58535 WORLD BANK POLICY ON ACCESS TO INFORMATION PROGRESS REPORT NOVEMBER 2009 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 2010 LEGAL VICE PRESIDENCY December 16, 2010 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ACS Administrative and Client Services Network AFR Africa Regional Vice Presidency AI Access to Information AIC Access to Information Committee AMS Administrative Manual Statement BETF Bank-executed trust fund CAS Country Assistance Strategy CD Country Director CM Country Manager COGAM Committee on Governance and Executive Directors' Administrative Matters CSO Civil Society Organization EAP East Asia Regional Vice Presidency ESW Economic Sector Work EXT External Affairs Vice Presidency FY10 Fiscal Year 2010 FY11 Fiscal Year 2011 GSD General Services Department HQ World Bank Headquarters HRSLO Leadership and Organizational Effectiveness, Human Resources Vice Presidency IEG Independent Evaluation Group IFC International Finance Corporation ISG Information Solutions Group ISR Implementation Status and Results Report IT Information Technology LAC Latin America and Caribbean Regional Vice Presidency LEG Legal Vice Presidency LEGIP Information Policy Unit, LEG MIGA Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency MNA Middle East North Africa Regional Vice Presidency MOF Ministry of Finance MOP Memorandum of the President OIS Office of Information Security OPCS Operations Policy and Country Services Vice Presidency ORAF Operational Risk Assessment Framework PAD Project Appraisal Document PD Program Document PIC Public Information Center RMT Resource Management Team SAR South Asia Regional Vice Presidency SEC Corporate Secretary Vice Presidency SD Sustainable Development SDN Sustainable Development Network TRD Tranche Release Document VP Vice President VPU Vice Presidential Unit Page | 1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report is endorsed by the Access to Information Committee. LEG (Information Policy Unit) prepared this report with contributions from EXT (Operational Communications Unit), ISG (Archives Unit, and Solutions Design and Implementation Unit), and SEC (Policy and Operations Unit). The preparation for, and implementation of, the AI Policy has been a collaborative effort involving many units across the World Bank. The list below, which is not exhaustive, shows the units that were involved in carrying out the various work discussed in this Report. Collaboration with Civil Society Organizations: led by EXT in collaboration with ISG. Development of External and Internal AI website: led by EXT in collaboration with OPCS, LEG, ISG, GSD and SEC. Proactive disclosure of more than 17,000 documents: led by ISG in collaboration with OPCS, EXT, LEG and Regional VPUs. Improvement of Accessibility of Legal Documents: led by LEG in collaboration with ISG. Development of Tracking System: led by EXT in collaboration with ISG and LEG. Development of AI Policy Statement: led by LEG in collaboration with OPCS. Development of AI Staff Handbook: led by OPCS in collaboration with LEG, ISG, EXT, SEC and other relevant business units. Development of Information Classification Policy: led by GSD in collaboration with LEG. Development of Classification Handbook for Restricted Information: led by GSD in collaboration with LEG and other business units. Development of quick reference guides and communication packages: led by OPCS and EXT in collaboration with LEG and other business units. Development of AI Guidance for Financial Management, and AI Guidance for Staff on Handling Procurement Information: led by OPCS in collaboration with Regional FM and Procurement groups and LEG. Carrying out AI Communications Action Plan: led by EXT in collaboration with OPCS, LEG, ISG and other relevant business units. Management of Internal Helpdesks on (i) the AI Policy; (ii) operations-related information; (iii) classification of restricted information; (iv) records management; and (v) handling of public requests for information: respectively, by LEG, OPCS, OIS, ISG, and EXT. Coordination of AI Focal Points: led initially by EXT; after AI Policy effectiveness, led by LEG. Development of AI Learning and Training Plan: led by EXT in collaboration with OPCS and LEG. o AI Readiness Presentations and CommNet Sessions: led by EXT in collaboration with OPCS, LEG and GSD. o AI Policy Overview webinars: organized by EXT, with LEG and OPCS managing the content and training the trainers, and support from HRSLO. o Mandatory AI e-Learning Program: sponsored by LEG, EXT, OPCS, ISG and GSD, and organized by EXT, with content provided by OPCS, LEG, ISG, GSD and EXT, and support from HRSLO. Active promotion by EXT, LEG, OPCS, ISG and GSD. Registration drives led by EXT, supported by the other sponsoring units. Weekly completion reports compiled by EXT and communicated by LEG to VPUs/Departments. Also promoted by individual VPUs, departments, units, and AI Focal Points. o Specialized Face-to-Face Training: organized by EXT, OPCS, LEG; delivered by OPCS and LEG. o On-line Webcasts ­ AI-related Topics: developed by EXT, LEG and OPCS. o AI Focal Point Training: organized by EXT and delivered by OPCS and LEG. Enhancement and Development of Information Technology Systems: led by ISG in consultation with LEG, OPCS, OIS and other relevant business units. Monitoring of records management: led by ISG, in collaboration with relevant business units. Page | 2 WORLD BANK POLICY ON ACCESS TO INFORMATION PROGRESS REPORT NOVEMBER 2009 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 2010 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .........................................................................................5 I. INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................8 - Purpose and Structure of this Report ......................................................................8 II. PREPARATION AND IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES .............................................9 - Access to Information Working Group ................................................................9 - Collaboration with CSOs ................................................................................9 - Public Outreach and Disclosures .........................................................................9 - Development of Bank Infrastructure and Staff Support .............................................11 III. ACCESS TO INFORMATION BY THE PUBLIC .....................................................16 A. Proactive Disclosures ................................................................................16 - Documents and Reports ...........................................................................16 - Public Interest in Newly Disclosed Documents .................................................17 - Simultaneous Disclosure .............................................................................17 - Operational Risk Assessment Framework Decisions and Implementation Status and Results Reports .......................................................17 - Board Records ........................................................................................18 B. Disclosures on Request .................................................................................18 - Public Access Requests ..............................................................................18 - Overview of Public Requests for Information ­ Status as of September 30, 2010 ..........19 - Timeliness of Response to AI Requests ...........................................................19 - Reasons for Additional Response Time ............................................................20 - Overview of Complex Requests and Requests Requiring Consultations ....................20 - Exceptions Justifying Denial of Access .............................................................22 - Other Grounds for Denial ...........................................................................23 - Profile of Requesters and Requests .................................................................23 - Managing Requests in Languages other than English ..........................................23 IV. ACCESS TO INFORMATION COMMITTEE DECISIONS ­ PREROGATIVE TO DISCLOSE, AND POLICY INTERPRETATIONS ......................24 - Exercise of the Bank's Prerogative to Disclose Restricted Information ........................24 - AI Policy Interpretations ..........................................................................25 V. THE APPEALS PROCESS .............................................................................26 - Types of Appeals .......................................................................................26 - AIC Decisions on Appeals ­ First Quarter ...........................................................26 - AI Appeals Board .........................................................................................28 VI. CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS ....................................................................28 Page | 3 Tables and Charts Table 1. Pre-July 1, 2010: Legal documents reviewed for declassification and disclosure ........11 Table 2. Training / Learning Activities Snapshot as of September 30, 2010 ...........................14 Table 3. Examples of Disclosed Documents ­ Comparison of Public Views ­ FY10 and FY11 ......17 Table 4. SEC Disclosure Summary for Board Records: July 1 through September 30, 2010 .......18 Table 5. Public Requests for Information Received by the Bank in the First Quarter .................18 Table 6. Resolution of Completed Requests ....................................................................19 Table 7. Time Required to Issue Final Response to Requests.................................................20 Table 8. Requests Requiring Additional Time for Response - Special Circumstances ..................21 Table 9. Regions / Units Requested to Locate and File Documents ........................................21 Table 10. Summary of Reasons for Denials .......................................................................22 Table 11. Profile of Requesters ­ Affiliation .....................................................................23 Table 12. Language in which Requests were Received by the Bank ........................................24 Table 13. Requests Related to Regional Information ................................................24 Annexes Annex A. Simultaneously Disclosed Board Documents: July 1 ­ September 30, 2010 ...................29 Annex B. Requests for Information Considered by the AIC in the First Quarter ..........................30 Annex C. Appeals Received for Consideration by the AIC in the First Quarter .........................32 Page | 4 WORLD BANK POLICY ON ACCESS TO INFORMATION PROGRESS REPORT NOVEMBER 2009 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 2010 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. In November 2009, the World Bank's Executive Directors approved a new Access to Information Policy ("AI Policy" or "Policy") to take effect on July 1, 2010. The AI Policy focuses on making information more available to and more accessible by the public. 2. In the seven months before effectiveness, the World Bank (the "Bank") undertook extensive work to put into place the infrastructure and systems necessary to implement the AI Policy. The work included: (a) developing the AI Policy Statement and guidance materials for staff, including an AI Staff Handbook; (b) developing a communications plan to raise staff, client and public awareness, including creating both external and internal AI websites; (c) carrying out a multi-phase staff training program; (d) updating and improving the Bank's existing information technology systems to handle increased public demand for information, as well as incorporating AI Policy considerations in the institution's new records management system under development; (e) developing a new information classification policy and related guidance to align with the AI Policy; and (f) developing a system to effectively track public requests for information. Additionally, vice presidencies across the Bank designated 189 focal points to champion the AI Policy and direct staff to related resources. 3. In its preparation for the AI Policy, the Bank also proactively declassified and released more than 17,000 documents and an additional 5,000 legal agreements, which were either restricted under the previous disclosure policy or not readily accessible. It also prepared for digitization and release of more than 7,000 loan and credit agreements that are on microfiche. In line with the objective to increase public access to information, in April 2010, the Bank also launched its new Open Data Initiative, which provides free, open and easy access to statistics and indicators about development. The Bank also created an external AI website, which enables the public to search and browse: (a) more than 100,000 documents through the Bank's Documents and Reports database; (b) 10,000 projects and operations from 1947 to the present; (c) the Bank's publications; (d) newly released documents; (e) recently declassified documents; (f) simultaneously disclosed documents; and (g) the Bank's statistics and indicators through the Open Data Initiative. Through the external AI website, the public can also efficiently submit requests for information. 4. Following the AI Policy's effectiveness, in the period of July 1 through September 30, 2010 ("First Quarter"), the Bank released an additional 400 legal agreements; 73 Implementation Status and Results Reports; 54 Board records; and 19 Board papers before Board discussion (i.e., simultaneous disclosure). In this period, the Bank's Documents and Reports database received more than 184,318 visits, and users downloaded more than 179,338 documents, with more than one million pages viewed. Page | 5 5. In addition to accessing documents online, the public may make requests for information to the Bank. In the First Quarter, the Bank received 156 public requests for information. The Bank completed 107 of those requests, with 49 under consideration as of September 30, 2010. Of the 107 completed requests, the Bank fulfilled (in whole or in part) 70 percent, and denied (in whole or in part) eight percent. The remaining requests either required more information from the requesters (who were unresponsive to the Bank's requests), or involved different disclosure regimes or policies. 6. As provided by the AI Policy, the Bank endeavors to provide a comprehensive response to requests within 20 working days, recognizing that additional time may be needed for special circumstances, such as complex requests or requests that require consultation with internal or external groups. Of the 107 completed requests received in the First Quarter, the Bank provided comprehensive responses to 94 requests within 20 working days. Of the completed requests that needed additional time to respond, twelve required extensive review, and/or required consultation with internal and/or external parties, thus, reflecting the special circumstances that account for the additional time. In one additional request, the reason for the additional time needed was not documented; the request (which was fulfilled) was delayed due to the introduction of the new tracking system, which staff were still learning to use when the request was received in July. The delay has been raised with the concerned unit to address. For those 13 completed requests that required additional time, the comprehensive response time averaged 30 working days. 7. Under the AI Policy, the Access to Information Committee ("AIC") has authority to exercise the Bank's prerogative to disclose certain types of information that is not otherwise publicly available under the AI Policy, if the AIC determines that the benefit of disclosure would outweigh the potential harm. In the First Quarter, a total of 12 public access requests were referred to the AIC for this purpose. At the end of the First Quarter, the AIC decided on seven of those requests, exercising the prerogative to disclose for three requests. 8. The AI Policy also authorizes the AIC to make Policy interpretations in line with the Policy's guiding principles. In the First Quarter, the AIC made four policy interpretations concerning: (a) the application of the AI Policy to procurement information resulting from Bank- executed trust funds; (b) the application of the term "director" concerned as referenced in the AI Policy; (c) the position of the AI Policy on whether restricted information must be redacted in response to a public request; and (d) the process for referring requests to the AIC for considering whether to exercise the Bank's prerogative to disclose restricted information. 9. The AIC also serves as the body that considers first level appeals under the AI Policy. In the First Quarter, the AIC received four appeals. Of the four appeals, at the end of the First Quarter, the AIC upheld the Bank's decision to deny access in two, and two remained under consideration. As provided under the AI Policy, the AIC makes its best efforts to reach a decision on appeals within 45 working days of receiving the appeal. Of the two appeals decided by the AIC, the average processing time was 24.5 working days. 10. The AI Appeals Board serves as the body that considers second level appeals ­ for appeals alleging a violation of policy. No appeal was filed before the AI Appeals Board in the First Quarter. Page | 6 11. To successfully implement the AI Policy, the Bank recognizes that one of the main challenges is to ensure that documents are properly filed and accessible in the Bank's records management system. In light of this challenge, much of the Bank's training and technological investments have focused on getting staff to properly file and classify documents. Some mistakes in the filing process have been identified. Expectedly, staff are still learning the AI Policy and the new classification policy. Measures have been taken (including mandatory training and helpdesks) to familiarize all staff and to support them with both the new policies and the upgraded records management system. To monitor staff's management of records, the Information Solutions Group is developing data monitoring and reporting on filing compliance. 12. The Bank will continue to monitor the implementation of the AI Policy, including compliance and public outreach matters. The next report will cover the quarterly period of October 1, through December 31, 2010. Page | 7 WORLD BANK POLICY ON ACCESS TO INFORMATION PROGRESS REPORT NOVEMBER 2009 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 2010 I. INTRODUCTION 1. As a development finance institution, the World Bank1 (the "Bank") strives to be transparent about its projects and programs, to share its global knowledge and experience, and to enhance the quality of its operations by engaging with the public and the development community. In furtherance of this objective, the new World Bank Policy on Access to Information ("AI Policy") focuses on maximizing public access to information, making more operational information ­ particularly in the implementation stages ­ and the records and documents of the Bank's Board of Executive Directors ("Board") available to the public. 2. The AI Policy is a fundamental part of the Bank's reform agenda to make the institution more efficient, effective and accountable. Incorporated in the Bank's commitment to the AI Policy is the Bank's undertaking to carefully monitor the implementation, including: (a) the Bank's disclosures and compliance with service standards; (b) the disclosure decisions made by the Access to Information Committee ("AIC") (i.e., the AIC's exercise of the Bank's prerogative to disclose restricted information); and (c) the decisions made by the AIC and the AI Appeals Board on appeals.2 3. Purpose and Structure of this Report. This report ("Report") reviews both the Bank's preparation efforts beginning November 2009, and the implementation results for the period of July 1, 2010, to September 30, 2010, i.e, the first quarter of fiscal year 2011 ("First Quarter"). Section II of this Report discusses the results of the Bank's preparation work leading up to the July 1, 2010, AI Policy effectiveness, and the implementation work undertaken in the First Quarter. Section III discusses the availability of, and the public's access to, information and the Bank's responsiveness to public requests. Section IV discusses the AIC's decisions in the exercise of the Bank's prerogative to disclose restricted information, and in matters of policy interpretation. Finally, Section V discusses the appeals process and the decisions of the AIC on appeals. 4. Annex A provides the list of Board documents that were simultaneously disclosed in the First Quarter.3 Annex B lists the public requests that the AIC received in the First Quarter, and their outcomes as of September 30, 2010. Annex C lists the appeals received by the AIC in the First Quarter, and their outcomes as of September 30, 2010. 1 For the purposes of this report, the term "World Bank" or "Bank" means the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development ("IBRD") and the International Development Association ("IDA"); "World Bank Group" or "Bank Group" means the IBRD, IDA, International Finance Corporation ("IFC"), Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency ("MIGA") and the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes. 2 Toward Greater Transparency Through Access to Information ­ The World Bank's Disclosure Policy, December 14, 2009 (R2009-0259/2; IDA/R2009-0273/2) (hereinafter "AI Board Paper"). 3 See paragraph 11 for discussion on simultaneously disclosed documents. Page | 8 II. PREPARATION AND IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES 5. Access to Information Working Group. The Bank began its preparations for implementing the AI Policy in November 2009, when the Board approved the AI Policy. An access to information ("AI") working group ("AI Working Group"), comprised of External Affairs ("EXT"), Legal ("LEG"), Operations Policy and Country Services ("OPCS"), Information Solutions Group ("ISG"), Corporate Secretariat ("SEC"), General Services Department ("GSD") and regional staff, collaborated to put into place the systems and processes needed to implement the AI Policy.4 After July 1, 2010, the AI Working Group was renamed as the AI Implementation Group, recognizing the move from preparation to implementation. This section reflects the results of the preparation and implementation work undertaken in the period of November 2009 through September 30, 2010. 6. Collaboration with CSOs. From development through the implementation preparation stages, the Bank received significant public input. The AI Policy development involved extensive consultations in 33 countries with stakeholders, citizens, representatives of member governments, civil society organizations ("CSOs"), private sector, academia, international organizations and donor communities, and solicited public input through the Bank's external webpage. During the seven months of implementation preparation, the Bank continued to partner with leading CSOs. The Bank sought the views of the CSOs and worked with them to test the Bank's readiness to respond to public requests. The CSOs also helped the Bank to test its new tracking system that was put into place to respond to public requests (discussed further in paragraph 7 (d) below) to identify possible unforeseen impediments. 7. Public Outreach and Disclosures. To ensure that the AI Policy achieves the intended results of getting information to the public, the Bank took the following measures: (a) Launch of External AI Website. The Bank launched an external AI website, which enables the public to search and browse: (i) more than 100,000 documents through the Bank's Documents and Reports database;5 (ii) 10,000 projects and operations from 1947 to the present; (iii) the Bank's publications; (iv) newly released documents; (v) recently declassified documents; (vi) simultaneously disclosed documents;6 (vii) the Bank's statistics and indicators 4 The AI Working Group consisted of (a) the Policy and Handbook sub-group, which developed the AI Policy Statement, and the AI Staff Handbook, which provides guidance on step-by-step workflow arrangements for releasing information to the public; (b) the Communications-Training-Public Information sub-group, which raised staff awareness, provided communications support to staff, and developed and implemented the staff training program in collaboration with subject matter experts; (c) the IT Systems and Services sub-group, which focused on updating and improving existing information technology ("IT") systems to handle the increased demand likely to result from the AI Policy, and linking the AI Policy with the Bank's upcoming records management system; (d) the Classification sub-group, which developed a new classification policy and related guidelines to better align with the AI Policy; (e) the Tracking System sub-group, which developed a system to effectively track public requests and internal workflows; and (f) the Translations sub-group, which led the effort to develop an improved translations framework. 5 The Bank's Documents and Reports database holds free, downloadable documents, including operational documents (project documents, analytical and advisory work, and evaluations), formal and informal research papers, and most Bank publications. 6 See paragraph 11 for discussion on simultaneously disclosed documents. Page | 9 through the Open Data Initiative;7 and (viii) an electronic form for the public to request information. Also provided to the public are links to the Board's calendar and work program. The external AI website, including the AI Policy, is accessible in six languages other than English: Arabic, French, Chinese, Russian, Spanish and Portuguese. (b) Proactive Disclosure of more than 17,000 Documents. The Bank routinely discloses a wide range of documents through its external website. In anticipation of the AI Policy's effectiveness, Bank management obtained the Board's approval to proactively declassify and publicly release more than 17,000 documents that were restricted under the Bank's previous disclosure policy. As discussed in further detail in paragraph 9 of this Report, the publicly released documents include final economic and sector work ("ESW") reports, sector reports, implementation completion reports, project completion reports, staff appraisal reports, technical annexes, and country assistance strategies dated before July 1, 2005, as well as President's reports and memoranda dated before July 1, 1990.8 (c) Improve Accessibility of Legal Documents. The Bank took on several initiatives to make the Bank's legal agreements more publicly accessible. (i) Microfiche Digitization Project. Recognizing that a complete on-line collection of the World Bank's loan and credit agreements was not available either through the Bank's Documents and Reports database, or the United Nations Treaty Database, the Bank catalogued and prepared its inventory of microfiche for loans and credits from 1946 through 1995, which represented 20,000 documents (loan, credit, grant, guarantee, and project agreements, and other supporting documents). In total, 7,000 microfiche were prepared for digitization. The digitization project is expected to be complete in FY11. (ii) Public Release of 5,000 Legal Documents. Before July 1, 2010, as part of the preparation work, the Bank reviewed nearly 5,000 non-public legal documents stored in ImageBank, the Bank's main repository for formal reports and documents, for the purpose of declassifying and publicly releasing the documents (see Table 1). After July 1, 2010, the Bank processed nearly 400 additional legal agreements for disclosure.9 7 The Bank's Open Data Initiative, announced in April 2010, provides open and easy access to statistics and indicators about development for all users free of charge (data.worldbank.org). Key development indicators are accessible in four languages: English, Spanish, French and Arabic. 8 These dates follow the declassification schedule set out in the AI Policy for such documents. 9 The Bank processed 319 trust fund related agreements, 47 amendments of loan and credit agreements, and 12 other types of legal agreements. Page | 10 Table 1. Pre-July 1, 2010: Legal documents reviewed for declassification and disclosure Legal Documents Number of Classified as "Official Use Only" Documents Reviewed in ImageBank and Disclosed Credit Agreements 573 Financing Agreements 206 Loan Agreements 860 Project Agreements 885 Guarantee Agreements 224 Grant and Trust Fund Agreements 1392 Other Agreements 844 Total 4984 (d) Accessing Bank Information and Tracking Public Access Requests. The public can access much of the Bank's information on the Bank's external website (www.worldbank.org). The public may also access Bank information through more than 100 Public Information Centers ("PICs") around the world, as well as the InfoShop and the Archives Unit in Washington, D.C. The public may also make a request for information by phone, facsimile, mail or the Bank's external AI website. InfoShop and PIC staff can also assist requesters in submitting their requests. When a request for information is made to the Bank, the request is tracked through a new tracking system, developed as a cost effective interim system before a more comprehensive institutional case management system is in place.10 The experience in the First Quarter showed that priority should be given to establishing an institutional case management system to provide greater functionality that would support internal business processes, including more automated monitoring and reporting capacities. The related Bank units are documenting their experiences with the tracking system and will continue to provide recommendations for an enhanced platform. 8. Development of Bank Infrastructure and Staff Support. The preparatory work leading to the AI Policy effectiveness included extensive efforts to put into place support systems for staff to implement the AI Policy. The support systems that were developed include the following: (a) AI Policy, AI Staff Handbook, Information Classification Policy and other Resource Documents. As part of the implementation preparation work, the Bank developed the AI Policy Statement and supporting reference documents, including the AI Staff Handbook and quick reference cards. The AI Policy Statement is available in Arabic, Chinese, French, Portuguese, Russian and Spanish. Communication packages for country directors and country managers were also developed to explain the AI Policy to clients and partners. Additionally, the Bank Group's Information Classification and Control Policy (AMS 6.21A) was updated to align with the AI Policy. In support of the classification policy, a Classification Handbook for 10 The Bank developed a new tracking system ­ a Lotus Notes based application ­ to enable the institution to meet its obligations under the AI Policy in a cost effective manner by July 1, 2010. Page | 11 Restricted Information and a related quick reference guide were also developed. The reference documents for staff have been published and disseminated Bank-wide. In view of the new requirement to disclose borrowers' audited financial statements of projects, guidance notes and communication materials were developed and issued to financial management staff. Guidance notes on the implications of the AI Policy on procurement information were also developed and distributed Bank-wide. (b) AI Communications Action Plan. In addition to disseminating the relevant resource materials, the Bank developed and rolled out an AI Communications Action Plan designed to ensure public and staff awareness. The Action Plan included the development of the internal and external AI websites, and publication of featured stories and kiosk announcements on updates related to learning offerings, civil society engagement, document filing, declassification of documents, handling requests from the public and other topics related to AI implementation. (c) Internal AI Website and Helpdesks. In addition to the external AI website, the Bank rolled out an internal AI website, developed to assist staff in accessing on-line resources regarding AI (e.g., AI Policy, handbooks, learning tools, guidance notes, powerpoint presentations, outreach materials and frequently asked questions). Also included on the internal AI website are internal helpdesks (service accounts) for staff to direct questions concerning: (i) the AI Policy, (ii) operations-related information, (iii) classification of restricted information, (iv) records management, and (v) handling of public access requests for information; the helpdesks are respectively managed and monitored by LEG, OPCS, OIS, ISG, and EXT. (d) AI Focal Points. The support system developed to assist staff includes the designation of 189 staff members (51 percent in country offices and 49 percent in Headquarters) by vice presidencies to serve as AI Focal Points. The AI Focal Points provide support to their colleagues on the AI Policy, by directing them to relevant resources. They also provide feedback on the implementation challenges and frequently asked questions. The AI Focal Points have been provided training (face-to-face, webinars, and a webcast for AI Focal Points), and are notified of updates through emails and newsletters. (e) Training and Learning Program. As part of the Bank's efforts to ensure staff preparedness, a comprehensive AI Learning Program was designed and delivered to help staff become familiar with the AI Policy and prepare for its implementation. The training and learning program included the following: (i) AI Readiness Presentations. As a lead up to the AI Policy's effectiveness, AI Readiness Presentations were given to groups across the Bank in 36 events. The presentations introduced the AI Policy and highlighted the key changes.11 The presentations reached broad groups across Headquarters and the country offices. 11 AI Readiness Presentations were given to/at the following groups/events: CDs/CDMs Orientation; EXTCC Retreat; IT Governance Group; SAR RMT meeting; SDN meeting; HDN management meeting, Financial Sector Week; ECA VC meeting; Kenya Country Office briefing; ACS Forum; ECA Country Offices video-conferences; LCR/ACS meeting; Africa Region Townhall; ECA RMT meeting; EAP RMT meeting; Corporate Secretariat 2010 Page | 12 (ii) Global Webinar Series. A live web-conferencing series was introduced to communicate the AI Policy to the Bank's geographically distributed staff at their desktop, regardless of their location. Close to 2,000 staff attended the 60-minute AI Policy Overview Webinar during an eight-week period and rated the learning experience as highly satisfactory. (iii) Mandatory AI e-Learning Program. A mandatory AI e-learning program, sponsored by the vice presidents of LEG, EXT, OPCS and ISG and by the director of GSD, was also developed and rolled-out to all Bank staff to help ensure the proper treatment of information created and received by the Bank. The mandatory training consists of three modules. The first module provides an overview of key provisions of the AI Policy that all staff should know. The second module covers classification of restricted information.12 The third module covers the Bank Group's policy on management of records.13 The program is designed to recognize that both information classification and records management are critical components for the effective implementation of the AI Policy. The AI e-learning was actively promoted, including a registration drive in mid-September that resulted in 4,500 visitors and 995 on-site registrations. At the end of the First Quarter, more that 4,000 staff completed the AI e- learning program. Completion reports are compiled and distributed every two weeks to all vice presidents (and heads of stand-alone departments and units).14 (iv) Specialized Face-to-Face Training. Specialized training (i.e., clinics, workshops, video-conferences, and presentations) has been delivered to diverse groups and organizational units, reaching more than 750 people.15 (v) On-line Webcasts ­ AI-related Topics. Additional virtual and self-paced learning tools were developed and made available on the Bank's internal AI website. Webcasts to provide staff with quick help on AI Hot Topics were also developed for the following topics: AI Overview; Simultaneous Disclosures; The 10 Policy Exceptions and Related Changes to the Bank's Records Management System; and Your Role as an AI Focal Point. Information Technology Week; MNA Operations Core Services Management Retreat; Education Sector Board meeting; Legal VPU Weekly Advisory and Operations Chief Counsels' meeting; WBI management team briefing; AFR Sector; CD/CM retreat; briefing to DEC management; SEC staff briefing; meeting with ECA EXT; IMT Forum; Web Community briefing; SD management team meeting; and EASSD Leadership Team meeting; Urban Sector Board briefing. 12 AMS 6.21A, Information Classification and Control Policy. 13 AMS 10.11, Management of Records. 14 As of November 2010, VPs and relevant department heads receive completion reports on a weekly basis. 15 Specialized face-to-face trainings were given to/at the multiple groups/events including the following: ISR Clinic AI Presentation (OPS); IRIS-Access to Information Changes (ISG); AI Overview ­ Ombudsman's Office; LCR VCs with multiple Country Offices/IRIS AI Changes; What's New In Operations for ACS in EAP, SAR, LAC, MNA; AI Overview ­ Controller's Management Team; China Delegation MOF ­ The Bank's Disclosure Policy; AI Sessions ­ Legal VPU; Country Based IL Reform Training (India); AIC-Access to Information Committee Members Training; Country-Based IL Reform (Sri Lanka); Country-Based IL Reform (Bangladesh); AI Overview ­ Corporate Secretariat and Executive Directors' offices; and AI Overview - CommNet. Page | 13 (vi) AI Focal Points. Of the 189 designated Focal Points, 129 attended the Access to Information Policy Workshops for AI Focal Points. Those who were unable to attend the workshop were given written information and a 16 minute webcast, Your Role as an AI Focal Point. Table 2. Training / Learning Activities Snapshot as of September 30, 2010 Training / Learning No. of Events Participants Self Paced Learning Mandatory Access to Information e-Learning for IBRD Staff Continuous > 4,000 AI Overview Continuous 2,513* Simultaneous Disclosure Continuous 288* The Policy Exceptions and Related Changes to the Bank's Continuous 594* Records Management System Your Role as an AI Focal Point Continuous 38* On-Line Webinars AI Global Webinar Series 41 1,889 Your Role as an AI Focal Point Workshops 5 89 Face-to-Face Learning AI Readiness Presentations 36 n/a** On Demand Face-to-Face Sessions 12 238*** AI Training for Specialized Groups*** Communications Network (CommNet) 2 170 Legal Vice Presidency 3 111 Corporate Secretariat 5 91 Executive Directors' Offices 9 96 Archives Unit and InfoShop 1 16 Your Role as an AI Focal Point Workshops 2 40 * Number of online views. ** These sessions were carried out at HQ for HQ staff and country office staff, worldwide, through video conference. The events were well attended. The number of participants is not given because participant lists were not uniformly recorded. *** The participants for the on-demand training and the list of specialized training reflected in this chart are not all inclusive. See footnote 15 for more information. The number reflects data from July through September 30, 2010. On-demand training sessions were delivered in the quarter before July 1, 2010, which would bring the number well over the 750-plus participants. (f) Communication and Public Information Staff and Public Outreach in Country Offices. To enable the Bank to implement the AI Policy in all offices, most communication and public information staff received in-depth training in May 2010, at the biennial gathering of CommNet, which is the Bank's professional network of communication staff, worldwide. The communication staff are responsible for developing, organizing and delivering innovative and locally-relevant outreach activities and promotional materials to raise awareness about the AI Policy among various constituencies such as academia, civil society, government clients and the general public. Public information staff also provide a critical translation function, helping to ensure that access is made available to non-English speakers, and play an important role in collecting and responding to requests for information from individuals who do not have Internet Page | 14 access, including walk-in requests in country offices (which are not necessarily captured in the tracking system). (g) Information Technology Systems. The AI Policy presumes that any information in the Bank's possession is publicly available unless it falls under one of the AI Policy exceptions. This new policy approach requires a substantial change in how the Bank captures, classifies and publishes information in its records management and supporting systems. As of September 10, 2010, the Bank enhanced the records management system ("IRIS") so that, if a staff member determines that a document is not "Public," the system will require the staff member to indicate the AI Policy exception that applies. A basic review process is being considered to determine whether documents filed by staff as "Public" since September 10, 2010, are accurately classified before they are disclosed. In addition to IRIS, the Bank is in the process of modifying the applications that supply records to IRIS to incorporate and/or streamline any required clearance processes for disclosure. For example, the application that manages the processing of the Implementation Status and Results Report ("ISR") has been revamped to incorporate all the clearance and publishing steps needed to put the documents on the external website. In addition to monitoring the accuracy of the attributes selected for documents in IRIS, work continues on several tracks, including: (i) incorporating clearance and disclosure steps into all relevant document processes; (ii) improving searchability and dissemination of content to the public; (iii) laying the technical foundation for better multilingual support, and (iv) making additional operational data available on the Bank's external website. (h) Document Filing by Bank Staff. The Bank recognizes that the ability to make information available to the public is necessarily linked to proper records management. Not unique to the Bank is the challenge of preserving records in the age of instant electronic communications and applications. In view of this challenge, as discussed above, much of the Bank's training and technological investments in preparing for and rolling out the AI Policy focus on getting staff into the mindset of both filing and classifying documents properly. Additionally, the Bank has taken steps to ensure accountability for information: if requested documents are not found in the Bank's records management system, the director responsible for the information will be asked to locate the information that would be responsive to the request and to have the information filed in the records management system. The director is required to complete and sign a response verification form, which indicates that a reasonable search for the information has been conducted. Continued support is being provided to help ensure that all staff become accustomed to the AI Policy and new filing system. To monitor staff's management of records, ISG is developing a monitoring and reporting tool to provide data at various levels of aggregation on filing compliance. The reports will likely present data at the unit, department and VPU levels. ISG is working with the Regional VPUs to determine where the responsibility for reviewing and acting on such reports will reside, and will expand to the non-regional VPUs later. ISG plans to complete an initial level of reporting by the end of FY11. (i) Access to Information Committee. In line with the AI Policy, an Access to Information Committee ("AIC") was established to serve as the internal body that: (i) broadly oversees the AI Policy implementation; (ii) is authorized to interpret the AI Policy; (iii) makes decisions concerning whether to exercise the Bank's prerogative to disclose certain information that is on the list of AI Policy exceptions (i.e., restricted information); and (iv) considers first Page | 15 level appeals filed against Bank decisions to deny access to information. The AIC consists of seven principal members and their alternates.16 The principal members are director-level staff representing OPCS, EXT, LEG, SEC, GSD and AFR, and the Chief Archivist representing ISG. The regional representation, currently held by AFR, will rotate amongst the six regional vice presidencies on an annual basis. The initial Chair of the AIC is the member representing OPCS. As appropriate, the AIC will invite representatives of other Bank units (e.g., Controller's, Treasury) when considering matters relevant to those business units. The AIC met six times in the First Quarter, the first meeting held on July 1, 2010. As further discussed in Sections IV and V of this Report, in the First Quarter, the AIC: (i) received 12 public requests to determine whether to exercise the Bank prerogative to disclose restricted information; (ii) received four appeals; and (iii) issued four AI Policy interpretations. (j) Access to Information Appeals Board. As part of the AI Policy, the Bank established a three-member, impartial Access to Information Appeals Board ("AI Appeals Board"). The AI Appeals Board serves as the body that considers second level appeals, which allege the Bank has unreasonably or improperly denied access to information that it would normally disclose under the AI Policy. The AI Appeals Board consists of three outside experts selected by the Bank President and endorsed by the Bank's Executive Directors. The AI Appeals Board members, whose two-year appointments began on July 1, 2010, are Messrs. Wajahat Habibullah, Daniel Metcalfe and Olivier Schrameck. No second level appeal was filed in the First Quarter. (k) Information Policy Unit, Legal VPU. With the effectiveness of the AI Policy, the advisory work relating to the Policy moved from OPCS to LEG. The Information Policy Unit ("LEGIP") was created to serve as the anchor for the Policy. LEGIP oversees the Policy and advises staff on related matters. It also monitors and reports on Bank-wide implementation of the Policy, and serves as the secretariat to the AIC and the AI Appeals Board. III. ACCESS TO INFORMATION BY THE PUBLIC A. Proactive Disclosures 9. Documents and Reports. As discussed in paragraph 7 (b) above, before July 1, 2010, the Bank proactively declassified and publicly released more than 17,000 Bank reports and documents, posting them on Documents and Reports. This included releasing 4,200 Memoranda of the President ("MOPs"), 3,900 ESW reports, and 2,160 project completion reports. The disclosure of MOPs, which resulted from the AI Policy, was particularly significant, considering that, previous to the AI Policy, Documents and Reports contained only 57 MOPs. After July 1, 2010, in the First Quarter, the Bank disclosed over 1,100 additional documents. The Archives Unit posts newly declassified documents every quarter. 16 The current AIC members are: Paul Bermingham (OPCS), AIC Chair; Robert Van Pulley (GSD); Hassane Cisse (LEG); Axel Peuker (SEC); Peter Stephens (EXT); Shantayanan Devarajan (AFR); and Elisa Liberatori-Prati (ISG). The alternate members are: Manuela Ferro (OPCS); Therese Ballard (GSD); Hans Jurgen Gruss (LEG); Elisabetta Marmolo (SEC); Sumir Lal (EXT); Edward Olowo-Okere (AFR); and Edward Strudwicke (ISG). Page | 16 10. Public Interest in Newly Disclosed Documents. In the First Quarter, the Documents and Reports database received more than 184,318 visits, and users downloaded over 179,338 documents, with over a million pages viewed. While the total number of page-views in Documents and Reports did not increase compared to the same period in the previous year, as shown by the examples in Table 3 below, the documents newly disclosed since July 1 appear to have generated significant public interest. Table 3. Examples of Disclosed Documents ­ Comparison of Public Views ­ FY10 and FY11 Documents and Reports Number of Public Views Document Type 1st Quarter - FY10 1st Quarter - FY11 ESW Reports 276 956 Project Completion Reports 209 2,692 MOPs 37 1,498 11. Simultaneous Disclosure. Consistent with the Bank's previous disclosure policy, the AI Policy recognizes that Board papers distributed to the Board for discussion or consideration are normally posted at the end of the Board's deliberative process, once they have been finalized. With the AI Policy, the Bank introduced the possibility of disclosing operational policy papers, sector strategy papers, Country Assistance Strategy papers ("CASs"), Project Appraisal Documents ("PADs") and Program Documents ("PDs") before Board discussion.17 This is commonly referred to as "simultaneous disclosure." CASs, PADs, and PDs may be simultaneously disclosed before Board discussion if the client gives its written consent to such early disclosure. As part of the AI Policy roll out, Bank staff took action to notify clients of this possibility, and to encourage simultaneous disclosures. In the First Quarter, the Bank simultaneously disclosed 19 Board documents.18 Simultaneously disclosed Board documents are posted in Documents and Reports, as well as a dedicated Simultaneous Disclosure webpage. To support simultaneous disclosures, ISG started the SD Newsletter which alerts subscribers whenever a new document has been released. The Simultaneous Disclosure webpage was the most visited page in Documents and Reports in August 2010. 12. Operational Risk Assessment Framework Decisions and Implementation Status and Results Reports. As part of the AI Policy, the Bank makes an increased amount of information available to the public on the implementation of operational projects. In line with this motivation, the Bank began making public its decisions resulting from the application of the Bank's Operational Risk Assessment Framework ("ORAF"), which is a tool used by project teams to systematically review the risks related to the achievement of a project's development objectives. ORAF decisions are reflected in PADs, which are publicly available. The Bank also launched a new Implementation Status and Results Report ("ISR") for Investment Lending Operations in July 2010. The new ISR supports transparency and accountability by making 17 See AI Policy at para. 23 (b). 18 See Annex A of this Report. Page | 17 certain information on the implementation status and results of Bank projects publicly available. At the end of the First Quarter, the Bank publicly released 73 ISRs on its external website, in the Projects Database and in Documents and Reports. 13. Board Records. Table 4 summarizes the disclosure status of Board records prepared in the First Quarter that are eligible for disclosure under the AI Policy. As of September 30, 2010, the Bank released 54 Board records that are eligible for disclosure. Eight Board minutes and four Board Committee minutes were pending approval by the Board and the respective Committees; following approval, the documents will be publicly disclosed.19 Table 4. SEC Disclosure Summary for Board Records: July 1 through September 30, 2010 Number of Board Records Type of Board Record Publicly Disclosed Minutes 24 Summings Up 14 Summaries of Discussion 10 Green Sheet Summaries 1 Committee Minutes 5 Total 54 Note: The numbers exclude Board records that are not eligible for public access under the AI Policy (e.g., Minutes of Restricted Executive Sessions of the Board; Green Sheets of Board Committee discussions when a subsequent Board discussion is expected). B. Disclosures on Request 14. Public Access Requests. As discussed in paragraph 7 (d) of this Report, information may also be made available to the public on request.20 As shown in Table 5 below, in the First Quarter, the Bank received 156 requests for information. The requests were handled by the Archives Unit (111 requests) and the InfoShop/PICs (45 requests). In comparison, for the same period in 2009, the Bank received 76 public requests for information. Table 5. Public Requests for Information Received by the Bank in the First Quarter Responsible Units July August Sept 2010 2010 2010 First Quarter Totals Archives 50 29 32 111 (71%) InfoShop/PICs 19 19 7 45 (29%) Totals 69 48 39 156 19 Board and Board Committee minutes are official records of meetings and must be approved by the Board and Board Committees, respectively. 20 See AI Policy at para. 24. Page | 18 15. Overview of Public Requests for Information ­ Status as of September 30, 2010. Of the 156 public requests received in the First Quarter, the Bank completed 107 (69 percent) as of September 30, 2010, and 49 (31 percent) remained under consideration. Of the 107 completed requests, the Bank fulfilled (in whole or in part) 71 percent, and denied (in whole or in part) only 8 percent. The remaining 21 percent of completed public requests involved: (a) requests that required more information from the requesters to fulfill, but the requesters were unresponsive; and (b) requests for information covered by different disclosure regimes or policies.21 Of the completed requests, the Archives Unit handled 64 percent and InfoShop/PICs handled 36 percent. Table 6 below provides details on the resolution of the 107 completed requests. Table 6. Resolution of Completed Requests Of the Completed Requests* Non-public Covered by Requesters Additional Other *** Information Disclosure ­ Referred to Required Regime or relevant Requests Requests from Policy units Completed Requests Requests Fulfilled Requester ­ Referred (not counted by Fulfilled Denied and ­ to relevant as part of (in whole) (in whole) Denied Unresponsive units** Completed in part Requests) Archives 68 48 5 1 10 4 (64%) (71%) (7%) (1%) (15%) (6%) 2 InfoShop/PICs 39 27 3 8 1 -- (36%) (72%)* (5%)* --- (21%)* (3%)* Total 107 75 8 1 18 5 2 (70%)* (7.5%)* (0.9%)* (16.8%)* (4.7%)* * Percentages do not add up to 100-percent due to rounding. ** The requests received by the Archives Unit that were covered by a different disclosure regime/policy, concerned the Independent Evaluation Group ("IEG") and the IFC. One request received by InfoShop/PICs concerned IFC and MIGA. *** These requesters were not members of the general public. The requests were made by external parties such as partner institutions, and thus, the requests were handled through other channels. 16. Timeliness of Response to AI Requests. The AI Policy states that the Bank endeavors to respond to requests for information within 20 working days, recognizing that additional time may be needed in special circumstances, including, for example, those involving complex or voluminous requests, or requests requiring review by or consultations with internal Bank units, external partners, the AIC, or the Board.22 In the First Quarter, of the 107 requests completed by the Bank, the Bank responded within 20 working days in 94 requests (88 percent) (see Table 7 below). Of the completed requests, 13 required additional time to respond, averaging 30 21 In reviewing the information in the tracking system, approximately 32 cases showed that more information could have been captured to indicate the outcome of the request. Four cases were handled by the Archives Unit, and 28 cases were handled by country office PICs. For the purpose of this Report, the outcomes of those cases were determined by additional analyses done by the Archives Unit and the InfoShop. 22 AI Policy at para. 25. Page | 19 working days. Of the 49 requests that remained under consideration at the end of the First Quarter, 24 were beyond 20 working days on September 30. The remaining 25 requests under consideration were received after September 3, and therefore had not exceeded the 20 working day standard. Table 7. Time Required to Issue Final Response to Requests Final Response Time Completed Requests Percentage Within 20 Working Days 94 88% More than 20 Working Days 13 12% Total Completed Requests 107 100% 17. Reasons for Additional Response Time. As noted above, the AI Policy recognizes that additional time, beyond the 20 working day standard, may be needed in special circumstances, including for example, those involving complex or voluminous requests, or requests requiring review by or consultations with internal Bank units, external partners, the AIC, or the Board. Of the 13 requests completed in the First Quarter that required additional time, 12 requests required extensive reviews; were classified by the Archives Unit as complex (see discussion below); were referred to business units for consultation; were referred to the AIC for consideration; and/or were referred back to the requesters for more information or clarification. One request, received in July, was delayed due to the introduction of the new tracking system, which staff were still learning at the time (the case resulted in the fulfillment of the request). Though the reason for the delay was not originally noted in the tracking system, InfoShop has since followed-up with the relevant country office PIC staff to take corrective action. 18. Overview of Complex Requests and Requests Requiring Consultations. The discussion below reflects the total number of requests that needed consultation with the relevant business units (including to locate the documents requested), were complex, or that required review by or consultations with the AIC, the Board and/or external parties, in the First Quarter. Of the 156 requests: (a) Forty-two requests (27 percent of the total 156 requests) were marked by the Archives Unit as complex cases.23 Of the 42 requests, 24 were completed by the end of the First Quarter: 19 of which were completed in 20 working days or less, and five required additional time, with an average response time of 30 working days. Eighteen remained under consideration 23 When a request is received by the Archives Unit, the archivist screens and marks the request as either a "simple" or "complex" case. The Archives Unit defines "simple cases" as requests for documents that are readily available or that typically do not exceed two hours of research by the assigned archivist. It defines "complex cases" as requests for documents that require review under the AI Policy to determine whether any AI Policy exceptions apply, that require more than two hours of research by the assigned Archivist, and/or that require consultations with relevant business units or other parties. The number of complex cases, by definition, may therefore overlap with the number of cases noted in this Section of the Report as requiring consultations with business units, the AIC, or the Board. Note also that the number of complex cases shown in this subparagraph only covers requests handled by the Archives Unit, as the InfoShop/PICs do not currently mark requests as "simple" or "complex." Page | 20 at end of the First Quarter. As shown in Table 8 below, of 107 completed requests, five (less than 5 percent) required additional time to respond beyond the standard 20 working days. For these requests, the average response time was 30 working days. Table 8. Requests Requiring Additional Time for Response ­ Special Circumstances (more than the 20 working day standard) Completed Requests Requiring Consultation Completed Consultation Consultation Total with Complex with with Business Units Cases AIC Board 22 2 5 12 3 (b) Twenty-one requests (13 percent of the total 156 requests) were referred to the relevant business units for consultation or to locate documents.24 At the end of the First Quarter, of those 21 requests, 13 were completed, with an average response time of 11 working days, two requiring more than 20 working days. Eight were still pending the business units' responses at the end of the First Quarter.25 The Archives Unit highlighted that filing documents in IRIS by originating business units (as required under AMS 10.11, Management of Records) ­ so that documents are institutionally stored, managed and retrievable ­ is a critical area to be addressed for the success of the AI Policy. Table 9 below shows which business units were requested to locate and file documents in the First Quarter. Table 9. Regions / Units Requested to Locate and File Documents Number of requests requiring Regions/Units business unit to locate documents SAR 2 EAP 1 LAC 0 AFR 5 ECA 2 DECHD and OPCS, jointly 5 Sector Units 3 WBIOP and PRMED, jointly 1 Other 2 Total 21 (c) Twelve requests (8 percent of the total 156 requests) were referred to the AIC to consider whether to exercise the Bank's prerogative to disclose information restricted under the 24 If a requested document cannot be located in the Bank's records management system, business units are requested to locate and file the document. Business units are required to respond within 10 business days and to indicate whether the identified documents may be disclosed. See further discussion on this in paragraph 8 (h) of this Report. 25 Of the eight, three required consultations with AFR, one with EAP, one with ECA, one with WBIOP/PRMED, one with DECHD, and one other unit (migration team). Page | 21 AI Policy. Of the 12 requests, 11 were made by the public. The AIC decided on seven of the requests, responding to the Archives Unit within an average of 14 working days. Of those seven requests, the Bank took more than 20 working days to issue the decision to the requester in four requests, with the average response time of 31 working days. At the end of the First Quarter, five requests remained under consideration because the AIC required consultations with and/or review by business units and/or external parties. (d) Three requests (2 percent of the total 156 requests) involved Board records and were referred to the Board for consideration. These requests remained under consideration at the end of the First Quarter. 19. Exceptions Justifying Denial of Access. The Bank allows access to information in its possession that is not on a list of exceptions as defined under the AI Policy.26 Accordingly, the Bank does not provide access to documents that contain or refer to information related to the following AI Policy exceptions: (a) Personal Information; (b) Communications of Executive Directors' Offices; (c) Ethics Committee; (d) Attorney-Client Privilege; (e) Security and Safety; (f) Information Restricted under Separate Disclosure Regimes and Other Investigative Information; (g) Information Provided by Member Countries or Third Parties in Confidence; (h) Corporate Administrative Matters; (i) Deliberative Information; and (j) Financial Information. A total of nine public access requests were denied during the First Quarter, of which five were denied based on the Corporate Administrative Matters exception and two were denied based on the Deliberative Information exception. Table 10 below shows the exceptions that justified denying access to the information requested by the public. Table 10. Summary of Reasons for Denials Denials Reason for Denials AI Policy Exceptions Responsible Unit Number of Corporate Documents Not Requests Administrative Deliberative Found in the Matters Information Bank's Possession** Archives 6* 3 2 1 InfoShop/PICs 3 2 0 1 Totals 9 5 2 2 * Of the six denials by the Archives Unit, five requests were covered by the Corporate Administrative Matters and/or Deliberative Information exceptions; for information restricted under these exceptions, the AIC may exercise the Bank's prerogative to disclose. Only four of the five requests were referred to the AIC for consideration because one request falling under the Deliberative Information exception was less than than five years old and/or concerned an open operation; the request was, therefore, denied in line with the procedure discussed in paragraph 26 (d) of this Report. ** See AI Policy at paragraph 26 and footnote 23. 26 See AI Policy at paras. 6-17. Page | 22 20. Other Grounds for Denial. The AI Policy states that the Bank reserves the right to refuse unreasonable or unsupported requests, including multiple requests, blanket requests, and any request that would require the Bank to create, develop, or collate information or data that does not already exist or is not available in the Bank's records management system.27 As shown in Table 10 above, two requests were denied for a reason other than an AI Policy exception. The request denied because the documents requested were not found in the Bank's possession.28 21. Profile of Requesters and Requests. Requesters are not required to identify themselves, and as a matter of practice, the Bank does not identify requesters when considering their requests or for any other purpose. Personal information regarding individual requesters is only available to parties who are involved in handling the respective requests. Requesters, however, are given the option to indicate their affiliation. Table 11 below gives some indication as to the profiles of the requesters. Table 11. Profile of Requesters - Affiliation Academia 72 NGO 24 Consultant 15 Business or Private Enterprise 9 Unknown* 36 * Not all requesters provided information on their affiliation when submitting an information request. 22. Managing Requests in Languages other than English. Of the 156 public access requests, 18 (12 percent) were in languages other than English (see Table 12 below). Requests received in languages other than English were assigned to the InfoShop. Those requests were referred to relevant PIC staff, who then translated the requests from their original language into English. In some cases, InfoShop used the Google translation platform to assist with the translation. Once translated, InfoShop added the translated request into the tracking system and reassigned the request to a PIC or the Archives Unit, as relevant. Tables 12 and 13, respectively, reflect the languages in which the requests were communicated, and (as applicable) the region to which the requested information relates. 27 See AI Policy at para. 26, footnote 23. Unsupported requests include those that (a) do not provide enough information to enable the Bank to locate the requested document in the Bank's records management system and/or (b) are for documents that the Bank is unable to locate in the Bank's records management system after a reasonable search. 28 The request denied by the Archives Unit was for: "Tranche Release Document for June 2010 disbursement of SEM DPL, Brazil (Project ID: P095205) First Programmatic Development Policy Loan for Sustainable Environmental Management." The Archives replied to requester by indicating that it does not exist. The Archives Unit indicated to the requester that while the first tranche has been released under this operation, a "Tranche Release Document ("TRD")" is not required for the first tranche, and that TRDs are required for all future tranches. The request denied by the InfoShop/PIC was for information concerning a particular country's "phosphate mining/production." Page | 23 Table 12. Language in which Requests were Received by the Bank English 138 Spanish 8 French 5 Portuguese 3 Arabic 2 Table 13. Requests Related to Regional Information Africa 34 Latin American and Caribbean 20 South Asia 17 East Asia and Pacific 13 Europe and Central Asia 11 Middle East and North Africa 9 IV. ACCESS TO INFORMATION COMMITTEE DECISIONS ­ PREROGATIVE TO DISCLOSE, AND POLICY INTERPRETATIONS 23. Exercise of the Bank's Prerogative to Disclose Restricted Information. Under the AI Policy, the Bank reserves the right to disclose, under exceptional circumstances, certain information covered by the (a) Corporate Administrative Matters, (b) Deliberative Information, and (c) Financial Information (other than banking and billing) exceptions, if the Bank determines that the overall benefits of such disclosure outweigh the potential harm to the interests protected by the exceptions.29 The AIC has the authority to exercise this prerogative in respect to documents covered by these exceptions, if they are not Board papers or Board records classified as "Confidential" or "Strictly Confidential" or information provided to the Bank by a country member or third party in confidence, and if the AIC determines that the overall benefits of the disclosure would outweigh the potential harm. 24. In the First Quarter, a total of 12 requests were referred to the AIC to consider whether to exercise the Bank's prerogative to disclose the restricted information. Eleven of the requests were made by the general public, and one was made by a judicial entity. At the end of the First Quarter, the AIC decided on seven of the 12 requests. Of the seven requests, the AIC exercised the prerogative to disclose in three cases. The three requests for which the AIC exercised the Bank's prerogative to disclose are the following: Rwanda - Structural Adjustment Credit (Credit 2271-RW) ­ deliberative documents concerning the proceeds disbursed pursuant to this credit; Jordan Public Sector Review, Report 19664; and Regional trading arrangements and beyond: exploring some options for South Asia - theory, empirics and policy. 29 See AI Policy at para. 18. Page | 24 In the four cases that the AIC chose not to exercise the prerogative to disclose, the documents were covered by the following AI Policy exceptions: three requests concerned documents covered by the "Corporate Administrative Matters" exception, of which one also and one request concerned documents covered by the "Deliberative Information" exception. 25. Ten requests required internal consultations with the business units concerned; of which, seven resulted in the need for the business units to consult with the member country or client concerned. Annex B lists the 12 requests received by the AIC for consideration during the First Quarter, the AI Policy exceptions that cover the information under consideration, and the AIC's decision on whether to exercise the Bank's prerogative to disclose restricted information. 26. AI Policy Interpretations. The AI Policy provides that the AIC "has the authority to interpret this Policy in line with the Policy's guiding principles."30 In the First Quarter, the AIC issued the following policy interpretations: (a) Procurement Information under BETFs. Procurement information resulting from Bank-executed trust funds ("BETF"), which are funds that support the Bank's work program, is covered by the Corporate Administrative Matter exception of the AI Policy and, therefore, restricted from disclosure. (b) Application of "Director" Concerned. The AI Policy indicates that the Bank's prerogative to restrict access to information (other than Board records and Board papers) that normally would be disclosed under the AI Policy must be exercised by the "director" concerned. The AIC clarified that, when information concerns a country, the director concerned is the relevant country director, who may consult with others (e.g., sector director) as needed. In other cases, the relevant director may be the sector director, network director, etc., depending on the nature of the information. Individual units may take the decision to have more stringent approval mechanisms (e.g., approval by the Vice President concerned to restrict access to information normally disclosed) but such would not impact the authorization framework set out in the AI Policy. (c) Redaction. Under the AI Policy, the Bank considers disclosure of documents in their original form. If a requested document includes restricted information, the AI Policy does not mandate the Bank to redact (black out) restricted information in order to make the document acceptable for public access. While the Bank does not have a redaction policy to black out restricted information in response to public requests (meaning, documents that include restricted information are not publicly available), the Bank is not prevented from redacting restricted information on a case-by-case basis if it chooses to do so. (d) Procedure for Referring Request to the AIC. The AI Board Paper suggested procedures for referring requests to the AIC so that it may consider whether to exercise the Bank's prerogative to disclose restricted information. Under the proposed procedures, information created before July 1, 2010, that (i) are covered by the Corporate Administrative Matters, Deliberative Information and/or Financial Information (other than banking and billing) 30 AI Policy at para. 35. Page | 25 exceptions, and (ii) are not eligible for declassification, would be referred to the AIC for consideration. In the interest of providing more timely responses to requesters, the AIC modified when such requests should be referred. The Archives Unit and InfoShop/PICs will only refer requests for such restricted information to the AIC if the information is at least five years old and/or involves a closed operation and has not been restricted by the exercise of the Bank's prerogative to restrict access. For such requests, the Archives Unit and InfoShop/PICs will deny the requests based on, as relevant, the exceptions that apply to the documents, or the Bank's exercise of its prerogative to restrict access. To monitor this procedural modification, the Archives Unit and InfoShop, as relevant, will inform the AIC of the number of requests that the Archives Unit and InfoShop/PICs have denied on this basis. V. THE APPEALS PROCESS 27. Types of Appeal. One of the guiding principles of the AI Policy is to recognize a requester's right to an appeals process if the requester is denied access to information by the Bank. A requester may file an appeal if he/she is able to: (a) establish a prima facie case that the World Bank has violated the AI Policy by improperly or unreasonably restricting access to information that it would normally disclose under the AI Policy ("violation of policy"); or (b) make a public interest case to override the AI Policy's exceptions that restrict the disclosure of certain information, such information being limited to corporate administrative matters, deliberative information and financial information (other than banking and billing) ("public interest"). 28. AIC Decisions on Appeals ­ First Quarter. The AIC serves as the first level of appeal for those appeals alleging a violation of policy, and as the first and final level of appeal for those appeals asserting a public interest. In the First Quarter, the AIC received four appeals. As further discussed in paragraph 29 below, the AIC upheld the Bank's decision to deny access to information in two of those appeals. At the end of the First Quarter, the other two appeals remained under consideration. Out of the four appeals received by the AIC, two asserted an appeal on "public interest" grounds; one alleged a "violation of policy"; and one alleged both a "violation of policy" and a "public interest" appeal. Of the two appeals already decided by the AIC, both benefited from internal consultations with the business units concerned, and the average processing time before the AIC was 24.5 working days. Annex C provides a table of the four appeals received by the AIC during the First Quarter, the appeal type, the AIC's decision to uphold or reverse the Bank's decision to deny access to information, and the applicable Policy exceptions restricting access. 29. The two decisions of the AIC made in the First Quarter are summarized below. (a) Case Number AI0199: Documents relating to the India: Rampur Hydropower Project. The Bank initially denied the request because the information requested is covered by the "Deliberative Information" exception under the AI Policy. The requester made a "public interest" appeal to access the supervision reports, midterm reviews, back to office reports, Page | 26 agenda notes and minutes of the meetings regarding the above listed project. In considering the appeal, the AIC found that a midterm review had not yet been carried out for the project. It also found that information on the project is publicly available through various websites and through a PIC located in the Bayal village that had been functioning since 2006. In view of the above, the AIC found insufficient public interest basis for overriding the "Deliberative Information" exception of the Policy restricting the requested information and decided to uphold the Bank's prior decision to deny access to the requested information. (b) Case Number AI0262: IBRD/IDA Integrated Risk Monitoring Report. The Bank initially denied access to the above-listed Bank report based on the determination that the document is covered by the "Deliberative Information" exception under the AI Policy. The requester made an appeal asserting both violation of policy and public interest. The appeal was considered on both grounds by the AIC. Violation of Policy. With respect to the requester's assertion of a violation of policy, the AIC found that the report is a deliberative document covered by the "Deliberative Information" exception, and includes matters such as financial projections, corporate considerations, and security and business continuity issues. These matters are also covered by the "Security and Safety," "Corporate Administrative Matters," and "Financial Information" exceptions under the AI Policy. In view of the exceptions that apply, the AIC determined that the report is restricted from public access and would not normally be disclosed under the AI Policy. The AIC also recognized that the report is a Board Committee paper classified as "Confidential," and that, under the AI Policy, Board papers (which includes Board Committee papers) classified as "Confidential" may only be eligible for declassification 20 years after the date on the document. As the report is dated November 13, 2009, the earliest the report might become eligible for declassification is November 13, 2029. However, because the report is a deliberative document that contains and relates to information covered under the "Security and Safety" and "Corporate Administrative Matters" exceptions, which are not eligible for declassification, the report is not a document that would be eligible for declassification under the AI Policy even after 20 years. Based on the above findings, the AIC decided that the Bank properly and reasonably denied access to the report and, therefore, did not violate the AI Policy. For these reason, in response to the appeal alleging a violation of the policy, the AIC decided to uphold the Bank's decision to deny public access to the report. Public Interest. In reviewing the appeal on public interest grounds, the AIC found that the "Security and Safety" exception applies to the report, and recognize that it is an exception that the AIC has no authority to override. It also did not find compelling public interest reasons to override the "Deliberative Information" exception (on which the Bank initially denied access to the report), or the "Corporate Administrative Matters" and "Financial Information" exceptions, which the AIC also found to apply to the report. For these reasons, in response to the public interest appeal, the AIC decided to uphold the Bank's decision to deny public access to the report. Page | 27 30. AI Appeals Board. The AI Appeals Board serves as the second and final level of appeal for those appeals alleging a violation of policy. For appeals alleging a violation of policy, the AI Appeals Board may affirm or reverse the decision of the AIC to uphold the Bank's initial decision to deny access. No appeal was filed before the AI Appeals Board in the First Quarter. VI. CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS 31. Challenges are inevitable in at least the early months of implementing a new policy, as staff members need to adapt to both the new policy and their new responsibilities associated with it. All staff are affected by the AI Policy changes, ranging from operations, to central units, to public information and Board staff. The Bank will continue to monitor the implementation of the AI Policy, considering in particular matters of compliance and public outreach. Moreover, in view of public outreach, the Bank recognizes the importance of having an effective translation approach in order to effectively communicate with the public and its clients. The Bank began its review to develop an updated translations framework when preparing for the AI Policy implementation. In the coming months, the Bank will need to do additional work to proceed with its development. The next report on the implementation of the AI Policy will cover the quarterly period of October 1, through December 31, 2010. Page | 28 Annex A Simultaneously Disclosed Board Documents: July 1 ­ September 30, 2010 No. Report No. Title 1 55863-UY Uruguay ­ Country Partnership Strategy 2 54265-PA Panama ­ Country Partnership Strategy (FY2011-FY2014) 3 54690-LB Lebanon ­ Country Partnership Strategy 4 54939-UY Uruguay ­ Policy Notes. Challenges and Opportunities, 2010-2015 5 53781-UY Uruguay ­ First Programmatic Public Sector, Competitiveness, and Social Inclusion Development Policy Loan 6 55045-BZ Belize ­ Municipal Development Project ­ Project Appraisal Document 7 52907-BR Brazil ­ Santa Catarina Rural Competitiveness Project ­ Project Appraisal Document 8 52314-BR Brazil ­ Rio de Janeiro Renovating and Strengthening Public Management (PRO GESTAO) Technical Assistance 9 54858-PE Peru ­ Fourth Programmatic Fiscal Management and Competitiveness Development Policy Loan ­ Program Document 10 55038-TR Turkey ­ Third Teias Project ­ Adaptable Program Lending ­ Phase 6 11 56276-MZ Mozambique ­ Spatial Development Planning Technical Assistance Project ­ Project Appraisal Document 12 53927-GY Guyana ­ Improving Teacher Education Project ­ Project Appraisal Document 13 52670-XK Kosovo: First Sustainable Employment Development Policy Operation (SEDPO1) ­ Program Document 14 54172-LK Sri Lanka ­ Small and Medium Enterprise Development Facility Project ­ Project Appraisal Document 15 55592-GZ West Bank and Gaza: Palestinian Reform and Development Plan Development Policy Grant III ­ Program Document 16 56277-BY Belarus ­ Post-Chernobyl Recovery Project ­ Additional Financing ­ Project Paper 17 50987-BR Brazil ­ Sao Paulo Trains and Signaling Project ­ Additional Financing ­ Project Paper 18 56032-PK Pakistan ­ Karachi Port Improvement Project ­ Project Appraisal Document 19 56431-MZ Mozambique ­ Health Commodity Security Project ­ Project Appraisal Document Page | 29 Annex B Requests for Information Considered by the AIC in the First Quarter Case No. Exercise and Prerogative to Requested Information AI Policy Exception(s) Disclose Restricted Information 1 AI 0197 Corporate Administrative No Attachments to the Access to Matters Information Staff Handbook 2 Rwanda Structural Adjustment Credit Deliberative Information Yes (Credit 2271-RW)** 3 AI0294 Corporate Administrative No Attachments to the Access to Matters Information Staff Handbook 4 AI0229 Deliberative Information Yes Jordan Public Sector Review Report 19664 5 AI0262 Deliberative Information No IBRD/IDA Integrated Risk Monitoring Report AC2009-0131 6 AI0287 Corporate Administrative No Bank Building Documents between Matters 1945-1979 7 AI0300 * * Ghana Urban Water Sector Reform Project (PO56256) 8 AI0352 Deliberative Information Yes Regional Trading Arrangements and Beyond: Exploring Some options for South Asia - Theory, Empirics and Policy 9 AI 0365 Deliberative Information * Management and Evaluation within the Plano Plurianual: Institutionalization without Impact * Under Consideration ­ Pending input of business unit and/or other parties. ** This request for documents concerning a Structural Adjustment Credit to Rwanda (Credit 2271-RW) was made by a judicial entity. Page | 30 Case No. Exercise and Prerogative to Requested Information AI Policy Exception(s) Disclose Restricted Information 10 AI0366 Deliberative Information * Management and Evaluation within the Plano Plurianual: Institutionalization without Impact 11 AI0374 Deliberative Information * Sanitation Improvements in Kabul City Financed by the World Bank Project: Co-Composting Pilot plant at Chamtala Dumpsite 12 AI0396 Deliberative Information * Oman: Development of Human Resources at Crossroads * Under Consideration ­ Pending input of business unit and/or other parties. Page | 31 Annex C Appeals Received for Consideration by the AIC in the First Quarter Type of Appeal Upheld or Reverse Case No. Bank Violation decision of Public to deny Applicable Exception(s) Policy Interest access 1 AI0199 X Upheld Deliberative Information India: Rampur Hydropower Project 2 AI0262 X X Upheld Deliberative Information; IBRD/IDA Integrated Security and Safety; Risk Monitoring Report Corporate Administrative AC2009-0131 Matter; and Financial Information 3 AI0336 X In process * Namibia: Education and Training Sector Improvement Program 4 AI0294 X In process * Attachments to the Access to Information Handbook * To be confirmed by the AIC. Page | 32