This document provides a questionnaire for Ministries of Education to self-monitor their progress in integrating conflict and disaster risk reduction (C/DRR) into education policies and plans. The questionnaire covers 7 sections related to C/DRR integration, including conflict and disaster risk assessment, education sector plans, teaching and learning, coordination, financing, monitoring and evaluation, and capacity development. UNESCO will administer the questionnaire in several countries and synthesize the results to share good practices for C/DRR integration by education ministries.

1. A Self-Monitoring and Reporting Mechanism on Education Policies
and Plans for Conflict and Disaster Risk Reduction for Sustainable
Development
© UNHCR
November 2013

2. 1
Contents
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 2
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE QUESTIONNAIRE....................................................................... 3
QUESTIONNAIRE...................................................................................................................................... 6
I. Conflict and Disaster Risk Assessment ............................................................................................. 6
II. Policies for Risk Reduction............................................................................................................... 8
III a. Education Sector Plans for Risk Reduction................................................................................ 11
III b. Implementation of priority C/DRR programmes....................................................................... 13
III c. Teaching and Learning............................................................................................................... 15
IV. Organizational Arrangements and Coordination......................................................................... 16
V. Costing and Financing ................................................................................................................... 18
VI. Monitoring & Evaluation.............................................................................................................. 20
VII. Capacity development ................................................................................................................ 22
WHAT NEXT? ......................................................................................................................................... 25
GLOSSARY.............................................................................................................................................. 25

3. 2
INTRODUCTION
This self-monitoring and reporting mechanism is a questionnaire that Ministries of Education (MoEs)
can use to document progress to integrate conflict and disaster risk reduction (C/DRR) into education
policies and plans at the national level, and to a limited extent at school level. It addresses key areas
in which C/DRR can be included in education policy and planning documents and processes. The
questionnaire can help MoEs determine what actions are needed to make C/DRR an integral element
of education sector planning. UNESCO will administer the questionnaire in several countries and will
synthesize the findings and lessons learned, so that good practices can be replicated by interested
ministries. These reports will be shared and validated by the concerned countries before the
proposed workshop in Bangkok.
The questionnaire focuses on disaster risk reduction, but also looks at conflict risk reduction, for the
following reasons:
 Few countries are exempt from political and social tensions
 There is increasing evidence that disasters and scarce resources can contribute to conflict,
and conversely, that conflict impacts (e.g. displaced populations) can increase vulnerability to
disaster
 Some risk reduction measures apply equally to disasters and conflict
 It is therefore important to examine how education can prevent conflict as well as disaster,
but also how education can run a risk of contributing to both conflict and disaster.
This is why UNESCO recommends addressing both the risks of disaster and conflict in education
sector plans and processes (rather than viewing these risks in isolation).
To familiarize yourself with C/DRR terminology, please see the glossary at the end of this document.

4. 3
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE QUESTIONNAIRE
The self-monitoring and reporting questionnaire has seven sections (Section III has three
subsections). Each section covers a thematic area that is important to C/DRR integration.
Contact person responsible for the project at the UNESCO Bangkok regional office is Danilo Padilla
(d.padilla@unesco.org). UNESCO Bangkok will ask a focal person in-country to be responsible for
administering and explaining the questionnaire to MoE staff. The focal person could be for example,
the UNESCO education specialist or a member of the UNESCO National Commission. The focal person
is responsible for: (1) ensuring that all relevant questionnaire sections are completed by relevant
MoE staff, and (2) returning the completed questionnaire to UNESCO Bangkok
(d.padilla@unesco.org). These forms should be returned no later than February 14th
2014.
The questionnaire sections will likely require inputs from different government officials in each
country. Below is a list of suggested relevant personnel to complete each section.
Section Summary Who might complete or have input for this
section?
I. Conflict and
Disaster Risk
Assessment
This section asks whether C/DRR
analysis frameworks have been
developed; and whether analysis have
been done and incorporated into
education sector plans.
Planning Department
The National Disaster Management Unit (if
one exists)
School safety unit or C/DRR focal point (if one
exists)
School Construction Department
II. Policies for Risk
Reduction
This section asks whether C/DRR
policies (official obligations, decrees,
ministry instruction, etc.) have already
been adopted. It looks at issues related
to:
 Global national or non-education
sector specific policies related to
C/DRR and disaster management;
 Safe school construction and safe
siting of schools;
 Safe facilities - including (in conflict
areas) protecting education from
attack;
 School-level conflict and disaster
risk management issues
1
;
 Arrangements for continuity of
education in the event of an
emergency.
General (or Basic) Education Department
Department of Infrastruture
National Disaster Management Unit
School Construction Department
School safety unit, or possibly C/DRR focal
point
III a. Education
Sector Plans for
Risk Reduction
This section asks whether C/DRR
programmes have been incorporated
into education sector strategic plans, or
in operational plans.
Planning Department
III b. This section is only completed if section To be completed by the relevant Ministry
1
Such as conducting school-level risk assessments, practicing school emergency drills, early warning systems
and other emergency preparedness.

5. 4
Section Summary Who might complete or have input for this
section?
Implementation of
priority C/DRR
programmes
III a. has been completed; i.e. when the
Ministry has incorporated specific
C/DRR programmes or activities into its
education sector strategic plan or
operational plans. Its purpose is
monitoring implementation of these
planned activities.
departments that monitor implementation of
specific C/DRR programmes. Inputs may be
needed from more than one unit. For
example, if a planned activity is to retrofit
schools, then inputs from the school
construction unit may be needed. Or if the
activity is to train teachers on C/DRR issues,
then input from teacher training department
(or those in charge of in-service teacher
training) should be sought.
III c. Teaching and
Learning
This section asks whether C/DRR has
been incorporated into the school
curricula, teaching and learning
materials as well as teacher training
programmes.
Curriculum Department
Teacher Education Department
Institution responsible for pre-service teacher
education curriculum
IV. Organizational
Arrangements and
Coordination
This section asks whether the MoE has
a designated C/DRR unit or focal point.
It also looks at coordination
arrangements, including MoE
participation in any national
coordinating body for disaster
management; coordination
arrangements for education in
emergencies; and the Education Sector
Working Group.
Planning Department and/or Minister’s office
Disaster Management Unit
Education Sector Working Group
V. Costing and
Financing
This section asks whether C/DRR
activities have been costed and
included in MoE’s overall budgets and
plans. It also looks at available funding
for C/DRR activities, either through the
overall financing framework, or
specially allocated funds.
Planning Department
MoE, Finance/Budgeting Department
Ministry of Finance, if needed
VI. Monitoring &
Evaluation
This section asks whether C/DRR
indicators exist and are used to monitor
implementation progress.
Planning Department
Department or unit for M&E
If separate units charged with monitoring exist
at decentralized level, they may provide inputs
too.
VII. Capacity
Development
This section looks at C/DRR capacity
development needs. It asks whether
policy makers, planners, decentralized
officials, teacher educators, and other
actors (such as youth groups) are
familiar with C/DRR and with the policy
and practice of education in
emergencies.
Minister’s office
Planning Department
Possibly National Disaster Management Unit, if
one exists
The questionnaire consists of a series of yes/no questions related to each of the sections identified
above. The questions are not all-inclusive, but they do highlight priority areas for integrating C/DRR
into the education sector.

6. 5
 Answering “yes” to a question indicates that a Ministry has taken some steps towards
integrating C/DRR in that specific area, and requires the person completing the form to (1)
rate the status of implementation from “needs improvement” to “satisfactory” to “good”;
and to (2) include comments or explanations about implementation progress;
 Answering “no” indicates gaps, i.e. areas for follow-up MoE action.

7. 6
QUESTIONNAIRE on Education Policies and Plans for Conflict and Disaster Risk Reduction for
Sustainable Development
Country
Ministry/Department
Name of person submitting completed self-monitoring and reporting form
Title
Email
Office
Date
Section 1.
I. Conflict and Disaster Risk Assessment Yes No
If yes, please rate by placing an “x” in the
relevant category.
Comments
Needs
improvement
Satisfactory Good Don’t
know
1. Has MoE developed a national assessment framework on
hazard and vulnerability?
2. Has MoE developed a local assessment framework on hazard
and vulnerability?
3. Has a conflict analysis been conducted for the education
system? If yes, include the main conflict related risks and
impacts in the comment box.
4. Has MoE incorporated national and local risk assessment
into education plans based on conflict, hazard and
vulnerability information?

8. 7
Name of person completing section I:
Name
Title and department, section or unit
Email
Justification:
A conflict and disaster risk assessment identifies the education system’s strengths and weaknesses (and their causes) faced with conflict and disaster. The
assessment results form the basis for identifying C/DRR policies and strategies, and for selecting priority programmes and activities.
Next steps:
If you answered “no” to questions in this section, you may wish to consider:
 learning more about incorporating disaster and conflict analysis into an Education Sector Diagnosis (ESD), as the first step of the planning cycle,
either as part of drafting an education sector strategic plan (medium – long-term) or as part of an annual planning process. (Please see UNESCO
Guidance Notes on Integrating Conflict and Disaster Risk Reduction into Education Sector Planning)
 identifying key stakeholders (such as education planning officials at all levels; head teachers, teachers; students’ and parents associations; youth
groups; NGOs and international organizations) to participate in conflict and disaster assessment processes at different levels and jointly develop
assessment frameworks and methodologies.

9. 8
Section II
II. Policies* for Risk Reduction
*official obligations, decrees, ministry instructions, etc.
Yes No
If yes, please rate by placing an “x” in the
relevant category.
CommentsNeeds
improvement
Satisfactory Good Don’t
know
1. Is there a national (non-education specific) policy related to
conflict and disaster risk reduction (C/DRR)?
If so, please indicate the name of the policy in the
comments.
2. Is there a national (non-education specific) policy related to
disaster management/disaster risk reduction?
If so, please indicate the name of the policy in the
comments.
3. Has the MoE incorporated the overall national C/DRR or
disaster management policy(ies) into education plans?
4. Is there a safe school construction policy? (For example: a
policy specifying that all the new schools are to be
constructed using hazard resistant methods and materials.)
5. Is there an official obligation to conduct school level risk
assessments (including school sites and routes to school) ?
6. Is there a plan to retrofit, replace and relocate unsafe
schools?
7. Is there an official obligation to incorporate issues of access
and safety for people with disabilities into school designs?
8. Is there a policy on the use of schools as emergency
shelters?
9. Is there a policy on the use of schools preventing military
occupation during times of conflict?
10. Is there a policy to protect schools, teachers, students from
attack by religious, ethnic or politically motivated groups?
11. Does the MoE have a national contingency plan in place

10. 9
regarding the provision of education during or following
conflicts or disasters? (For example: identification of
alternate facilities and modes of instruction for educational
continuity in case of a disaster.)
12. Are there sub-national contingency plans to support
educational continuity?
13. Does the MoE have emergency stocks of education materials
available at national level or pre-positioned regionally?
14. Are back-up copies of curricula stored in safe locations
including electronically?
15. Are back-up copies of school baseline data stored in safe
locations including electronically?
16. Do schools have standard operating procedures for relevant
hazards?
17. Is there an official obligation for schools to practice
emergency drills?
18. Do schools have early warning and/or emergency
communication systems to alert families and teachers?
19. Does the MOE have emergency staff recruitment and
mobilization procedures for teachers and other education
personnel in case of emergency?
Name of person completing section II:
Name
Title and department, section or unit
Email
Justification:
Policies give coherence to the efforts of education actors implementing C/DRR strategies at all levels of the education system. Policies can include:

11. 10
 broad national (non-education specific) C/DRR decisions; conflict and disaster management issues at school level (ex. school-level risk assessments;
emergency drills practices; the use of early warning mechanisms);
 safe school facilities issues (ex. hazard-resistant building designs, retrofitting buildings, or ensuring that facilities are safe from attack); or
 decisions to support educational continuity.
 Polices can take the shape of official obligations, decrees, ministry instructions. These can be reflected as policies in a strategic sector plan or
operational plan document.
Next steps:
If you answered “no” to questions in this section, you may wish to consider:
 involving the school community and NGOs in developing C/DRR practices, including developing school-level risk assessments, standard operating
procedures for emergencies, and early-warning mechanisms.
 establishing a roster of teachers and other education personnel that can be mobilized in case of an emergency.
 discussing the condition of education facilities with ministry representatives responsible for constructing and maintaining education infrastructure.
 determining if education facilities are at risk of attack and if so, how they can effectively be protected. Seeking input from teachers, parents and
community members will be a critical step in any effort to protect schools from attack.
 consulting the Comprehensive School Safety Framework for additional guidance on conflict and disaster management at school level as well as on
safe school facilities.

12. 11
Section III.
III a. Education Sector Plans for Risk Reduction Yes No
If yes, please rate by placing an “x” in the relevant
category.
Comments
Needs
improvement
Satisfactory Good Don’t
know
1. Has the MoE incorporated specific C/DRR programmes
and activities into education sector plans?*
2. Has C/DRR been incorporated into sub-national plans?*
3. Has C/DRR been incorporated into annual operational
plans?*
* If you answered yes to any of questions 1-3, please complete sections III b. and III c. below. Otherwise, please proceed to Section IV.
Name of person (people) completing section III a.:
Name
Title and department, section or unit
Email
Justification:
C/DRR programmes translate general goals and strategies into more operational terms by fixing precise targets to be reached, defining the sequence of
activities to be carried out and the resources required. Integrating C/DRR programmes into education sector plans (strategic or operational) can help ensure
the sustainability of such programmes.
Next steps:
If you answered “no” to questions in this section, you may wish to consider:
 Who should be involved? C/DRR programmes affect children’s lives and education. Those developing the programmes can consult a broad range of
stakeholders, such as: MoE officials at all levels, officials from other ministries; development partners including education I/NGOs (who may have

13. 12
significant technical expertise); private sector education providers; civil society and community representatives; and children and youth – the
primary education beneficiaries.
 Find out when the next education plan (strategic or operational) will be developed and how you can advocate for a C/DRR policy or strategy to be
incorporated. For example, when is the next annual review coming up, during which C/DRR programmes can be discussed, validated and integrated
into the plan and its budget? The drafting of a new education sector strategic plan is of course an even better window of opportunity, although it
typically happens only every 5 years.
 Consider also whether the annual school census questionnaire can be updated to include questions that would allow planners to collect specific
C/DRR data.
 You may wish to consult the following resources for additional guidance with regard to integrating C/DRR into policies and plans:
o IIEP and UNICEF WCARO’s Integrating conflict and disaster risk reduction into education sector planning;
o Education Above All’s Conflict sensitive education policy: a preliminary review;
o INEE Minimum Standards for Education: Preparedness, Response, Recovery; and
o INEE Conflict Sensitive Education Pack.

14. 13
*III b. Implementation of priority C/DRR
programmes
(Note: complete this section only if you answered yes to any
of questions 1-3 in Section III a. Otherwise proceed to
Section IV.)
Poor/
below
planne
d
On
target/
per
plan
Exceeds
target
Don’t
know
Source of
information for your
rating
Implementation challenges /
comments
If C/DRR is included in education plans, use this section to list priority C/DRR programmes and to rate their implementation. Place an “x” as appropriate.
For each programme, please indicate the source of information for your rating (reports, discussions with colleagues, etc.)
List the priority programmes/activities in the boxes below as
described in the education plan. (Note: if C/DRR has also been
incorporated into annual operational plans, outline those
activities here; otherwise use the programmes/activities from
the national plan).
For example:
 Retrofit 300 existing schools for disaster resilience.
 Train 5000 existing teachers on the new C/DRR
curriculum
 Displaced and/or refugee populations in 3 conflict
affected regions integrated into the education system
and receiving quality education
 Codes of conducts for teachers in place in all schools to
monitor human rights violations and/or violence in
schools
1.
2.

15. 14
Name of person (people) completing section III b.:
Name (and title, department, email) of each person
Justification:
This section is crucial – it serves as a “reality check” of how the ministry is doing when it comes to actual delivery of planned C/DRR programmes.
Where the previous section III a. dealt with C/DRR plans, the current section III b. deals with the actual implementation of these plans. Hence indeed, this
section is only completed if the Ministry has incorporated specific C/DRR programmes or activities into its education plans. Its purpose is monitoring
implementation of these planned activities, and rating them.
It should be completed by the relevant Ministry departments that monitor implementation of specific C/DRR programmes. Obviously, the quality of data
sources quality matters a lot here.
Next steps:
Regardless of whether implementation is below planned, on target, or exceeding target, it may be worth discussing why with MoE colleagues internally.
What are the challenges to implementation? How can they be overcome? What strengths are there to build on?
If the answer is “Don’t know”, what can be done to obtain reliable information?

16. 15
*III c. Teaching and Learning
(Note: complete this section only if you answered yes to any of
questions 1-3 in Section III a. Otherwise proceed to Section IV.)
Yes No If yes, please rate by placing an “x” in the
relevant category.
Comments
Needs
improvement
Satisfactory Good Don’t
know
1. Does the curriculum contain DRR aspects such as school
safety guides?
2. Does the curriculum contain CRR aspects or
peacebuilding/conflict resolution components?
3. Have teacher guides been developed that include conflict
resolution/peacebuilding components?
4. Have teacher guides incorporated key messages of school
safety/risk reduction and resilience?
5. Have textbooks been developed that are conflict-sensitive
6. Do the textbooks incorporate key messages of school
safety/risk reduction and resilience?
7. Do the current national exams test the students’ knowledge
of conflict resolution/peacebuilding?
8. Do the national exams test the students’ knowledge of
school safety and disaster risk reduction?
Name of person completing section III c:
Name
Title and department, section or unit
Email
Justification:
Curricula that address disaster risk reduction and conflict-sensitive education can ultimately contribute to developing a culture of safety, and resilient
communities. Curricula (and the corresponding teaching and learning materials) need to be appropriate in terms of age group and sequencing, and teachers
may need C/DRR training.

17. 16
Next steps:
If you answered “no” to questions in this section, you may wish to:
 review the curricula and discuss with curriculum developers and teacher trainers the best way to incorporate C/DRR themes in the curricula. (See for
example the UNESCO-UNICEF Technical Guidance for Integrating Disaster Risk Reduction in the School Curriculum for more information.)
 consult the Comprehensive School Safety Framework for additional guidance on risk reduction education.
Section IV.
IV. Organizational Arrangements and
Coordination
Yes No
If yes, please rate by placing an “x” in the
relevant category.
Comments
Needs
improvement
Satisfactory Good Don’t
know
1. Is there a national coordinating body for disaster
management or conflict risk reduction?
2. Is there an education representative on the national
coordinating body for disaster management or conflict
risk reduction?
3. Is there a separate unit in the MoE with responsibility for
C/DRR?
4. Is there a permanent focal point in the MoE with
responsibility for C/DRR?
5. Are there permanent focal points for C/DRR or
education in emergencies at decentralised levels?
6. Is there a regular national education sector co-
ordination mechanism (such as the Education Sector
Working Group which would normally include
development partners, ministries, UN agencies, etc.)?
7. Is there an active coordination mechanism specifically

18. 17
for education in emergencies (EiE) such as an Education
Cluster or Emergency Education Committee/WG or a
sub-group of the sector coordination group?
8. If yes to both questions 4 and 5 above, then rate the
coordination between the ESWG and the Cluster (or sub-
group).
Name of person completing section IV:
Name
Title and department, section or unit
Email
Justification:
Effective plan design and implementation require clear organizational arrangements and coordination. Designated MoE officials should be identified and
held accountable for a work plan for (a) integrating C/DRR into education sector planning and (b) its actual implementation.
Next steps:
If you answered “no” to questions in this section, you may wish to consider:
 establishing a committee (or designating individual MoE officials) tasked specifically with developing a work plan for integrating C/DRR into
education sector planning and to be held accountable for its implementation and monitoring. This specific committee could include senior MoE
staff, representatives of the Ministry of Planning, Ministry of Finance, and other selected ministries. The committee may be represented on the
Education Sector Working Group or its equivalent as well as within any central government ministry or office with responsibility for national disaster
management plans or policies.
 nominating C/DRR focal points at central and decentralized levels and/or creating central and decentralized C/DRR units including respective terms
of reference and action plans.
 designating partners to assist with implementation of C/DRR activities and data collection. For example, NGOs working with School Management
Committees or youth groups can perhaps implement activities and collect/store data.

19. 18
Section V.
V. Costing and Financing Yes No
If yes, please rate by placing an “x” in the
relevant category.
Comments
Needs
improvement
Satisfactory Good Don’t
know
1. Does the education plan contain costing and financing
for C/DRR activities?
2. Has there been an analysis of the costs of mitigating, or
responding to conflicts or disasters as part of the overall
budget framework?
3. Are C/DRR and any emergency-related activities costed
and included in the national education sector budget?
4. Is there other national funding (e.g. within the
President’s Office or through a National Disaster
Management Organisation) that the MoE can draw upon
in an emergency?
5. Do emergency-prone regions have specific funds
available for emergency preparedness and response?
6. Does MoE provide funds to schools for ongoing safety
and maintenance?
7. Does MoE provide specific funds to schools for C/DRR
activities?
Name of person completing section V:
Name
Title and department, section or unit
Email

20. 19
Justification:
Successful integration of C/DRR into educational planning requires human and financial resources. Plans and policies must be linked to budgets, budget
cycles, and financing frameworks. Every country will have different budget formats and cycles, as well as approaches to costing and financing education.
Arguments (and evidence) presented for C/DRR programmes need to be convincing in order to attract funding.
Next steps:
If you answered “no” to questions in this section, you may wish to consider:
 determining what type of financial framework and unit costs could be used, so that C/DRR activities are costed and aligned to the budget cycle and
financing framework of the MoE and the Ministry of Finance.
 Ultimately the goal is to include the costs for C/DRR and emergency-related activities within the regular education sector budget to make sure that
they are also included in the overall financial framework for the education sector.
 You may wish to consult with the Finance Department within the Ministry of Education as well as the Ministry of Finance in order to develop the
budgets and unit costs correctly.
 identifying financing gaps, and identifying potential funding sources (both nationally and externally) to cover these gaps.
 Before seeking alternative or external sources of funding, it is often quicker and more productive to review available national or diaspora-led
funding sources.
 External funding sources may include development funding (project support, pooled funds, multi-donor trust funds, sector budget support, general
budget support), humanitarian assistance (flash appeals, consolidated appeal process, central emergency response funds), as well as the private
sector.

21. 20
Section VI.
VI. Monitoring & Evaluation Yes No
If yes, please rate by placing an “x” in the
relevant category.
Comments
Needs
improvement
Satisfactory Good
Don’t
know
1. Have specific C/DRR indicators been developed?
2. If yes to question 1, do MoE officials at central level use
the C/DRR indicators for monitoring purposes?
3. If yes to question 1, do MoE officials at decentralized
levels use the C/DRR indicators for monitoring purposes?
4. Does the EMIS include any data that you think can be used
for monitoring C/DRR activities? If yes, indicate in the
comment box what type of data could be used.
Name of person completing section VI:
Name
Title and department, section or unit
Email
Justification:
Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) is crucial to knowing whether the goals and objectives outlined in the education sector plans have been achieved or not.
Collecting, monitoring, analyzing and evaluating information helps in learning lessons that can impact the next planning cycle and inform future policy
choices. C/DRR data can be analysed as part of the national education management information system (EMIS) and maintained in the same format as other
relevant education sector databases.
Next steps:
If you answered “no” to questions in this section, you may wish to learn how to include specific C/DRR objectives and indicators in the medium or long-term
educational plan or in the annual operational planning process. Have you thought about the following?

22. 21
 Deciding on routine monitoring responsibilities and designating partners to assist with data collection.
 For example, data can be transmitted to regional or central locations by head teachers responsible for day-to-day monitoring; an emergency or
disaster focal point can be responsible for periodic monitoring activities and for participation in the annual review and monitoring process; school
managements committees or youth groups can also support the monitoring process; and local NGOs or international agencies that have a presence
in conflict or disaster-affected areas may be able to access the information safely.
 When identifying key indicators, determine where and how the data will be collected. Are the data available in existing reports, such as the annual
school survey or a routine monitoring and inspection checklist?
 Have you thought about using existing indicators and build upon them according to the specific hazards and vulnerabilities affecting the education
system (e.g. completion rate and pupil-teacher ratios to the extent that they relate to C/DRR objectives)?
 Alternatively, you could develop new specific C/DRR indicators (e.g. the number of schools with disaster plans). C/DRR-related information can be
collected through the annual school survey at little additional cost.

23. 22
Section VII.
VII. Capacity development Yes No
Number of staff
trained
Typical
duration of
training
Comments/type of training received –
please specific whether related to
conflict or disaster or both
1. Have MoE officials at the central level been trained on
conflict sensitivity or conflict analysis?
2. Have MoE Officials at the central level been trained on
DRR or schools safety
3. Have MoE officials at decentralized levels been trained on
conflict sensitivity or conflict analysis?
4. Have MoE officials at decentralized levels been trained on
DRR or school safety?
5. Have MoE officials at the central level been trained on the
Interagency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE)
Minimum Standards and on the INEE Guidance notes on
conflict-sensitive education?
6. Have MoE officials at decentralized levels been trained on
the INEE Minimum Standards and on the Guidance notes
on conflict-sensitive education?
7. Have education planners been trained on how to integrate
C/DRR (either or both) into the education sector planning
process (e.g. analysis of hazards, vulnerabilities and risks,
development of priority programmes, M&E, costing and
financing, etc.)?
8. Have curriculum developers been trained on DRR and/or
conflict-sensitive education and on the content related to
relevant hazards and risks?
9. Have teacher educators been trained on DRR and/or
conflict-sensitive education and on the content related to
relevant hazards and risks?
10. Have school principals/head teachers been trained on DRR

24. 23
and conflict-sensitive education and on the content related
to relevant hazards and risks?
11. Has DRR and/or conflict-sensitive education been
embedded within teacher education programmes?
12. Have other relevant partners been trained on C/DRR? (e.g.
students’ parents associations, NGOs, etc.)
If so, please list the different partners.
13. Is there any awareness raising campaign on C/DRR issues?
(e.g. for youth groups as they are the primary beneficiaries
of education services.)
If so, please indicate the target audience, the
characteristics, objectives and timing of the campaign(s).
14. Does training and capacity building on C/DRR (either or
both) mainly take place as pre-service or in-service?
Name of person completing section VII:
Name
Title and department, section or unit
Email
Justification:
Capacity development of education staff at central and decentralized levels will likely be required in order for them to successfully carry out the tasks
outlined above (sections I – VI) . Planners need to be enabled to analyse vulnerabilities, develop C/DRR programmes, collect and analyse C/DRR data, and
prepare a financing framework. At decentralized levels, for example, school inspectors should know the risks affecting school communities in their districts,
what information to collect, and how to analyze it.
Next steps:
If you answered “no” to questions in this section, you may wish to consider:
 offering training to focal points at central and decentralized levels.
 raising awareness on C/DRR or
 working with planners to produce specific C/DRR objectives.

25. 24

26. 25
WHAT NEXT?
Please email the completed form to Danilo Padilla at UNESCO Bangkok d.padilla@unesco.org no later than February 14th
2014. Your results and those of
other participating countries will be compiled in order to assess overall progress on implementing C/DRR in education in the pilot countries.
GLOSSARY2
Climate change: Any change in global temperatures and precipitation over time due to natural variability or human activity.
Conflict: Refers to armed or other violent conflict in or between countries or population groups.
Conflict risk reduction: The practice of reducing the risk of conflict through systematic analysis and management of the causal factors of conflict. This
involves conducting conflict assessments to identify the ‘drivers’ of conflict (whether economic, social, political, or environmental) and how these impact on
or are impacted by education. Strategies then need to be applied to reduce (and if possible prevent) those risks from negatively affecting education systems,
personnel, and learners.
Disaster management: The systematic process of using administrative directives, organizations, and operational skills and capacities to implement
strategies, policies and improved coping capacities to lessen the adverse impacts of hazards and the possibility of disaster. It aims to avoid, lessen or transfer
the adverse effects of hazards through activities and measures for prevention, mitigation and preparedness.
Disaster risk reduction: The practice of reducing the risk of disaster through systematic analysis and management of the causal factors of disasters. This
includes reducing exposure to hazards, lessening the vulnerability of people and property, wise land and environmental management, and improved
preparedness. For education it implies the systematic analysis of and attempt to reduce disaster-related risks to enable the education system to provide
(and learners to continue, and out-of-school children to access) quality education for all, before, during, and after emergencies. Disaster risk reduction under
the Hyogo Framework for Action does not include conflict, but risk reduction principles can also be applied to contexts involving conflict and civil unrest.
2
Adapted from IIEP-UNICEF. 2011. Guidance Notes for Educational Planners, Integrating conflict and disaster risk reduction into education sector planning. Paris: IIEP. and
UNISDR. 2009. UNISDR Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva: UNISDR.

27. 26
Hazard: A dangerous phenomenon or human activity that may damage, disrupt, or lead to loss of life, health, property, livelihood, social and economic
services. Hazards arise from a variety of sources and sometimes in combination. Hazards can include human (e.g. conflict, chemical spill) and natural
phenomena (e.g. floods, earthquakes).
Mitigation: Measures undertaken to minimize the adverse impact of potential conflict-related, natural and human-made hazards. Examples: Retrofit
schools; educate education personnel and communities on risk reduction; promote inclusive education and participation; establish a child protection
network ahead of flood season.
Preparedness: Measures taken before and between hazard events to forewarn and prepare in order to ensure a timely and effective response. Examples:
An early warning communication mechanism; evacuation drills; building skills in fire suppression, first aid, and search and rescue; stockpiling and
prepositioning of food, water, and educational supplies ahead of flood season or worsening conflict; safe keeping of records, teacher’s guides, and
curriculum material; a national emergency preparedness and response plan; a provincial contingency plan and a school safety/preparedness plan.
Prevention: Activities undertaken to avoid the adverse impact of conflict or disaster. Examples: Locate and build disaster-resistant schools; change attitudes
and behaviour by raising awareness of risk and of conflict, for example, through peace education. Inclusive, good quality education in itself can reduce the
risk of conflict and disaster.
Resilience: Resilience is the ability of an education system (at different levels) to minimize disaster and conflict risks, to maintain its functions during an
emergency, and to recover from shocks. Resilience at the individual level is the ability to apply knowledge to minimize risks, to adapt to emergency
situations, to withstand shocks, and to rapidly resume learning. Resilience can be strengthened when factors underlying vulnerability are addressed.
Resilience is reinforced when the ‘inherent’ strengths – of individuals and systems – are identified and supported.
Retrofitting: The reinforcement or upgrading of existing structures to become more resistant and resilient to the damaging effects of hazards3
.
Risk: The combination of the probability of an event and its negative consequences. The word ‘risk’ has two distinctive connotations. In popular usage, the
emphasis is on the concept of chance or possibility (‘the risk of an accident’). In technical settings the emphasis is usually placed on consequences in terms
of ‘potential losses’. The relationship between vulnerability and the likelihood and severity of hazards can be represented using this equation: Risk = Hazard
x Vulnerability/Capacity. This means that the worse the hazard, the greater the risk. Likewise, risk also increases when a community, system or even a school
is more vulnerable.
3
Definition adapted from: www.ineesite.org/assets/Guidance_Notes_Safer_School_Constructionfinal.pdf

28. 27
Vulnerability: The characteristics and circumstances of a community, system, or asset that make it susceptible to the damaging effects of a hazard. There
are many aspects of vulnerability, arising from various physical, social, economic, and environmental factors. At the education system level, vulnerability is
the combination of exposure to conflict-related, natural and human-made hazards, and the degree to which the education system at different levels is
susceptible to collapse and disruption of function. At the learners’ level, vulnerability is the combination of exposure to hazards and the degree to which
learners are susceptible to interruption or complete loss of access to quality education opportunities.