF Proposal were re-organized into two PDO indicators and three Intermediate Results indicators. During this restructuring, two indicators (one PDO indicator and one Intermediate Results indicator) were revised. (See Annex 1 for the revised Results Framework.) The changes were necessary to have a PDO indicator that better captures the progress toward reducing anthropogenic pressures on key natural resources, and another PDO indicator to use a more appropriate measurement to assess results. The revisions did not entail changes to the Project’s scope. Changes made to the outcome indicators are summarized below:

Original Outcome Indicator Revised Outcome Indicator Change

Outcome: Viable and sustainable natural resource-based livelihoods promoted among the targeted rural communities

(i) At least 3,250 participants, 30% of which are women, directly engaged in community-based sustainable natural resource-based alternative livelihoods, utilizing new knowledge and skills

Target: 40% increase in the number of participants in alternative livelihoods, out of which 30% are women

(i) Direct project beneficiaries Target: At least 3,250 direct beneficiaries, 30% of which are women, benefiting from community-based sustainable natural resource-based alternative livelihoods and new knowledge and skills acquired through the Project.

Target: 3,250 people

Classified as intermediate results indicator and Core Sector Indicator was used and the indicator wording added in the description of the indicator.

(ii) In all 8 locations, the household income of participants increased through

(ii) Increase in the household income of participants in all 8 locations through

Classified as PDO indicator and the indicator wording slightly modified.


Page 7 of 30

sustainable community- and natural resource-based alternative livelihoods

Target: Household income in all 8 locations increased by 25%

sustainable community- and natural resource-based alternative livelihoods

Target: 25%

(iii) Other non-Grant communities interested in the community-based sustainable use of natural resources models

Target: Interested communities increased by 100%

(iii) Increase in other communities interested in community-based sustainable use of natural resources models

Target: 10 communities

Classified as intermediate results indicator. Slight change in indicator wording and measuring unit (from % to number of communities).

(iv) Lessons learned compiled and submitted as recommendations for national policy and regulatory framework to facilitate community-based natural resource management

Target: 1 national dissemination event organized attended by 150 target audiences

(iv) 1 national dissemination event organized attended by 150 target audiences

Target: Yes

Classified as intermediate results indicator and indicator wording clarified.

Outcome: Reduced anthropogenic pressures on the natural resources in the project area

(v) In all 8 locations, increase in the area effectively managed by communities under the community co-management mechanism supported by the Grant Target: The area under effective management increased by 30%; 8 community resource management plans adopted and implemented

Deleted Deleted. This indicator was intended to measure the change in anthropogenic pressures from the targeted communities on their natural resources, i.e., the second part of the PDO. However, area and effectiveness were not clearly defined. The level of effectiveness of alternative livelihood activities by the communities was not necessarily represented by the extent of the area that is used for such livelihood activities (e.g., the Lionfish jewelry production and marketing). Also, co-management mechanism turned out not to be applicable to the participating communities in relation to the nearby protected areas.

N/A (v) Awareness raised among the targeted communities towards the importance of sustainable use of natural resources

Target: 25 communities show that awareness has increased

New PDO indicator added to measure the promotion of viable and sustainable natural resource-based livelihoods.

(i) (ii)

Components

Component 1: Community Management Support (Original $325,000; Actual $350,712)

14. The objective of this component was community mobilization and capacity building to precede the livelihood investments under Components 2 and 3. Under Sub-component 1.1 Community Mobilization, the planned outputs


Page 8 of 30

included (i) community mobilization workshops in each target community to discuss and develop plans in a participatory approach for specific livelihood activities to be supported; and (ii) gender analysis to ensure that gender issues would be incorporated in several aspects of livelihood activities. Under Sub-component 1.2 Training, the outputs included (i) a comprehensive business training program targeting men, women, and youth to facilitate the transition to and implementation of the livelihood activities; and (ii) Natural Resources Awareness Team to encourage local communities in monitoring and awareness raising for reducing anthropogenic pressures on their natural resources.

Component 2: Sustainable Use of Non-Timber Forest Products and related activities (Original $1.251 million; Actual $1.263 million)

15. This component was aimed at supporting the community-based sustainable use of non-timber forest products (NTFPs) as well as other alternative livelihoods in targeted communities. Under Sub-component 2.1 Participatory NTFP and related sub-projects, the Project supported demand-driven livelihood activities that involved local communities in conservation by demonstrating direct links between sound development and conservation at the local level, and at the same time, show potential for generating environmentally sustainable sources of income for targeted communities. The communities were provided with technical training such as the production techniques, development of management plans, harvesting techniques, quality control, information systems, product processing, and monitoring and oversight. The Project also partnered with local organizations and the relevant ministries and provided technical assistance to the sub-project groups. Under Sub-component 2.2 Business development and marketing, the Project assisted the communities in the development of the business plan for livelihood activities selected by the communities. The business plan was essential for assessing their financial viability, commercialization of the production; the management structure; development of an efficient operation; the risks and a mitigation plan; their niche and explore new markets.

Component 3: Marine-based Sustainable Alternative Livelihoods (Original $924,600; Actual $463,889)

16. This component supported marine-based livelihoods for fishing communities. Under Sub-component 3.1 Participatory Marine-based Sustainable Livelihoods Sub-projects, initial investments, training, and technical assistance were provided to the participating communities similarly to the NTFP and related livelihood activities under Component 2. Under Sub-component 3.2 Business development and marketing, the Project assisted the communities in the development of business plans for marine-based livelihoods. The same approach as NTFP was taken, such as marketing plan, organizational plan, operating plan, and financial plan.

Component 4: Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation, and Knowledge Dissemination (Original $304,400; Actual $556,049)

17. This component included (i) Participatory Performance Monitoring by community members to monitor progress and performance of the activities; (ii) Knowledge Dissemination for Replication including community-to-community exchange of experience gained through the implementation of sub-projects; (iii) Dissemination of Project Results for relevant government officials, policymakers, media and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in addition to the project participants; and (iv) Project Management and Administration by the PIU, housed in Belize Enterprise for Sustainable Technology (BEST), supported by the Project Steering Committee (PSC) established with personnel of relevant ministries and chaired by the Ministry of Economic Development (MED).

Significant Changes during Implementation

18. Extension of Closing Date. The closing date was extended once for 18 months until May 14, 2018. The extension allowed remaining activities to be completed, including (i) training of Natural Resource Awareness Teams in target areas (Component 1), (ii) implementation of on-going livelihood sub-projects and monitoring of the outcome of


Page 9 of 30

the investments (Components 2 and 3), and (iii) conducting a dissemination workshop and evaluation of project activities (Component 4).

19. Institutional arrangements. The Grant Agreement was amended to include Community Participation processes to procure goods, works, and non-consultant services required under the sub-projects that are small in scale and not complex and that require local cooperation.

20. Reallocations. Consultant’s Services were overdrawn due to the increased budget for the development of business plans for approved sub-projects. After the approval of 17 sub-projects, there was $164,580 in savings under Category (4) Goods, Works and Non-Consulting Services for Sub-projects under Part II and Part III of the Project and $191,749 under Training. The savings were reallocated from Category (4) to Category (2) Consultant’s Services and Category (5) Operating Costs as described below, which was assessed to be necessary for Project management during the proposed extension period.

Table 1. Reallocations

Category No. Current Category of Expenditure Original

Allocation Revised

Allocation

1 Goods 46,000 43,738

2 Consulting 366,400 660,085

3 Training 368,000 176,251

4 Goods, Consulting, Works, Non-Consultant Services for Sub-projects under Parts II & III

1,825,000 1,660,420

5 Operating costs 194,600 259,506

Total: 2,800,000 2,800,000

21. Changes to Component Budget. As a result of reallocations, the component budget was revised as described in Table 2.

Table 2. Component Budget

Component Original Budget

(US$) Actual (US$)

Component 1: Community Mobilization 325,000 350,712

Component 2: Sustainable Use of Non-Timber Forest Products 1,246,000 1,262,976

Component 3: Marine-based Sustainable Alternative Livelihoods 924,600 463,889

Component 4: Monitoring and Evaluation, Knowledge Dissemination, and Project Management and Administration

304,400

556,049

Undisbursed: 166,374

Total: 2,800,000 2,800,000

II. OUTCOME

A. Assessment of Achievement of Each Objective/Outcome

22. The PDO consisted of two outcomes: (i) viable and sustainable natural resource-based livelihoods are promoted among poor communities in Belize, and (ii) anthropogenic pressures on the key natural resources are


Page 10 of 30

reduced. Each outcome is assessed against the PDO indicators quantitatively and with qualitative information presented below.

23. Outcome 1: Viable and sustainable natural resource-based livelihoods promoted among poor communities in Belize. This outcome is substantially achieved. The corresponding PDO indicator and two out of three Intermediate Result indicators were fully achieved. One Intermediate Result indicator was partially achieved.

24. An increase (25%) in the household income above baseline resulting from the livelihoods investments support under the Project (PDO indicator 1). The target of a 25% increase on average above the baseline household income of BZ$1,100 per month with investments covering all 8 targetted geographical areas has been met. Some groups surpassed the target, with as high as an 87% increase in average household income over the duration of sub-project.

25. As a result of the Project’s effort to mobilize the communities and build their capacity, a total of 58 funding proposals were submitted, of which 28 proposals were selected after a rigorous screening process, 11 of them were consolidated for efficiency, leaving 17 finalists for funding. Total financing for the 17 sub-projects was US$1,640,250. Additionally, the Project provided a total of 32 technical training courses for 475 people tailored to the needs of each sub-project. All eight geographic areas targeted under the Project were covered by these finalists. Selection of livelihood proposals was a rigorous multi-step process to ensure financial and social viability and sustainability. Funding proposals were first screened by the PIU, then reviewed by the Project’s Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for the technical aspects of the proposal including its sustainability. TAC consisted of the representatives from relevant technical agencies of the government. Proposals endorsed by TAC were then presented to the Project Steering Committee (PSC) for their review and approval for financing. Once proposals were approved, the groups developed business and marketing plans with the assistance of business consultants financed by the Project. The Project’s financing started only after the business plan demonstrated its financial viability and sustainability. The whole process was lengthy as there were many steps involved and typically various questions were raised by TAC and PSC, requiring back-and-forth with the proponent group. The beneficiaries were generally not content with the speed of the process as it ate into the limited time to implement the livelihood sub-projects. Some members left during the approval process as well as at the implementation stage for various reasons. The original number of beneficiaries in those sub-projects was 2,548 people which reduced to 2,064 people at the end of the Project. Many groups were highly committed and motivated to be progressive. These groups completed the proposed activities despite the short implementation period. All groups receiving funding under the Project developed decision-making rules. Some of the groups formally developed their own by-law. The groups were also required to register as businesses under the Belize Name Act. Two groups went further and registered as a cooperative under the Cooperatives Act. Other groups are also following this example.

26. Of the 17 businesses supported, 15 of them were operational and 13 of them have made sales at the end of the Project. Based on the actual quarterly revenue, a calculation of income per member is presented in Table 3. Additionally, of those which have not made sales, two sheep rearing groups were getting ready to sell lambs at the time of Project closing. The water taxi of Toledo Tourism was launched in November 2018. They have not transitioned full time to the new livelihood activities, thus all profits are in addition to the existing income.

Picture 1. Cayo Vegetable Growers


Page 11 of 30

27. Five sub-projects—Los Buenos Amigos, Cristo Rey Pig Farmers, Seven Miles Women’s Group, Cayo Vegetable Growers, Sarteneja Honey—have surpassed the target of 25% increase in household income above the baseline (BZ$1,100 per month). Cristo Rey Pig Farmers earned BZ$100,167 in 13 months between March 2017 and March 2018. With the additional income from labor, they earned BZ$959 of average monthly income per member equivalent to 87% of the baseline. Los Buenos Amigos earned BZ$165,490 over 19 months between May 2016 and November 2017. The result is BZ$702 in average monthly income per member including additional income from labor, which corresponds to a 64% increase above the baseline. Seven Miles Women’s Agro-processing Group earned BZ$11,829 in only 4 months since December 2017, resulting in a 38% increase above the baseline. Cayo Vegetable Growers earned BZ$40,699 in 3 months, resulting in a 40% increase. Other groups that had an increase of more than 10% are San Miguel Pig Rearing Group, Cristo Rey Bakery, and Sarteneja Honey Producers.

Table 3. Annual Income from Livelihood Sub-projects

Name of Group Approved Funding

(BZ$)

# of members

Months Revenue

(BZ$)

Average Monthly revenue

(BZ$)

Monthly Additional

Income from Labor Cost

(BZ$)

Average Monthly

Income per member

(BZ$)

Increase above

Baseline (%)

Inland Communities

1 Los Buenos Amigos Pineapple 171,095 18 19 165,490 8,710 3,920 702 64

2 San Miguel Junalij K'anjel Pigs 163,950 9 19 33,522 1,764 212 220 20

3 San Felipe Melting Pots of Honey 129,858 12 7 6,925 989 742 144 13

4 Orange Walk Sheep Rearing 129,798 39 - - - - - -

5 Cristo Rey Pigs 229,413 9 13 100,167 7,705 925 959 87

6 Cristo Rey Bakery 39,671 5 6 4,231 705 289 199 18

7 Seven Miles Women’s Group 125,966 10 4 11,829 2,957 1,212 417 38

8 Cayo Vegetable Growers 355,110 38 3 40,699 3,118 13,566 439 40

9 Community Baboon Sanctuary Tourism

675,637 105 - - - - - -

10 LINK Sheep Rearing 186,000 16 - - - - - -

11 Flowers Bank Cohune Oil 65,000 10 4 2,383 596 179 77 7

Coastal Communities

12 Sarteneja Sewing 43,054 4 7 1,435 205 133 85 8

13 Sarteneja Honey 129,822 6 17 16,414 966 724 282 26

14 Toledo Tourism 221,252 78 - - - - - -

15 Toledo Solar Dried Fruits 302,354 22 2 240 120 36 7 1

16 Sarteneja Water Taxi 272,444 33 2 3,244 1,622 243 57 5

17 Belize Lionfish Jewelry 40,075 16 6 3,912 652 293 59 5

Average 25 9 23,024 2,610 808 264 25

28. Many groups faced various challenges from organizational to technical that prevented them from reporting sales at project closure, however, they are expected to produce sales in the near future. For example, both apiculture groups lost hives due to bad weather and reduced production. Also, one of the honey groups had to destroy their harvest since it was stored in inappropriate food storage containers and could have been contaminated. After the incident, the Project added two more training sessions on food handling and a total of 89 people were certified in food


Page 12 of 30

handling. Until December 2017, no honey was harvested from this group. In the first quarter of 2018, 100 gallons of honey was harvested, but sales from this honey have not yet been reported.

29. Considering that many sub-projects started operation only in 2017, financial results are promising. Financial projections based on the reported financial performance or estimated performance of each sub-project demonstrate that all the sub-projects result in substantial economic value to the members as shown in Table 4. In total, across all the sub-projects, the net present value (NPV) of projected profits exceed BZ$4.8 million, over a 10 year horizon at a 10% discount rate. This incorporates the invested JSDF sub-project budgets and applies pro forma net profit projections based on the reported financial performance of each sub-project enterprise, or estimated performance where no sales were reported yet. Future sales figures of each sub-project are forecasted by either applying an annual growth rate to a 2018 sales projection based on actual performance reported; or adjusting business plan projections, such as discounting or delaying, based on reported progress which typically includes delays in completion of start-up activities (e.g. procurement of fixed assets or training). Additionally, analysis of the labor cost components of each sub-project results in substantial economic value to the members of each sub-project.

Table 4. NPV of Profits (BZ$)

Discount Rate

5% 10% 12%

5 year $1,797,774 $1,182,276 $979,314

10 year $7,239,652 $4,863,311 $4,147,248

20 year $18,082,938 $10,072,780 $8,088,283

30. At least 3,250 direct beneficiaries, 30% of which are women, benefiting from community-based sustainable natural resource-based alternative livelihoods and new knowledge and skills acquired through the Project (Intermediate Result Indicator 1.a). The target of this intermediate result was fully achieved. One of the main challenges for the Project was limited capacity of the beneficiary groups. The Project strategially placed a local coordinator in each geographic area to closely support the groups and liaise with the PIU to solve any issues in a timely manner. The Project delivered all the planned mobilization workshops and training for the targeted beneficiaries. First, a total of 10 community mobilization workshops were held and a gender analysis was conducted to inform gender equitable objectives in sub-project development. Subsequently, 53 business training sessions were offered by the Project covering various topics such as business administration, record keeping, legal entities, introduction to computers, report writing, conflict resolution, team building, food handling certification, and monitoring and evaluation. By October 2016, the community mobilization and capacity building component was mostly completed (97%). As a result, 1202 people were trained in business skills. A total of 58 funding proposals were developed by the beneficiary groups and submitted for funding under the Project. Additionally, the Project provided a total of 32 technical training courses for 475 people which were tailored to the needs of each sub-project. Eventually 2,064 people benefitted from these sub-projects.

Picture 2. Honey Producers


Page 13 of 30

Overall, the Project supported a total of 3,741 beneficiaries directly through training and liveihood sub-projects. Of the sub-project members, 50% were women and 60% of the executive members of those groups were women.

31. Number of other communities (10) interested in community-based sustainable use of natural resources models (Intermediate Result Indicator 1.b). This indicator was fully achieved. As the Project successfully developed these small enterprises in the targeted communities, other communities contacted the PIU to express their interest in developing natural resource-based businesses. Also, four community-to-community knowledge sharing events were supported under the Project. Those events included the two honey producers, the Toledo Tourism group with a group in Belize City, the two pig rearing groups, Lionfish Jewelry Group and a craft making group from Cayo.

32. A national dissemination event organized attended by 150 target audiences (Intermediate Result Indicator 1.c). This was partially achieved. The national dissemination event took place in May 8, 2018 and was attended by 55 people. Lessons learned from the Project were compiled and presented as recommendations for a national policy and regulatory framework to facilitate community-based natural resource management.

33. Outcome 2: Reduced anthropogenic pressures on the key natural resources. This outcome was fully achieved as evidenced by the achievement of the corresponding PDO indicator as well as successful project results in reducing land clearing and combating fish stock pressures. Unsustainable economic activities on the forested lands such as slash-and-burn agriculture, illegal logging, poaching which were increasingly hurting the healthy ecosystems had to be addressed. Belize’s marine ecosystem and its resources were heavily impacted by local stressors such as overfishing, pollution, and sedimentation. Particularly slash-and-burn agriculture and overfishing were the key anthropogenic pressures that the Project sought to address through training, awareness building, sub-projects on sustainable nature-based interventions such as sustainable agro-forestry practices and alternative livelihoods. Promotion of alternative livelihoods that put less pressure on natural resources would compensate for loss of other livelihoods that deplete these scarce resources. The Project promoted community participation and decision making as a key to sustainability of outcomes, where communities realize benefits from their efforts in managing and conserving these resources.

34. For example, the Lionfish Jewelry Group has tackled the environmental problem caused by invasive lionfish which put pressure on marine resources, while they have elevated women’s role in the fishing communities. Multiple studies show that the fisheries in Belize are overexploited with total landings steadily declining since the 1990s and the size of fish caught increasingly smaller while fishing efforts have increased2. Fishing is the main source of livelihoods in many fishing communities in Belize and few alternative livelihood options exist in the communities. People in fishing communities consume fish as an essential protein source and as part of their tradition. Thus, a decline in fish stocks directly affects their economic, physical, and cultural welfare. In addition to overfishing, Belizean reef was suffering from invasive lionfish since 2008. Their population has grown exponentially as females produce 2 million eggs per year, reproducing every four days. Within less than a year lionfish sightings were reported across the entire length of the Belizean barrier reef. Lionfish voraciously prey on various families of small reef fish and crustaceans, which put them in direct competition with native predators such as snapper and grouper, and they even prey on juveniles of these native species reducing a significant loss of fish recruitment. Lionfish have shown to exhibit a higher consumption rate when compared to similar sized native predators. One study conducted in the Bahamas recorded that lionfish reduced the prey fish population by 90% over the course of two months compared to a 35% reduction by the native coney grouper. The loss of the preferred prey base will also produce a ripple effect through the coral reef ecosystem since most of the prey species are herbivores that help control the growth of algae on the reef. Removal of these herbivores leads to an increase in algal growth which eventually leads to a decrease in the survival rate of corals. These negative impacts, along

2 Heyman et al., 2007. Status of Reef Fish Spawning Aggregations in Belize, 58th Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute; Harper et al., 2011. Under the threat of oil: assessing the value and contribution of Belizean Fisheries. Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 19(6), pp. 152–160.


Page 14 of 30

with a variety of other factors, are contributing to a decline in the stability of the coral reef ecosystems throughout the Atlantic and Caribbean. Small reef fish such as parrotfish are herbivores and cleanse algae of coral reefs to keep them healthy. Overfishing of these fish combined with other stressors such as pollution, sedimentation, warmer water, bleaching, and ocean acidification has put Belizean reef ecosystem in highly vulnerable status.

35. Nineteen women from Belize’s coastal communities including Sarteneja, Caye Caulker, Chunnox, Copper Bank, Monkey River, Placencia, and Punta Gorda formed a national lionfish jewelry brand— “Belioness". This group has contributed to reducing the pressure on fish stock, the control of the lionfish population, and the conservation of coral reefs, as well as women's empowerment and economic diversification in these fishing communities. The lionfish jewelry uses the colorful fins of lionfish which were discarded before, increasing the value of lionfish landings for fishers, and increasing awareness of the invasive lionfish problem nationally and internationally. Many of these women did not have a job before the Belioness venture. In September 2015, the group registered in Sarteneja with the support of the Project and a local marine conservation organization Blue Ventures. This group has moved from idea to reality, demonstrating the members' motivation for this venture to be a success. The Project supported the group to grow as a business by building the capacity of group members and exploring the markets for lionfish jewelry.

36. Another example is Junalij K’anjel Pig Rearing Group in a Mayan village of San Miguel in the Toledo District. Maya indigenous people use a traditional crop-growing system called “milpa” which is based on the ancient agricultural methods to produce crops such as maize, beans, and squash. The milpa cycle consists of a few years of cultivation followed by longer years of fallow while they move to another field to cultivate. While it had been self-sustaining at small levels of cultivation, the milpa system was beginning to put pressures on forested land at more intensive levels. The Project supported Junalij K’anjel Pig Rearing Group in developing high-quality pig rearing combined with corn production for pig feed on a land in their village, which reduced their dependence on milpa and, consequently, the need to clear forests for cultivation.

37. Awareness raised among the targeted communities towards the importance of sustainable use of natural resources (PDO indicator 2). This indicator measured the understanding and commitment of community members to reduce anthropogenic pressures on key natural resources through sustainable nature-based practices and opportunities was fully achieved. First, the Natural Resources Awareness Teams in all 8 locations were established and trained. All the targeted communities expressed their appreciation of sustainable use of natural resources. Five training sessions on natural resource management were held, in which 66 people participated. Secondly, a survey and interviews were conducted during project implementation. Positive responses toward sustainable use of natural resources were collected from 25 communities. A survey conducted by the Project demonstrated that community members understood and supported communities’ ability to earn income in a manner that generates a constant stream of income yet minimizes damage to or pressure on the environment and natural resources. Members also demonstrated an appreciation of practices and features of the sub-projects that are intended to mitigate negative environmental impacts,

Picture 3. Lionfish Jewelry Group “Belioness”


Page 15 of 30

such as no clearing of forested lands, controlling the population of invasive lionfish, installing bio-digesters for processing of livestock waste, clean-up of garbage dumps, and organic vegetables and honey. Additional groups interviewed expressed the aspiration to expand and engage in other sustainable nature-based opportunities such as agro-forestry and catch-and-release sports fishing. Additionally, some of the supported natural resource-based livelihoods have provided positive co-benefits. For example, apiculture not only generated income but also contributed to the ecosystem through the pollination of flowering plants, both wild and cultivated. The shell of cohune nuts that were discarded during the oil production provided alternative fuel for the local community.

B. Overall Outcome Rating

38. The overall Outcome rating is Moderately Satisfactory as there were moderate shortcomings in the Project’s achievement of its objectives. A split evaluation of outcomes is not warranted as there was no reduction of project scope and ambition as a result of the changes to the PDO indicators and restructuring.

C. Other Outcomes and Impacts

Gender

39. Positive impacts include: (i) the extent to which the Project has raised awareness of the relevant gaps between males and females in communities and line agencies; (ii) closed gender gaps related to human endowments, jobs, ownership/control of assets, voice and agency; and (iii) provided evidence to support these assessments. The Project contributed to promoting the empowerment of women in the targeted communities who often had little access to education, few means to financially support the family, and have been less involved in household decision-making. All

17 groups supported under the Project included women, seven of which comprised female members only. Women occupied 60% of the executive positions in the 17 groups. Some success stories from these groups, in addition to Belioness introduced earlier, are presented below.

40. Junalij K’anjel Pig Rearing Group in a Mayan village of San Miguel in the Toledo District combined high-quality pig rearing and corn production for pig feed. The group consisted of nine members, four of which were women and four were youth. With Project support, the group legally registered in January 2014. The female members assumed a strong leadership in the group, with the chairperson, treasurer, and secretary being female. The women were recognized to have played a critical role in making this sub-project a success. It has required a high standard of care or husbandry, timely task

performance, health interventions, monitoring along the production chain and effective production of animals, identifying market demand and serving that market. These women have played a key role in the decision-making process, for example deciding when and how many pigs to sell to markets.

41. Western Women Agro-processing Association (WWAPA) from El Progress Seven Miles Village was able to establish their agro-processing business, while the entire community was able to also benefit from their investment. The group comprises ten female members, who had been producing various agro-processing products such as salsa,

Picture 4. Junalij K’anjel Pig Rearing Group


Page 16 of 30

habanero pepper sauce, and jams as well as plants, crafts, and sewing products at a small local scale prior to the Project. With Project support, their business grew with the construction of a sales outlet which is the only building with electricity in the village, powered by solar panels installed on the roof. It is also a stop for tourists travelling to visit nearby Mayan ruins. The outlet also serves as the first community center in the village to host events such as movie nights. This has contributed to creating social bonds and the well-being of the community members. The group has received technical training including sewing and food handling.

Institutional strengthening

42. BEST as the Implementing Entity. At Project inception, BEST had no experience in managing World Bank projects and faced a steep learning curve, especially in fiduciary aspects and environmental and social safeguards. During project implementation, project staff participated in fiduciary and safeguards training events delivered by the Bank. In parallel, the Bank closely supervised and supported the PIU staff in managing procurement, financial management (FM), and safeguards aspects. Over time, BEST increased their capacity and adequately managed these fiduciary aspects.

43. Procurement. A key factor in enhancing project implementation was the use of Community Participation in procurement process as the procurement method for a number of sub-project investments. Not only it eased the bottleneck in procurement, but also this approach fostered beneficiaries’ ownership in business plan implementation, via the procurement of goods, services, and works as laid out in their business plans. BEST further optimized Project procurement processes and resource use by bundling procurement items.

44. Business Organization. Many of the sub-project groups were newly organized for Project funding. Because these groups were newly formed, the Project needed to provide a great deal of capacity building to support these new organizations to develop and register as a business. These groups have learned to manage their businesses rapidly through Project training. Some groups are now well organized and dedicated to their new businesses. These groups are seeking to become a cooperative to solidify their business organization and promote member ownership.

Mobilizing private sector in value chain

45. The Project has successfully mobilized private sector participation and in some cases formalized their collaboration with sub-project groups. Los Buenos Amigos Cooperative Society Ltd. (LBA-CSL) of Trio Village in the Toledo District developed pineapple production in collaboration with a local juice company, Citrus Products of Belize Ltd. (CPBL). LBA-CSL produces MD-2 pineapples—a variety suitable for juice production—and its harvest and delivery are synchronized with CPBL’s production windows during the year. CPBL interacts with LBA-CSL not only as a customer but also as a collaborator and strategic partner, given that the company provides technical assistance in the field to ensure high-quality standards are adhered to during the entire production process. As the LBA-CSL has built sufficient liquidity to sustain and increase the production of MD-2 and delivery to CPBL, they have begun to formalize and develop distribution channels in local markets. Also, WWAPA is increasing their business in other districts and the tourism market with a consignment agreement with the Belize Marketing and Development Corporation, which has been promoting Belizean products and distributes these countrywide.

Picture 5. Western Women Agro-processing Association


Page 17 of 30

Collaboration with different ministries/departments

46. The Project promoted collaboration with different ministries/departments in charge of natural resources management such as the Agriculture Department, Forestry Department, BAHA, and Belize Marketing Board. This allowed the community groups to have a channel of communications in case they need further technical assistance. This kind of collaboration has been critical for the groups to maintain the quality of their productive activities post Project implementation.

III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME

A. Key Factors during Preparation

47. Complexity of design. Given the limited capacity of the beneficiaries and the PIU which was new to managing a Bank-funded project, project design was not necessarily simple to allow smooth implementation from the inception. Development of demand driven sub-projects and the spread and number of geographic areas (8) added to the Project’s complexity.

48. Procurement Arrangements. It was difficult to fulfill requirements under regular procurement methods in which complex documentation was required and often discouraged local suppliers from participating in procurement of small items. Although Community Participation in procurement had been anticipated to support procurement of goods, works, and non-consultant services required under the sub-projects and was included in the original Project design, it was not fully reflected in the Grant Agreement nor the Operational Manual. This was addressed later during implementation through project restructuring and an amendment to the Grant Agreement.

49. Realistic timeframe. Commonly, business development takes time to mature. Given the level of capacity of beneficiaries and the implementing entity at entry, many of the livelihood sub-projects needed more time for implementation than the Project’s original timeframe, hence the need for a restructuring and a closing date extension.

50. Readiness for implementation. The PIU contracted a full-time technical officer, procurement officer, and accounting officer only after effectiveness and the contracting of these officials was delayed. Establishing the PIU with appropriate staff, as a condition of grant effectiveness, would have supported implementation being carried out as planned.

B. Key Factors during Implementation

51. Revision to Outcome Indicators. As mentioned earlier, during implementation, the Bank noted that the Results Framework would benefit from some minor revisions. Through the first project restructuring in November 2016, five outcome indicators in the JSDF Proposal were re-organized into two PDO indicators and three Intermediate Results Indicators. The changes enabled the PDO to be more measurable and provided clarity on what the indicators were measuring. This allowed the project to better capture results towards the achievement of the outcomes.

52. Rigorous selection of funding proposals. There were effectively three stages in the sub-project approval process: (i) PIU screening, (ii) evaluation and recommendation by the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), and (iii) review and decision on financing by the Project Steering Committee (PSC). At any of these stages, additional information could be requested from the proponents before a decision was made. Where the PSC approves sub-project financing, the cycle reverts to the PIU for the contracting of a consultant to work with the proponents to prepare a business plan. This was a necessary condition to ensure the plan’s viability and sustainability. Only after the business plan confirmed its financial viability, an implementing agreement would be signed with the sub-project group and the procurement process would begin for the proposed investments. This approach led to a relatively lengthy sub-project approval process. The longest time elapsed before approval was one year, while six to nine months passed for


Page 18 of 30

some other groups. Furthermore, the period between approval and contract signing ranged from just under five months to as high as ten months across the sub-project portfolio. The PSC faced the challenge of obtaining a quorum for meetings. This was later addressed by the introduction of a rapid implementation initiative, in which plans were reviewed and approved by email on an absence-of-objection basis.

53. Local Coordinators. The deployment of local coordinators was one of the most effective aspects of the Project’s implementation and management arrangements. A coordinator in each geographic region assisted communities and sub-project groups in general coordination of project activities and followed up with sub-project groups, functioning as the bridge between the groups and the PIU. This approach allowed BEST to have close contact with the groups despite the geographical spread and inexperienced beneficiary groups. Furthermore, the fact that coordinators were group members allowed for communities to embrace the role, as evident from the interactions with the groups consulted.

54. Sub-project amalgamation. While the union of several groups provided economies of scale, this did add complexity to coordination since groups tended to be less cohesive across the communities than they were among themselves and within their respective communities.

55. Procurement and Availability of Consultants and Suppliers. One of the main challenges in procurement was the limited availability of providers in the local or national market. In some cases, even for minor purchases, the Project needed to research international markets to proceed with the purchase of low-valued goods. During project implementation and taking into consideration local market conditions, the threshold for the use of Shopping was formally increased with a no-objection from the Bank as a simplified method to encourage the participation of local bidders due to their limited knowledge or experience with bidding documents or more complex procurement procedures. The second restructuring in June 2017 amended the Grant Agreement to allow for Community Participation in procurement. By using simplified documents that can be better understood by small local providers, their participation was facilitated, and the Project was able to obtain a larger number of quotations. Also, the participation of selected community groups allowed multiple processes to take place in parallel as opposed to the limited number of processes that the PIU’s Procurement Officer alone could handle at one time. With this change, the Procurement Officer could focus on more complex procurement processes. Consequently, project implementation accelerated significantly.

56. Staff Turnover. There was frequent turnover during implementation in PIU staffing, particularly of the technical officer, procurement officer, and accounting officer (there were three technical officers, four procurement officers, and three accounting officers during implementation). This led to critical delays, especially in the procurement of goods and services necessary to implement the sub-projects.

57. Continuity of Task Team. There was a hand-over of the Task Team Leader (TTL) during the fourth year of implementation. But it did not affect project implementation as the second TTL was an original member of the task team and had been working on the Project since the design stage.

58. Proactivity. During implementation, proactive actions were taken by the Bank and client to ensure completion of project activities and achievement of outcomes. Delays with project implementation required an extension of the closing date by 18 months. Restructuring to reallocate funds was necessary for Project management during the proposed extension period. The PDO rating in the Implementation Status and Results Reports (ISRs) was Moderately Unsatisfactory between June 2016 and June 2017 due mainly to the slow implementation of livelihood sub-projects. As a remedy, the PIU developed an action plan, monitored and discussed the status and remedies with the Bank monthly. Another restructuring was approved in June 2017 to change the institutional arrangements and legal covenants to operationalize community participation in procurement process which in turn removed procurement bottlenecks for a number of small items. This allowed sub-project implementation to accelerate and progress made during the last 12


Page 19 of 30

months was significant. The disbursement rate jumped from 55% to 94%. Multiple sub-projects, especially early ones, showed positive results. Thus, the Project was able to achieve most of the targets and the PDO rating in the last ISR in December 2017 was upgraded to Moderately Satisfactory.

59. PIU Mobility. Financing of vehicles was not eligible under JSDF. BEST did not have a vehicle that could be assigned full-time for the Project. Since frequent visits to the beneficiary communities were crucial to support them effectively, BEST explored the option to rent, but there were no vehicles for rent that are suitable for unpaved roads. Hence, the PIU had to rely on the availability of BEST’s vehicles. The communities could have been better supported if there was a dedicated vehicle for the PIU.

IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME

A. Quality of Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)

M&E Design

• The PDO was realistic and the theory of change clear. The JSDF application did require a set of outcome indicators, but it was not in a format of a Results Framework. Most of the indicators appropriately measured the PDO, however, some could have benefitted from more clarity and used other units of measure. Thus, the outcome indicators were modified via a Level-2 restructuring to provide better definition and alignment to the PDO.

• In addition to the PIU’s traditional M&E system, participatory M&E by the beneficiary groups was adopted. In order to monitor the timely implementation of the sub-projects, monthly updates on the sub-projects were prepared by each group and compiled into a report by the PIU to submit to the PSC and the Bank.

M&E Implementation

• Seven training workshops in M&E for the community groups and local coordinators have been conducted for all targeted areas. An M&E training manual was developed by the PIU to be utilized for training workshops. The training material was utilized by those communities whose sub-projects were under implementation.

• Ex-post interviews were carried out to measure the knowledge transferred during M&E workshops and satisfaction with the training received.

• The Bank provided close supervision regularly in order to keep implementation on track. A rapid implementation initiative was adopted by both the PSC and the Bank to minimize the review period by both ends.

M&E Utilization

• Monthly reporting from the sub-projects informed the PIU and the Bank, who were able to better assess their implementation status and take action on slow implementation in a timely manner. This informed the restructurings and closing date extension and allowed the Project to achieve its outcomes.

Justification of Overall Rating of Quality of M&E

60. The overall quality of M&E is rated Substantial as there were only minor shortcomings in M&E design.

B. Environmental, Social, and Fiduciary Compliance

Environmental and Social


Page 20 of 30

61. The safeguard policies applied to the Project were Environmental Assessment OP/BP 4.01, Natural Habitats OP/BP

4.04, Forests OP/BP 4.36, Physical Cultural Resources OP/BP 4.11, Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10, and Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP 7.60.

62. The Project’s environmental assessment category was B because all potential environmental and social impacts from these supported livelihood activities on human populations or environmentally important areas were site-specific, reversible and could be readily prevented, minimized, and mitigated through known management measures. The Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) was prepared in 2013 and completed and disclosed on January 30, 2014 on the World Bank’s external website and the Government’s website. The Culturally Appropriate Community Consultations and Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework was consulted with beneficiary groups in 2013 and disclosed on the grant recipient’s website on August 10, 2017, and on the Bank’s external website on December 12, 2017. The Project’s ESMF includes a screening procedure to screen-out activities that trigger OP 4.12. All 17 sub-projects developed under the Project included Environmental and Social Management Plans (ESMP) that were reviewed and approved by the Bank.

63. Safeguards performance was mostly rated Moderately Satisfactory throughout the life of the Project due to the slowness in the preparation of ESMPs. The Project, however, increased the environmental and social management capacity of participating communities through the development of ESMPs for specific livelihood diversification options and their implementation. Considering the basic knowledge and capacity of these communities prior to the Project, they quickly adopted the safeguards concepts and remedied where necessary. They have also rapidly embraced the concept of sustainable natural resources management to reduce threats to forest and marine resources while enhancing the socio-economic value of participatory natural resource management.

64. No significant safeguards implementation issues occurred during project implementation except for a food handling case in the honey production. San Felipe Honey Group was among the first sub-projects, starting the training in June 2015, with the first harvest in May 2016, and the first sale in August 2016. The group again harvested 60 gallons of honey in April and May 2017. However, this honey had to be destroyed since it was stored in inappropriate food storage containers and the honey could have been contaminated. The PIU and the Honey Group acted promptly to destroy the honey in question and documented the incident, which was received by the Bank in June 2017. It prompted the urgent need to add more training in food handling to cover all groups dealing with food as well as more detailed training in safeguards for the PIU to be able to monitor and comply with the Project’s ESMF and the EMPs as mentioned above.

65. The Project provided four training sessions for the sub-project groups in food safety in partnershp with Belize Agriculture Health Authority (BAHA) between January 2016 and January 2018, in which a total of 89 people participated. All these trainees received a food handling certificate by BAHA at the end of the training.

66. BEST received safeguards implementation support throughout the life of the Project. In particular, BEST benefitted from the Environmental and Social Safeguards Training offered in Belize in July 2017 by the Environmental and Social Safeguards Team of the Bank that was specifically tailored for the multiple PIUs of Bank-supported projects.

Financial Management

67. BEST had a financial management system in place and kept improving their system to ensure that timely, accurate and reliable financial information was available to manage and monitor the Project. These improvements included a revision of the Project’s chart of accounts, eliminating the parallel practice of recording project transactions, and design a systematic audit preparation process. BEST addressed these issues during implementation and satisfactorily improved its financial management system to manage and monitor the Project’s financial data.


Page 21 of 30

Procurement

68. BEST had little experience in implementing procurement processes following the World Bank Procurement Guidelines prior to the Project. During project implementation, the PIU staff participated in the Bank fiduciary training and quickly built capacity in procurement. The PIU worked closely with the Bank to find solutions to the challenges and managed the procurement aspects satisfactorily. The main challenges were the limited availability of providers in the local or national market and procurement of a number of small items for the sub-projects. Solutions included increasing the threshold for the use of Shopping as a simplified method to avoid the non-participation of local bidders, and the activation of Community Participation in procurement.

C. Bank Performance

Quality at Entry

69. The Bank identified, facilitated preparation of, and appraised the Project such that it was consistent with the Bank’s strategic involvement in the country focusing on poverty, gender, and social development aspects. Being a small RETF prior to the 2017 Guidance, there was a confusion and delay in assessing applicable safeguards policies and, hence, developing appropriate safeguards instruments. The original implementation period was ambitious given the baseline capacity of the beneficiaries in particular. Also, although Community Participation in procurement was contemplated in design, it was not fully reflected in the Grant Agreement and the Operational Manual for this procurement arrangement to be utilized initially.

Quality of Supervision

70. As mentioned in the key issues for implementation section, throughout the Project life, the Bank proactively identified and resolved risks to the achievement of relevant development outcomes as evidenced in the Project’s two Level II restructurings. The Bank provided close supervision of fiduciary and safeguard aspects as documented in the Implementation Status Reports (ISRs) and aide memoires. The Bank conducted implementation support missions twice a year on average. Although the Task Team members were located in Washington D.C. and Honduras (Procurement Specialist), communications were fluid and responsive. The ISRs were filed on time and provided candid observations of the implementation status and prospects.

Justification of Overall Rating of Bank Performance

71. Overall rating of Bank performance is Moderately Satisfactory as there were some shortcomings in Quality at Entry.

D. Risk to Development Outcome

72. The following risks to maintaining the achievement of the operation's development outcome have been identified:

• Farm tampering/theft risks to agricultural production, apiculture, and livestock husbandry. Many groups engaged in small agricultural production and livestock husbandry, which are at risk of tampering and theft. These groups have built in measures to secure the production sites, such as locks on the covered structures, fences, enclosures, etc.

• Disease Outbreak risks. For those groups engaged in agricultural production, apiculture, and livestock husbandry, an outbreak of any disease that is out of their control that may destroy their assets and production. The groups have received technical assistance from relevant government agencies to improve their knowledge to prevent diseases. Also, the groups have engaged local veterinarians regularly to prevent outbreak.


Page 22 of 30

• Natural Disaster. Hurricanes, severe storms, flooding, and droughts affect any natural resource-based businesses including tourism. Any structures built for the sub-projects avoided flood-prone areas. Also, the material used are of quality and sturdiness to withstand strong wind and rain.

73. There are also risks that affect the further development of the operation’s outcome, such as:

• Larger economic development occurs in the beneficiaries' area, which leads them to abandon their businesses. As long as the sub-projects continue to be profitable, there is less chance of switching or changing employment.

• Financial and market environment turns unfavorable. The business plans have included recommendations for the sub-projects to continue to develop and/or diversify production and market.

V. LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS

74. The Project faced various challenges during implementation, which were related to both project design and implementation. Being one of the first sizeable investments in rural livelihoods development in Belize, it has generated important lessons and recommendations that can serve as an input to future operations in sustainable livelihoods development. The lessons are summarized as follows:

Project design

• The scope of the PDO and design of a participatory project should be relative to the beneficiaries’ capacity. One of the main challenges that the Project faced was the varying degrees of capacity at the community level in planning and implementation of livelihoods activities, especially since newly organized groups had very limited capacity. To overcome this challenge, the Project had to increase capacity building activities. Likewise, the Project could have been even more effective in supporting the groups if the geographical area was more concentrated. A rigorous assessment of beneficiary capacity early on would be recommended in order to set the right scope of the PDO and design for a project that depends on a participatory approach.

• Social capital is vital for the successful sustainable livelihoods. While investments in financial, physical, and human capacity are essential to the livelihoods development, social capital is often neglected to improve rural livelihoods and make it sustainable. The Project supported the beneficiary groups to form and develop their own management and decision-making rules. During the implementation, some members dropped out. But the remaining members are generally motivated and committed. The members pool their funds for the group, grow their skills together, and help each other in various ways, and sharing benefits among themselves. With increased social capital, there is more likelihood of successful and sustainable livelihoods development.

• The Project implementation should be no less than five years and the capacity building should start immediately after the inception, given that livelihood investments take time to start generating income and to demonstrate results.

• To increase the ownership of the sub-project activities among the groups, the Project design should consider an incentive mechanism such as a requirement for the groups to put equity into the sub-projects. Much of the delays in implementation owes to the lack of ownership by the groups. There must be an incentive mechanism to keep them motivated and diligent.

• Beneficiaries’ expectation level must be managed early and carefully as business investments take years to become profitable. Beneficiaries can lose interest quickly and disengage from business development if their expectation is not met. It is thus important to manage their expectation with a clear indication from project preparation that investments need several years to mature.


Page 23 of 30

• Community Participation in Procurement is a key element for successful community development projects. This procurement method should be more widely utilized in the Bank-supported projects that involves community-driven activities.

• Financing of vehicles would have been an effective approach in a project to support rural communities. To effectively support rural beneficiaries, especially with limited experience and capacity, frequent interactions in person are essential and, thus, the PIU needs good mobility. Not having a dedicated vehicle, the PIU had to rely on the availability of the implementing entity’s vehicles. The communities could have been better supported if there was a dedicated vehicle for the PIU.

Project Implementation

• Capacity constraints of the implementing agency may pose challenges in the early phases of project implementation. On the technical side, local implementing agency (BEST) possessed deep knowledge and long experience in supporting rural livelihoods. However, its capacity related to other project management aspects was intermittent. Even though BEST has proven to be the right entity to manage the JSDF Project, significant efforts had to be made to increase its capacity in project management, financial management, procurement, environmental and social safeguards.

• While rigorous project oversight and decision-making structure are appropriate for quality assurance, the process needs to be streamlined and efficient. The two-layer decision-making structure by the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and the Project Steering Committee (PSC) contributed to the technical quality assurance of and political support for the sub-projects. Moreover, rigorous selection process and the time lapse until the start of sub-projects resulted in the groups consisting of only the most committed members proceeding with the investment part of the livelihoods support. However, the downside of such rigorousness and a complex decision-making structure tend to create delays in the implementation.

• Alternative livelihoods activities need continuous technical support to be successful and sustainable. Projects can support livelihoods activities only for a few years during the Project’s timeframe. Therefore, during the implementation, projects should create a network of support beyond the financing timeframe with various players such as the Government’s technical departments, the private sector, and NGOs.

.


Page 24 of 30

ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS

A. RESULTS INDICATORS A.1 PDO Indicators Objective/Outcome: Promotion of viable and sustainable natural resource-based livelihoods

Indicator Name Unit of Measure

Baseline Original Target Formally Revised

Target

Actual Achieved at Completion

Increase in the household income of participants in all 8 locations through sustainable community- and natural resource-based alternative livelihoods

Percentage 0.00 25.00 25.00 25.00

31-Jan-2013 14-Nov-2016 14-May-2018 14-May-2018

Comments (achievements against targets): 17 businesses have been established, 15 of them became operational, and 13 of them have made revenues at the end of the Project. The average increase in household income above the baseline (BZ$1100) is 25% at the end of the Project. Objective/Outcome: Reduced anthropogenic pressures on the key natural resources



Target


Awareness raised among the targeted communities towards the importance of sustainable

Number 0.00 25.00 25.00 25.00

31-Jan-2013 14-Nov-2016 14-May-2018 14-May-2018


Page 25 of 30

use of natural resources

Comments (achievements against targets): The Natural Resources Awareness Teams in all 8 locations were established and trained. Five training sessions on natural resource management were held and participated by 66 people.

A.2 Intermediate Results Indicators

Component: Component 1, 2, 3



Target


Direct project beneficiaries Number 0.00 3250.00 3250.00 3741.00

31-Jan-2012 14-Nov-2016 14-May-2018 14-May-2018

Female beneficiaries Percentage 0.00 30.00 30.00 50.00

31-Jan-2012 14-Nov-2016 14-May-2018 14-May-2018

Comments (achievements against targets): 95 training and workshops were provided and participated by 1677 people covering various topics. Sub-projects benefitted 2,064 people, of which 50% were women and 60% of the executive members of those groups were women.

Component: Component 2, 3, 4



Target


Increase in other communities Number 0.00 25.00 10.00 10.00


Page 26 of 30

interested in community-based sustainable use of natural resources models

31-Jan-2013 14-Nov-2016 15-May-2018 14-May-2018

Comments (achievements against targets): As the Project successfully delivered workshops and training, non-target communities heard about the Project and 10 of them contacted the PIU and expressed their interest in developing natural resource-based businesses.

Component: Component 4



Target


1 national dissemination event organized attended by 150 target audiences

Yes/No N Y Y N

31-Jan-2013 14-Nov-2016 14-May-2018 14-May-2018

Comments (achievements against targets): This was partially achieved. The national dissemination event took place in May 8, 2018 attended by 55 people.


Page 27 of 30

B. ORGANIZATION OF THE ASSESSMENT OF THE PDO

Objective/Outcome 1 – Promote viable and sustainable natural resource-based livelihoods

Outcome Indicators 1. Increase in the household income of participants in all 8 locations through sustainable community- and natural resource-based alternative livelihoods

Intermediate Results Indicators

1. At least 3,250 direct beneficiaries, 30% of which are women, benefiting from community-based sustainable natural resource-based alternative livelihoods and new knowledge and skills acquired through the Project 2. Increase in other communities interested in the community-based sustainable use of natural resources models

Key Outputs by Component (linked to the achievement of the Objective/Outcome 1)

1. At least 9 community mobilization workshops in selected locations for a target of 600 participants total;

2. Community groups developed management rules; 3. At least 11 viable livelihoods models selected; 4. Training in business management, bookkeeping, proposal writing, etc. for 600

people; 5. Gender analysis reflected in livelihoods activities; 6. A business and marketing plan developed for each proposed livelihood activity to

validate financial prospect and sustainability.

7. 600 people who received training in technical skills required for sub-project implementation.

Objective/Outcome 2

Outcome Indicators 1. Awareness raised among the targeted communities towards the importance of

sustainable use of natural resources


Page 28 of 30

Intermediate Results Indicators 1. Increase in other communities interested in the community-based sustainable use of

natural resources models 2. A national dissemination event organized attended by 150 target audiences

Key Outputs by Component (linked to the achievement of the Objective/Outcome 2)

1. 8 Natural Resources Awareness Teams

2. 4 community-to-community knowledge sharing events. 3. Recommendations to national policies and regulations to promote rural

livelihoods activities.


Page 29 of 30

. .

ANNEX 2. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT

Components Amount at Approval

(US$M) Actual at Project

Closing (US$M) Percentage of Approval

(%)

1. Community Management Support

0.325 0.219 67.4

2. Sustainable Use of Non-Timber Forest Products and related activities

1.251 1.263 101

3. Marine-based Sustainable Alternative Livelihoods

0.925 0.464 50.2

4. Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation, and Knowledge Dissemination

0.299 0.687 229.8

Total 2.80 2.633 94


Page 30 of 30

ANNEX 3. RECIPIENT, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS

Mr. Dennis Jones, Managing Director, Belize Enterprise for Sustainable Technology (Implementing Entity)

Generally speaking, we are satisfied that the report reflects the achievements of the project. BEST would like to make comments for emphasis and clarification, which are listed below.

• Sub-component 3. 1 – Marine based Sustainable Alternative Livelihoods (Participatory Marine based Sustainable Livelihoods Sub-projects) The failure to get participation in innovative projects, such as , seaweed production and the introduction of shades for lobster production, had to do with the fact that the projects were supposed to be “ demand driven” which limited ,even eliminated in some cases , technical input from skilled persons outside of the beneficiary groups .

• Sub-component 3. 2 – Business Development and Marketing (Project Management and Administration) Consideration needs to be made in the design of future projects to ensure that the Project Implementation Units are clear as to the technical capacities needed to implement the sub-projects. In this case, the project was designed for a complement of two staff, none of which could cover the range of skills that were required to implement all the activities across the 17 sub-projects.

SECTION III: KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME

• BEST as the implementing Entity - BEST takes this opportunity to emphasize the positive impact of the technical support given by the World Bank Staff through the Monitoring and Evaluation missions and the online support provided in the areas of Project Management, Procurement and Financial Management. Though there was frequent turnover of procurement and accounting staff, the institution benefited from the skills transfers.

SECTION V: LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS

• Project Design - The issues related to the time frame for the implementation of the sub-projects need to be emphasized. It is difficult to harness all the technical skills needed by the beneficiary groups within the relatively short period for the implementation of these sub-projects.

• Project Implementation (Alternative Livelihoods activities need continuous technical support to be successful and sustainable.) This is an issue that project designers will have to grapple, if these livelihood projects are to have the desired impact. There is a gap between when these projects start and when they begin to generate benefits. Additional time for the transfer of skills and the generation of income must be provided.

implementation completion and results...

Documents