School infrastructure

Interactions between students, teachers and pedagogical content, and thus, education, generally take place within a school’s physical infrastructure. Physical infrastructure has significant impact on children’s enrolment, attendance, completion rates and even learning achievements. For instance, the World Bank found that investments in school facilities in Peru increased students’ attendance rates (UNICEF, 2009f). Physical infrastructure can also protect the lives of teachers and pupils, as well as investments in education, for instance in the case of a natural hazard.

Target 4a of Sustainable Development Goal 4, specifically states the importance of building and upgrading education facilities. In order to do this, it is essential to encourage the community to participate in the process (for more on this subject, see Policy page Buildings are not ready). Involving the community also helps ensure the respect of cultural and religious beliefs through the school’s physical infrastructure (for more on this subject, see Policy page Relationship between schools and their community).

Promising policy options

Refer to national building codes

Planners should refer to their national building codes to build accessible, gender-responsive, adequate, safe and resilient school physical infrastructure. Analyse if there are specific building codes for school and education infrastructure and if these codes are being respected (for more information on this subject see Policy page Buildings are not ready).

If no specific building codes for school construction have been designed yet, make this a priority (if needed, refer to The World Bank and INEE’s Guidance Notes on Safer School Construction).

Essential physical infrastructure facilities

Interactions between students, teachers and pedagogical content, and thus, education, generally take place within a school’s physical infrastructure. Ensuring an adequate and sufficiently equipped infrastructure is key, so that teaching ‘takes place in acceptable conditions and that learning can flourish’ (IIEP-UNESCO, 2018: 19). Indeed, physical infrastructure has significant impact on children’s enrolment, attendance, completion rates and even learning achievements (e.g. the World Bank found that investments in school facilities in Peru increased students’ attendance rates (UNICEF, 2009f)). Physical infrastructure can also protect the lives of teachers and pupils, as well as investments in education (e.g. in the event of a natural hazard).

Various considerations must be taken into account when developing the physical infrastructure of schools.

For instance, adapting facilities to children’s size and physical abilities is indispensable (see section Children with disabilities below for specific recommendations on how to make school infrastructure accessible). Cultural sensitivity and local customs must also be considered, such as toilets that are intended for use by Muslims should not face Mecca.

Adequate water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) facilities in schools ‘improve access to education and learning outcomes, particularly for girls, by providing a safe, inclusive and equitable learning environment for all’ (UNICEF and WHO, 2018:8). Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) 6 and 4 aim for universal access to WASH and inclusive and effective learning environments. The following essential physical infrastructure facilities must be taken into account to reach those goals:

• Sanitation facilities: Privacy, cleanliness, safety, and easy-to-use sanitation facilities are important. Toilets should be close to classrooms, cubicle doors should open inwards, toilets should have covers, and facilities should have an appropriate ventilation system and regular maintenance. Latrines, on the other hand, should be at least 50 metres away from the school and 30 metres away from any ground-source (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010).
• Hygiene facilities: Sinks should be provided with water and a cleaning agent. The minimum standard is 1 washing point per 100 children (Kayumba, Ginoulhiac, and Hirano, 2009).
• Safe water: Schools must offer adequate access to potable water (within the school or in close proximity). This can be done through proper plumbing infrastructure, a borehole, well or a water stream. Planners must set their own standards based on their national circumstances and international standards (SDG 6 targets universal access to drinking water, sanitation and hygiene for all by 2030; The Sphere Standards annex states that 3 litres of water per pupil per day for drinking and hand washing is the survival minimum required in schools (Sphere Association, 2018).)

Electricity-wise, SDG 7 aims to ensure universal ‘access to affordable, reliable and modern energy for all’ (United Nations Division for Sustainable Development Goals, 2015b). Electricity-based lightning improves teaching and therefore learning outcomes. Every school should have electricity to provide lighting and energy for teaching as well as for the equipment –computers and radios– and appliances such as refrigerators and stoves. Multiple recommendations for school electrification programmes exist, such as leveraging ‘innovative financing streams and public-private partnerships to fund electrification efforts’ and ensuring ‘ technical reliability of grid connections and equipment through standards and certification’, among others (UNDESA, 2014:20).

As for having a secure physical environment, a fence should be constructed around the school to demarcate the school grounds, prevent children from leaving school and keep out intrusions. Fences can be made from galvanized line wires, vegetation or mud walls. Additionally, it is essential to make sure buildings are built to resist different natural hazards, such as seismic-resistant school infrastructure in earthquake zones, proper drainage and plumbing infrastructure in flood zones, and securely attached roofs in wind-prone areas. For more information on this subject see Policy page Buildings are not ready.

Finally, for garbage disposal, it is essential to have a designated area for garbage disposal at schools, with dustbins and brooms included. Children should participate in cleaning and maintaining the classroom (e.g. Standards used in the SWASTHH Project, Jharkhand India (UNICEF, 2009f:14).

Additional functional elements and facilities

Some additional elements can be set up in schools to given students and teachers a better learning environment. These are:

• Health provisions: Every school should have a first-aid kit or a medical cabinet for basic emergencies. In addition, a designated space must be set to store medicine appropriately.
• Kitchen: A kitchen should be provided with equipment and furniture that ensures adequate food storage and cooking.
• Library and I.T. Rooms: Designate a space for books and learning resources as well as I.T. rooms equipped with computers and internet connection. Locate it strategically within the school to allow an easy access and away from noisy areas. When possible, make them accessible to community members.
• Landscaping and open spaces: Along with school buildings, school grounds are very important. Planting trees, shrubs and flowers can have positive effects on the learning environment. Students can be encouraged to help raise vegetables, fruits, domestic animals and fish on school grounds. This production should be done after community’s consultation (e.g. in the SWASTHH Project done in Jharkhand, India, children participated in the raising of vegetables). Moreover, open spaces such as play yards are essential. Whenever possible, allow the community members to use those spaces after school hours (see below).

Parental and community member’s participation

Historically, in most countries, central governments entirely controlled and implemented the school’s physical infrastructure design, construction, refurbishment, and maintenance. However, over the past decades, the involvement of the community and local governments in the process has become increasingly important. Today, most of the processes are highly participatory. In fact, even when they are entirely managed by MoE, key stakeholders –such as relevant ministries, local governments, school staff, parents and community members– have a say. This allows schools to reflect the community’s needs, culture, and aspirations. (For more on this issue, see Policy page Buildings are not ready.)

For example, the programme This School is Our School, created in 2020 in Mexico, provides funds to Parent and Teachers Associations (PTA) to support school infrastructure programmes (Schmelkes del Valle, Robles Vásquez and Santos del Real, 2022). The purpose of the programme is ‘to improve the infrastructure and equipment conditions of public basic education facilities, giving priority to those located in areas with the greatest backwardness, preferably in localities with high or very high levels of marginalization and a high concentration of indigenous people (DOF, 2019c).’ (Schmelkes del Valle, Robles Vásquez and Santos del Real, 2022: 246.)

In addition to the formal involvement of the community in the construction, refurbishment and maintenance of the school’s physical infrastructure, encourage and welcome community members to use school facilities whenever possible (e.g. for town meetings, local gatherings and other events (UNICEF, 2009f).)

Community-Driven Development programmes

In more decentralized systems, responsibilities and roles given to local governments and communities are higher. The responsibility to finance community’s subprojects for the school’s infrastructure is transferred to local governments and the final responsibility for the design, planning, construction, restoration and maintenance of the school’s physical infrastructure relies on parents and community members. This approach is commonly referred to as Community-Driven Development programmes (this term is employed by The World Bank to characterize investment programmes that support decentralization). For instance, through The Kecamatan Development Programme implemented in Indonesia, communities participated in the construction and rehabilitation of 5,100 schools. In another example, from 2001 to 2006, communities participated in the rehabilitation of 1,446 schools and the construction of 700 new schools in Honduras (The World Bank, 2009b).

For CDD to happen it is necessary to (Theunynck, 2009):

• have adequate accountability mechanisms which clearly define the roles of each stakeholder (MoE, local governments, and communities);
• implement information, monitoring and evaluation systems;
• enhance the community’s empowerment; and
• develop capacity-building trainings.

Make sure CDD programmes are inclusive (Alkire et al., 2001) by paying attention to concerns expressed by those who are the most marginalized is necessary to ensure that investment choices and the programme itself will truly meet the needs of those who need it the most. Identify the most marginalized populations within the community and incorporate diverse voices in the decision-making process, such as those of women, girls, people from different ethnicities, religious groups, persons with disabilities, families, among others.

Before implementing any CDD programme, it is very important to analyse the context-based pertinence of such measure (for a critical evaluation of CDD programmes implemented in conflict-affected contexts read: King, E. n.d. A Critical Review of Community‐Driven Development Programmes in Conflict‐Affected Contexts. Waterloo, ON: Balsille School of International Affairs. Retrieved from: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/57a08a0240f0b64974000398/61046-A_Critical_Review_of_CDD_in_Conflict_Affected_Contexts.pdf.)

In general, Ministries of Education –and all relevant stakeholders– must uphold the Abidjan Principles when it comes to voluntary community contributions to the education system.

Policy options for improving Equity and Inclusion

Gender-responsive policies

Promising policy options

Construct gender-responsive infrastructure and facilities

A key aspect of a gender-responsive school relies on providing gender-responsive WASH facilities (Mason et al., 2013; Miiro et al., 2018; Sommer et al., 2016 as cited in Pisani and Dowd, 2022). Adequate sanitation facilities positively affect girls’ access, attendance, and retention in school. For instance, in Pakistan, the construction of separate toilets for girls increased their enrolment in primary schools (The World Bank, 2003). Another study, done in South Asia, revealed that, when no separate toilet facilities exist, many girls drop out of school at the onset of their menstruation (Narayan, Rao and Khan, 2010).

Adequate, well-functioning, clean, and separate toilets or latrines should be available for boys and girls as well as female and male teachers. WFP optimal standards for sanitation at school (cited by IIEP-UNESCO, 2010), suggests that there should be one toilet cubicle for every 25 girls, as well as one toilet cubicle for every 100 boys and one urinal for every 40 to 60 boys.

Ensure adequate resource allocation to build gender-responsive WASH facilities. For example, the Punjab Education Sector Reforms Programme in Pakistan allotted 60% of the funds to improve girls’ school facilities, particularly the provision of toilets (ASER Pakistan, 2014, cited by UNESCO and UNGEI, 2015). Another example is Uganda’s 2016 Gender in Education Sector Policy demands an adequate provision of budget to build gender –and disability– responsive infrastructure and facilities (Uganda, 2016).

Provide facilities for managing menstruation. In many countries around the world, women continue to face strong stigma during their menstrual period. School development policies and programmes should:

• provide facilities to manage menstruation and separate toilets (see above). In certain contexts, secure private washing places must be made available where girls and female teachers are able to wash during menstruation, as well as their cloths and rags (Chitrakar, 2009; Kayumba, Ginoulhiac, and Hirano, 2009; UNICEF, 2009f); and
• provide cloths, pads and/or sanitary products for menstruation. For this purpose, find different stakeholders who have innovative projects in this area and build partnerships so as to ensure girls and female teachers remain in school. For instance, the Mariam Seba Products Factory (MSPF) is an Ethiopian social-impact organization, which manufactures low cost, environmentally friendly, washable, and reusable sanitary pads which, for over ten years, has reached more than 800,000 girls (for more information consult their website: http://mariamseba.com). The NGO Dignity Period, in partnership with MSPF, provides menstrual hygiene kits as well as the necessary education to manage menstruation (For more information consult their website https://www.dignityperiod.org.)

Another key aspect of a gender-responsive school infrastructure is to ensure a secure physical environment. Parents may have concerns regarding their children’s safety at school –especially girls—which is why it is essential to have surveillance mechanisms against harassment and abuse. Construct windows in each classroom which allow good visual contact with the outside (Kayumba, Ginoulhiac, and Hirano, 2009).

Build fences around the school to demarcate the school grounds (see general section above).  For example, in Afghanistan, the Ministry of Education launched an initiative to build boundary walls around existing schools. Girls’ schools were prioritized. In 2011, 8,327 school walls were built and an additional 1,796 school walls were planned (Sperling, Winthrop and Kwauk, 2016). 

Community-Driven Development programmes

Studies reveal that the most successful Community-Driven Development (CDD) programmes are those with an explicit gender inclusion strategy. They do not rely solely on mainstreaming gender throughout the proposed programmes, but also guarantee women’s meaningful participation throughout the decision-making processes and project implementation (Browne, 2014). Some recommendations to make CDD programmes gender-responsive are (Browne, 2014; Alkire et al., 2001):

• gain a clear understanding of existent gender-roles, structures, and attitudes related to decision-making at the community level;
• provide training and capacity-building opportunities to tackle gender issues affecting the implementation of CDD programmes: Provide training in gender-sensitivity and gender-mainstreaming in CDD programmes so that they are effectively geared towards building inclusive, gender-responsive school infrastructures;
• implement quotas to ensure women’s participation in meetings and decision-making bodies as well as monitoring committees;
• develop women-only groups and meetings to analyse, develop and manage CDD projects. In many contexts ‘single-sex groups can work by increasing women’s skills, bargaining power and respect for them in the community’ (Ahmed et al., 2009: 40, cited by Browne, 2014: 4). Yet, the main goal is that their projects are effectively taken into consideration and adopted by the communities in which they are inscribed, thus, funding bodies should prioritize the ideas and projects proposed;
• assign to women real responsibilities and support them to embrace leadership roles. Appoint female staff and facilitators as role models;
• make meetings flexible (time and place) and allow them to bring their children to ensure their attendance;
• invite women by name (instead of inviting a household representative); and
• ensure that women seat in the front rows during meetings.

Policies for children with disabilities

Promising policy options

Governments must ensure that the school’s infrastructure and facilities are accessible to everyone. Accessibility is a ‘broad concept that encompasses the usability of environments, amenities and resources by persons with disabilities’ (UNICEF, 2014: 12).

*Note: Educational planners and decision-makers should keep in mind that the question of accessibility goes beyond the mere subject of school’s physical infrastructure and facilities. In fact, for a school to be accessible, the accessibility provided by the school’s physical infrastructure must be complemented by accessible teaching and learning methods, teaching and learning aids, and classroom practices, among others (these questions and pertinent policy recommendations can be consulted in the following Policy pages Classroom practices; Teaching skills; Student learning assessments; Availability and content of textbooks; and Availability of teaching aids).

Moreover, in order to ensure inclusion in schools, reasonable accommodation measures should be taken in addition to Universal Design (UNICEF, 2014: 7). For instance, providing ramps and wide doors is essential, but if a child needs an assistive device in order to get into the school and the classroom, then the provision of such device by the school administration would be considered as a reasonable accommodation (UNICEF, 2014). 

Develop standards for accessibility and monitor the compliance of infrastructures

Ensure that all education facilities are accessible: article 4 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) calls upon the States to conceive universally designed facilities and develop minimum standards to ensure that facilities are accessible (UN General Assembly, 2007). It is thus recommended that governments develop standards and guidelines to ensure that their education infrastructure –and other public spaces– are accessible to all children and individuals (UNESCO-Global Education Monitoring Report, 2018). For example, the Department of Basic Education in South Africa developed a legally binding set of norms and standards for all public schools in 2013 based on the principles of Universal Design (UNESCO-Global Monitoring Report, 2018). Another example is the Government of Ghana, with the support of UNICEF, developed standards and guidelines to ensure school’s physical accessibility. All educational institutions must apply and adhere to them (Ghana, 2015).

Monitor the compliance of school’s construction with the aforementioned standards. A recommended strategy is to include information concerning school’s physical accessibility through the Education Management Information Systems EMIS (e.g. the Child Functioning Module (CFM) developed by UNICEF and United Nation’s Washington Group on Disability Statistics can be added to the existent EMIS in order to get information about the school’s accessibility (UNICEF, 2018).)

Monitoring and evaluating schools’ accessibility should not be based solely on the availability of features such as ramps.  It should provide a comprehensive picture about school’s accessibility. This could be done by including information on how children are ‘getting to, entering and moving through the school; using water, sanitation, and recreational facilities’ as well data on school evacuation systems (UNESCO-Global Education Monitoring Report, 2016: 311).

Ensure school’s infrastructure is accessible and inclusive

Identify the barriers impeding children to get into the school. This could be done through multi-sectoral access audits. UNICEF’s general recommendations include ‘providing ground surfaces that are firm and stable, as well as ramps at road curbs and other changes in level, ensuring trees along routes are trimmed to keep the route clear, and providing a curb or barriers at the edge of routes where there is a vertical drop or steep slope down’ (2014: 18).

For the school’s entrances, make sure all children are welcomed at the same main entrance. It should not have steps, provide at least 850mm of width when doors are open and have a well-maintained paved, firm, even and slip-resistant floor.

As for the accessibility within the school, multiple aspects should be taken into consideration such as hallways and walkways, stairs and ramps. UNICEF (2014) recommends the following:

• Hallways and walkways: Must be wide enough (minimum of 1,500mm) to ensure that children with wheelchairs can move around the school buildings.
• Stairs: Integrate handrails to make them safe for all children, as well as include colour contrast and tactile warning pavers at the edges of stairs.
• Ramps: Should always be clear, their gradient slope should be minimum of 1 unit of rise by 12 units of length (1:12), a 1:15 slope is preferred. The width should be of at least 1,500mm (1,800mm is preferred).
• General recommendations: All learning spaces must be ventilated and bright.
• Accessibility within the classrooms: Specific considerations must be taken into account in order to decide on the type of floor, the blackboards and whiteboards, the lightning levels as well as the windows.

Ensure that the water, sanitation and hygiene facilities are accessible. Accessible toilets should be integrated to existing toilet cubicles. Some general recommendations include:

• provide a minimum clear floor space of 1,500mm x 1,500mm;
• the door should open to the outside and provide at least 900mm of space;
• integrate L-shaped grab-bars;
• build accessible urinals at the beginning of the row with support grab-bars on both sides;
• build accessible drinking-water and hand-washing facilities;
• build accessible signage for toilets (that are visible and touchable) and make sure pictograms are responsive to local customs;
• build accessible playgrounds; and
• conceive accessible evacuation plans. Provide visual and audio alarms, ensure that strategies are developed to assist in the evacuation of every child.

*All of the aforementioned recommendations are a recompilation of the main ideas proposed by the publication UNICEF, 2014, please consult it to get specific details regarding each strategy.

Parental and community member’s participation

Ensure the active participation of local stakeholders –such as children with disabilities and their families, the local community, Disability People’s Organisations, teachers, school leaders, local education planners, among others–  throughout the design, planning and construction phases (Snider and Takeda, 2008; AusAID, 2013; UNICEF, 2014). The process should be participatory and consultative. Especially, involve children with disabilities and their families as they are ‘experts on their own needs and can often bring innovative and cost-effective ideas to the table’ (UNICEF, 2014: 11). This strategy is ‘a key to cost-effective universal design’ (Snider and Takeda, 2008: 6).

Universal Design is meant to benefit the entire population, accommodate to each particular context, as well as identify the locally available products and construction techniques (Snider and Takeda, 2008; Bolton, 2013). It is thus recommended ‘to educate designers, builders and citizens about the purpose and benefits of universal design for the whole community so that they understand its value and work to find good solutions to problems’ (Snider and Takeda, 2008: 6).

Community-Driven Development programmes

Community-Driven Development (CDD) programmes should be inclusive and respond to the needs of those who are the most marginalized, such as children with disabilities. In order to identify and tackle their specific needs, make sure to engage children with disabilities and their families as well as Disability People’s Organisations throughout the decision-making and project implementation processes.

Policies for displaced populations

Promising policy options

Analyse the State of School Infrastructure and Plan for Rehabilitation, Reconstruction and Replacements

Identifying whether sufficient adequate school infrastructure is available to welcome displaced populations is key, particularly amidst or after an emergency. A detailed survey can be held by head-teachers, local supervisors, and other relevant stakeholders ‘to identify the condition of buildings, prioritize maintenance, repair or reconstruction work, and decide which buildings are unsafe and must be vacated’ (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010: 143). The following aspects should be considered in the survey (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010): 

• The number of damaged schools due to conflict. 
• The specific condition of the school buildings and facilities. 
• Security conditions within the school and surrounding areas. 

Surveys can be complemented by risk, hazard, and vulnerability mapping exercises (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010). Maps allow decision-makers to establish various factors geographically, including the vulnerability of schools, given the frequency of hazards, and how exposed they are (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010). Maps are a powerful instrument to identify schools, the state of their infrastructure, and their degree of safety.  

Based on the gathered information, decision-makers must plan and cost the rehabilitation, reconstruction and/or replacement of school infrastructure. National construction units, when available, must manage major infrastructure programmes, such as the construction or replacement of schools (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010). In complement, district education offices and any other local authorities can work with the community members, NGOs, and other stakeholders, to support the rehabilitation and reconstruction of school infrastructure, while providing them with the necessary materials (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010). International assistance can also be sought while ensuring a coordinated process. For instance, Algeria’s Ministry of Education worked in close collaboration with UNICEF to demolish, rehabilitate, and install new school buildings in Saharawi Refugee Camp (Triangle, n.d.).  

To ensure the quality, safety, and adequate use of schools, plans must also include the regular maintenance of facilities and furniture. For instance, Jordan’s Education Sector Plan (2018-2022) included ‘preventive maintenance programs’ for 800 male and female schools (2018:31). Adequate funds should be allocated for this purpose, as well as encourage the set-up of maintenance committees within schools, with the help of school management committees (SMC), parent-and-teacher associations (PTA), any other school-governing body or the school community at large. For instance, Jordan’s ESP allocated funds to school principals to cover the cost of maintenance provided by maintenance committees (2018: 31). Moreover, teachers and school leaders must foster an appreciative environment, where students acknowledge the importance of cleaning and taking care of the facilities and furniture at their disposal.  

Choosing between host community schools, building permanent, and/or alternative, temporary school infrastructure

According to the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants, measures must be taken to guarantee that all displaced children access education ‘within a few months of their arrival in the host country’ (UNESCO, 2019: 30). Thus, education infrastructure’s capacity must be enhanced to guarantee the right to education for all displaced children, regardless of their nationality or status, as expeditiously as possible. 

Including displaced students in the national education system is ‘the most sustainable option for ensuring quality and certified education for refugees’, asylum-seekers, and IDPs (UNESCO, 2019). For that purpose, the capacity of existing educational infrastructure must be assessed, among other key aspects (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010). When there is not enough space or when classes in host community schools are already overcrowded, other strategies must be considered such as using school’s learning centres or libraries or building new permanent classrooms or schools to cater for the influx of displaced populations (UNESCO, 2019; Global Protection Cluster Working Group, 2010). For example, Jordan’s 2018-2022 ESP planned to ‘establish 300 new, accessible male and female school buildings for Jordanian, refugees, and special needs students over the next five years’ to receive 1,000 students per school (Jordan, 2018: 31).  

While constructing new schools and classrooms is the ideal scenario, it is not always possible nor recommended. If the large influx of displaced populations relates to a temporary emergency, such a long-term, costly solution may not be the most pertinent one. The UNHCR states that in emergencies ‘infrastructure should be based on the principles of rapid response, followed by cost-effectiveness’ to ensure fast access to education (2003: 14). In such scenarios, other structures such as temporary, semi-permanent, extensions or mobile infrastructures may be more appropriate (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010). Alternative learning spaces can include (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010; UNESCO, 2019):    

• Canvas tents; 
• classrooms under trees; 
• classrooms with a wood or bamboo roof, covered with plastic sheeting or tarpaulin; 
• existing, non-school buildings such as community places, gyms, warehouses, vacant government buildings, or religious places (only if those facilities are safe).  

Overall, temporary structures must protect children from meteorological conditions, and ensure adequate lighting and ventilation. They should be set up in secure locations and ‘away from stagnant water, very loud areas, main roads and distribution points’ (UNICEF ROSA, 2006: 15). It is key to acknowledge that after the first weeks of an emergency, ‘it may be more cost-effective and healthier to have a permanent roof and cement floor, even where walls are made of local materials’ (UNHCR, 2003: 14). An example of easy to build infrastructure, which has proven to be better ‘than tents, cement blocks and corrugated metal sheets in terms of thermal insulation’ is beehive schools (Watt, 2018). Supported by Emergency Architecture & Human Rights (EAHR) as part of their initiative 100 Classrooms for Refugee Children, these beehive schools were constructed for and by refugees in Zaátari, near a Syrian refugee camp in Jordan (see the picture in annexe 1). 

While temporary learning spaces may be key to ensure fast access to education, it is also necessary to guarantee efforts overtime to ensure that ‘infrastructure is progressively upgraded to meet locally identified standards’ (UNHCR, 2003: 72). National standards and guidelines must be in place or established to ensure that all school infrastructure and facilities are adequate, regardless of whether they are permanent, semi-permanent, or temporary (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010). When national standards do not apply to temporary or semi-permanent structures, ‘good practice’ should be followed (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010). International recommendations should be considered, such as UNHCR’s recommendations for camp schools (2016 and 2003): 

• One school per 5,000 people; 
• classroom size of 6 meters by 7 meters; 

• 1 school per sector (if possible); 
• 3 classrooms per school (if possible); 
• 50 square meters (further recommendations) (see more examples in annexe 2).  

In addition, and particularly in camp settings, regular monitoring of schools’ and classroom’s infrastructure is key not only to inform decision-makers on the most suitable materials and design but also to inform the need for maintenance and restorations (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010).  

Annexe 1

Beehive school

Source: Watt, J. 2018. This amazing beehive building is a classroom for refugees, built by refugees. Accessed 9 December 2021:  https://theirworld.org/news/beehive-classroom-for-syrian-refugee-children-jordan

Annexe 2

Recommendations provided by Shelter Cluster Iraq, CCM Cluster and WASH Cluster,  2016, for schools in refugee camps in Iraq

Source: Shelter Cluster Iraq; CCM Cluster; WASH Cluster. 2016. Camp Construction and Management. A Joint Technical Guidance Note for Camp Construction in Iraq. p. 7. Retrieved from: https://www.sheltercluster.org/sites/default/files/docs/english._joint_guidance_note_on_camps_snfi-wash-cccm.pdf 

Designate schools as ‘safe areas’ and ensure safe learning environments

In case of an ongoing conflict as well as in the aftermath of the crisis schools must be designated as safe areas (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010). ‘The targeting of schools and educational institutions can be prosecuted as a war crime’ given that the protection of educational institutions is included in article 8 of The Rome Statute (1998) (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010: 139). All parties involved in a conflict must define schools as safe areas. For example, during Nepal’s conflict (1996-2006) local communities negotiated with armed groups to declare schools as ‘Zones of Peace’ (UNICEF, 2014). Safety measures must also be implemented to protect students, school staff, and the school’s infrastructure. This can include evacuation plans and reinforcement or protection systems for school buildings (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010). Moreover, in the aftermath of a crisis and within refugee camps it is also key to demarcate schools and playing areas as safe spaces. This can be done with ropes, plastic tapes, stones, and fences (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010).  

To ensure safe learning environments, it is key that school infrastructure and its surroundings are secured. Concerning camp settings, ‘schools and recreational activities should be designed with due consideration for security. All persons of concern, including young children and adolescents, should be consulted in the process’ (Technical Support Section Division of Operational Services UNHCR, 2007: 15).  

The following aspects should be considered (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010; Technical Support Section Division of Operational Services UNHCR, 2007; Smith, 2013; Kupfer, 2016; GPEA, 2016): 

• Clear landmines from the school and surrounding area; 
• remove hazardous objects, such as glass, sharp items;  

• ensure that buildings are structurally safe (strengthen the infrastructure if necessary and use non-flammable materials); 
• build roofs and doors to protect students from meteorological conditions and avoid theft; 
• build fences or boundary walls to protect the school property and the students, avoid external unauthorized people from entering the school; 
• build various exits from classrooms and the school to ensure an adequate evacuation when necessary. 

Ensure adequate school facilities

All school facilities for displaced populations must be adequate, inclusive, and gender-responsive. All the strategies treated in the general section of the present Policy page, as well as the gender-responsive policies and those for children with disabilities, must be considered in complement to this section. Precisions concerning WASH facilities and the creation of child-friendly spaces will be provided below.  

WASH facilities are key to ensuring adequate, safe, clean, learning environments for all displaced students. To ensure adequate access to safe potable water consider the following (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010): 

• Analyse whether there is sufficient water in schools or if water treatment is needed (feasibility of water treatment plans must be evaluated, as well as the technology and funding required to do so). 

• When there is no potable water within schools, the source should be close and accessible to all.  

To provide adequate, functioning latrines consider the following (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010): 

• If pit latrines are built, include covers and the use of soil and ash to prevent flies.  
• If resources allow it, build ventilated improved pit (VIP) latrines. Although more expensive, they are preferable to pit latrines as they prevent the propagation of germs.  

• Flush toilets are preferable to the two previous options. Yet, maintenance plans must be ensured, as well as the considerations mentioned in the general section of the present Policy page, in the gender-responsive section as well as that of children with disabilities.  

Child-friendly spaces are key during emergencies, particularly in camp settings, as they ‘help them [children and adolescents] regain a sense of normality and allow to play and socialization’ (Technical Support Section Division of Operational Services UNHCR, 2007: 16). It is key to provide safe spaces where children and adolescents can play, as well as support activities such as sports, drama, art programmes. States can ask for help from humanitarian and development partners to provide the necessary materials to create supportive, inclusive, and gender-responsive child-friendly environments (Technical Support Section Division of Operational Services UNHCR, 2007). 

Determine needed school furniture and materials

In addition to facilities, school furniture and materials must be considered to ensure adequate, inclusive, gender-responsive learning environments.  

An analysis must be performed to define the most appropriate seating and the required amount. The different types of furniture can include low tables and mats, desks with benches or individual chairs, or chair desks (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010). The chosen furniture must be adapted to students’ age and height, and in camp-settings furniture for multi-age populations must be provided (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010). Chairs and tables for teachers and staff rooms must also be taken into consideration (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010). Blackboards must also be provided and be placed where all students can see them.  

When possible, it is key to hire local businesses to create the necessary furniture and materials (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010). It is also key to create maintenance procedures and ensure that students and school staff use the furniture and materials in an adequate manner (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010).  

Collaboration with the community, clusters, and other stakeholders

Throughout all the processes mentioned above, it is key to engage the community and clusters. The following clusters must be involved throughout the processes: WASH Cluster, Education Cluster and Nutrition and Protection Clusters (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010). Development partners, as well as donors, must be identified to fund the construction of new required school infrastructure and facilities (Smith, 2013).  

To avoid animosity from the host community, it is key to involve them since the early stages of schools’ construction, as well as when integrating displaced populations in existing schools (Moumné and Sakai, 2017; IIEP-UNESCO, 2010). For the selection of the school’s location ‘selection committees’ can be created (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010). They should be composed of teachers, host and displaced community members, parents, local authorities, engineers or site planners, social and health staff, as well as members of the clusters mentioned above and donors (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010). The host and displaced community members can also participate in planning, designing, and constructing the school, maintaining the infrastructure, facilities, and furniture, raising funds and ensuring the safety of the school (IIEP-UNESCO, 2010; Smith, 2013). 

Other policy options

Double-shift schooling

When there is a lack of infrastructure, when insufficient funds to build new schools or classrooms are available, when pupil-teacher ratios are high, or when there is no space to build new schools or classrooms, implementing double-shifts can be a cost-efficient strategy to receive displaced populations in mainstream schools as it allows to use existing facilities and furniture in a cost-efficient manner (Murwanjama and Mureu, n.d.; Save the Children, 2018). This strategy has been implemented in Lebanon to receive Syrian students in public schools (UNCHR, 2015i as cited in Global Education Monitoring Report Team and UNHCR, 2016). It has also been implemented in Kenya, through the Two Schools in One programme, which has increased access to education through efficient use of existing school infrastructure, furniture and materials in refugee camps, ‘while meeting ministry approved guidelines for the delivery of secondary education’ (Save the Children, 2018: 39; Murwanjama and Mureu, n.d.; Windle, n.d.).  

For more information on this subject, consult the Policy page Double-shift schooling.  

Policies for minority populations

Promising policy options

Consultation of minority populations in school infrastructure’s decision-making processes

To ensure that schools’ infrastructure meets minority populations’ needs, the targeted communities, or representatives, must be consulted (The World Bank, 2019). Depending on the context, ad-hoc consultations may be necessary at first. Normally, ‘government and international agencies arrange for consultations with indigenous leaders and communities in the locations where they plan to implement school infrastructure, education and other projects’ (ADB, 2011: 35).  This can be done in different manners. For example, in Bangladesh, the ‘Indigenous Peoples Network Forum’ has been organised to discuss issues regarding indigenous peoples, including school infrastructure (ADB, 2011). In the long-term, however, it is key to move from ad-hoc consultations towards systematised, institutionalised, consultation processes (ADB, 2011). For this purpose, consultative bodies or ‘special task forces’ representative of indigenous peoples and other minority populations can be set up (ADB, 2011: 35). This is important in any context involving minority populations. 

Consultation processes should be maintained throughout the entire project and complemented with adequate monitoring mechanisms, to track whether the project is moving forward accordingly, as well as track and solve any emerging issues (ADB, 2011).  

Ensure an equitable allocation of funds to maintain, repair, or build school infrastructure serving minority populations

Evidence shows that minority populations usually dwell in highly underserved and poor rural and urban areas, characterized by a lack of adequate school infrastructure, facilities, and furniture (ADB, 2011; Radinger et al., 2018; Earthman, 2004). Thus, strategies must be developed to ensure that sufficient school buildings and classrooms exist in underserved rural and urban areas serving minority populations and that the facilities and furniture are adequate, inclusive, and well-maintained (United Nations Human Rights Council, 2009; Barret et al., 2019; Kerosi and Olando, 2021; Curtis, 2009). This type of policy is particularly important since school infrastructure can have a significant impact on children’s enrolment, attendance, completion rates and learning achievements, and in the equity of the education system overall (Barret et al., 2019).  

An analysis of the availability and state of school infrastructure serving minority populations must be performed to prioritise areas in need. Detailed surveys and mapping exercises can be used for that purpose (for more information on those strategies consult Displaced populations’ section above). Such an analysis must be followed by an adequate and equitable allocation of funds to construct, rehabilitate, and maintain school infrastructure, facilities and furniture serving minority populations (Barret et al., 2019; Kerosi and Olando, 2021).  

The allocation of funds for school infrastructure differs in each country, yet it is key to consider that ‘for communities in remote areas…the allocation of funding for infrastructure should not be based on a school-to-population ratio’ (ADB, 2011: 6). Moreover, it is key to have a clear understanding of the authorities responsible for capital expenditures both at central and/or local levels (OECD, 2017). Although difficult in various contexts due to a lack of data, it is key to collect and disaggregate funding data to bring to light disparities in allocation processes, as well as ‘measure outcomes of government spending’ on infrastructure serving minority populations (ADB, 2011: 7). For instance, a study in the United States showed that ‘local school districts shoulder the vast majority of their capital facilities costs’ thus ‘poor and low-wealth districts are frequently unable to adequately maintain their buildings and grounds, much less modernize their schools. Therefore districts and zip codes with higher enrolments of students from low-income families are more likely to have buildings in poor condition’ (Alexander and Lewis, 2014; Filardo et al., 2006, as cited in Filardo, Vincent, and Sullivan, 2019: 1). In cases where school districts are the ones responsible for the capital budget, it is key that central or federal authorities, as well as international partners, when possible, provide additional support to underprivileged areas to ensure adequate, inclusive, gender-responsive, safe, and well-maintained school infrastructure. For instance, the central or federal government can help better plan, manage, and maintain infrastructure and facilities, and/or provide additional capital funds as required (Filardo, Vincent, and Sullivan, 2019).  

Moreover, the central authority can also plan and provide sufficient resources to construct new schools and classrooms in underserved areas. Various examples include Bangladesh’s 2006 Secondary Education Sector Development Project and Programme which planned to construct 56 new schools in underserved areas and 5 new schools in ‘underserved thanas where tribal peoples live’ (ADB, 2011: 23). China’s initiatives, ‘Reconstruction of Old and Dilapidated Buildings in Primary and Secondary Schools’ and the ‘Reconstruction of Weak Schools for Compulsory Education in Rural Areas’, among others aim to improve school infrastructure in ‘rural, remote, and poverty-stricken areas’ (National Commission of the People’s Republic of China for UNESCO and National Center for Education Development Research Ministry of Education China, 2015: 27). Kenya has also committed to constructing and restoring classrooms and facilities, as well as providing more funds to underprivileged areas serving marginalized communities, such as the Endorois (Kerosi and Olando, 2021). Viet Nam also prioritised through its 2011-2020 Education Development Strategic Plan (EDSP) the construction of solidified classrooms in underprivileged areas, while decreasing semi-solid and temporary school buildings (Viet Nam, 2017).  

Other policy options

Flexible and alternative education models

Evidence shows that school infrastructure is usually ‘ill to respond to the needs of highly mobile groups and the schooling provided is often irrelevant to their lives’ (UNESCO, 2010: 11). To address indigenous students’ migratory lifestyles, mobile schools can be developed, consisting of dismantlable structures, such as tents. These schools can reach populations who otherwise would be unable to reach formal schooling locations.  

In countries such as Kenya, this initiative has been implemented. With the support of the World Bank, Kenya has developed around 90 mobile schools, which provide teachers to certain family or family groups, allowing younger children to attend school during the day and older children at night (Kenya, 2010). While this system allows children to learn, the implementation of such schools is difficult, costs per student are high, teachers are often unqualified and have little support and resources, and the inconsistency of children moving in and out of the system leads to negative learning consequences. Moreover, ‘in practice, most mobile schools [in Kenya] tend to fill a service gap in relation to sermi-permanent settlements and do not reach the most mobile households’ (Kenya, 2010: 11). Yet, regardless of the difficulties of implementation, this type of strategy should be explored further by decision-makers to ease its implementation and thus reach the minority, nomadic children.  

Providing funds to institutions, other than public ones, to ensure adequate education infrastructure

Various countries such as India have developed programs to provide funds to institutions other than public ones to ensure quality education to minorities by reinforcing school infrastructure, among others. For example, in India, the Department of School Education and Literacy created a scheme to increase enrolment and retention of minority students ‘by augmenting and strengthening school infrastructure in Minority Institutions (elementary/secondary/senior secondary schools) in order to expand facilities for formal education to children of minority communities’ (India, n.d.: 1). The scheme supported the construction of sufficient and adequate school facilities as well, such as computer labs, libraries, toilets, and WASH facilities, among others (India, n.d.). The initiative, known as the Infrastructure Development of Minority Institutes (IDMI), has been implemented at a national level, prioritising areas with minority populations over 20% and providing a maximum of 50 lakhs ($70,000) per eligible private aided and unaided minority institution (India, n.d.).  

It is key to keep in mind that the State should only provide funds to eligible private educational institutions which meet substantive, procedural, and operational requirements (The Abidjan Principles, 2019). 

Providing rooms for students or building boarding schools

In many underserved, remote areas, there is no access to school. In many instances, to ensure the right to education of minority populations, it is essential to build ‘hostels’, rooms, or boarding and semi-boarding schools within the school’s infrastructure. For instance, in 2010 Bangladesh constructed ten hostels to ‘provide accommodation for students living in very remote areas with no access to school, thereby enabling them to attend Government primary schools’ (ADB, 2011: 26). Similarly, from 2011-2015 Viet Nam approved a ‘framework on consolidating and strengthening the system of ethnic minority boarding schools’ that led to  ‘strengthening network and size of ethnic minority boarding schools in mountainous, ethnic minority and exceptionally difficult socio‐economic regions’ (Viet Nam, 2017: 51).