Key activity 1: Diagnostics
A diagnostic assessment helps development actors
understand the broad cultural, environmental and political
context in which they are working. This provides a solid
foundation for any safer school construction program.
The assessment may occur at the country level for
large programs or at the district or community level for
small programs. A model “Education Sector Snapshot
for Comprehensive School Safety and Education in
Emergencies” typically developed by the national education
authority, in partnership with education sector development
and humanitarian partners, provides a sound template for
this analysis. Program managers should have available the
following components in these diagnostics:
SECTION III: MOBILISATION
• Education sector analysis. Early in the strategic
planning process, it is vital to understand what drives
the need for safer schools and potential stakeholders.
When the gap between demand for schools and access
to schools is great, new construction may be warranted.
When the gap is small or when existing schools are in
poor repair, the more pressing problem is fixing existing
facilities. Sometimes repairs are too costly and schools
need to be rebuilt from scratch. Rather than focusing on
large new construction programs, the program may focus
on rapid assessment and prioritisation of schools needing
repair, retrofit or replacement and then carrying out these
options for the weakest facilities (see the case study
‘Rapid visual assessment for retrofitting’ in the Community
Planning Stage).
• Contextual analysis. Safer school construction happens
in both a hazard and socio-cultural context. Gathering
existing hazard maps, hazard studies and descriptions
of past disasters can help orient the program to some
of the major safety issues they need to address. Local
hazards and a more nuanced understanding of impacts
emerge through community engagement in the Planning
Stage. An analysis of historical, socio-cultural and political
processes also helps situate the role of education within
past and present community development.
• Stakeholder analysis. Conceptually mapping the key
stakeholders and interests, their relative powers and
capacities can unearth local champions of safer schools.
Bringing champions into each stage of the program
increases the long-term ownership and replication of the
process.
Once program managers have identified stakeholders,
they can invite them to engage in a participatory social
assessment to help understand each stakeholder’s
priorities and needs. Without this direct dialogue, program
managers have difficulty tailoring projects to local needs.
• Analysis of school construction. Constructing or
retrofitting schools using a community-based approach
is rooted in the local building culture, which may require
analysis.
35
Components of an Education
Sector Snapshot for
Comprehensive School Safety
and Education in Emergencies
1. Introductory Demographics
2. Education Sector Overview
3. Hazards and Risks Overview
4. Disaster Risk Management Overview
5. Comprehensive School Safety Overview
• Pillar 1: Safe School Facilities: Policies,
Practices & Programs
• Pillar 2: School Disaster Management
& Educational Continuity: Policies,
Practices & Programs
• Pillar 3: Risk Reduction and Resilience in
Education: Policies, Practices & Programs
Program managers need to understand the technical
capacity of the broader society, usually with support from
external experts or existing technical assessments. It
is vital to understand the current knowledge of hazardresistant construction and assessment that exists within
local universities, governments, vocational schools and
trades. At times, this important knowledge may be limited,
or even lacking. Where knowledge is insufficient, safer
school construction programs need to build technical
capacity – creating a sustained impact across a society.
The analysis should also identify known weaknesses in
school construction or past school construction programs.
Local engineering experts may be well-acquainted with
systemic failures in vernacular construction or national
building codes, where they exist. Past disasters may
also paint a vivid picture of failings – roofs consistently
blown off in high winds or dangerous cracking in columns
after earthquakes. Program managers can use these
historical weaknesses to implement strategies that avoid
such problems in the current project. A review of funding
and legal responsibility for school building construction
supports this analysis.
Wider school construction analysis helps program
managers shape programs that build on and support
existing processes and systems. Coordinating with other
groups strengthens the long-term sustainability of safer
school construction and helps integrate safer school
construction into national, regional and local programs.