The Middle East, North Africa & Europe Collective Consultation Framework

The Middle East, North Africa & Europe Collective Consultation on Minimum Standards for Education in Emergencies
Standards, Indicators and Guidance Notes
Amman, Jordan - 19 - 21 May 2004

 

The Middle East, North Africa and Europe Collective Consultation on Minimum Standards for Education in Emergencies was held from May 19-21, 2004 in Amman, Jordan and co-hosted by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO, represented by Christopher Talbot and Robert Parua) and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR, represented by Nemia Temporal and Zahra Mirghani).

In preparation for this regional consultation, delegates held 26 national and local consultations involving over 300 people in 10 countries in the Middle East, North Africa and Europe (Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Egypt, Greece, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Kosovo, Lebanon, Morocco and Palestine). Participants in these local and national consultations are working on education and child protection issues in emergency, chronic crises and early reconstruction situations -- both conflict and natural disasters -- in Afghanistan, Armenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Chechnya/Russia, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, Kosovo, Morocco, Palestine, Russia, Yemen. This includes teachers and other education personnel; students and other young people; international and local NGOs focused on education, community issues, protection, and human rights; parents, community members and religious leaders; United Nations representatives from UNICEF, WFP, UNESCO and UNHCR; and government officials from Ministries of Education throughout the regions.

The delegates representing affected populations, governments, NGOs and UN agencies at the Middle East, North Africa and Europe Consultation on Minimum Standards for Education in Emergencies built upon the standards, indicators and guidance notes developed at these national and local consultations. This report represents the minimum standards, indicators and guidance notes developed through this consultative process across the categories of:

I. Situation Analysis
II. Access, Equity & Learning Environment
III. Curriculum Development (Learning Content, Methodology, and Resources))
IV. Community Participation
V. Teachers and other Education Personnel
VI. Education Policy and Coordination
- List of Delegates

 

INEE is an open network of UN agencies, non-governmental organizations, donors, practitioners, researchers and individuals from affected populations working together to ensure the right to education in emergencies and post-crisis reconstruction. The network is responsible for gathering and disseminating best practices in education in emergencies and ensuring a regular exchange of information among its members and partners. INEE is led by a Steering Group composed of representatives from CARE International, International Save the Children Alliance, the International Rescue Committee, Norwegian Refugee Council, UNESCO, UNHCR, UNICEF and the World Bank.

INEEs Working Group on Minimum Standards for Education in Emergencies consists of 13 organizations with expertise in education in crisis and early reconstruction situations: CARE Canada, CARE USA, Catholic Relief Services, the International Rescue Committee, Norwegian Church Aid, Norwegian Refugee Council and the Norway United Nations Association, Save the Children UK, Save the Children USA, Refugee Education Trust, UNESCO, UNHCR, UNICEF and World Education.

 

Minimum Standards, Indicators and Guidance Notes developed at the Middle East, North Africa and Europe Collective Consultation on Minimum Standards for Education in Emergencies

Introduction to Handbook should include the following:

• Reference key international commitments to and standards/rights on education (ie. Strategy 5 from Dakar states that education programs should include and facilitate learning that promotes peace, tolerance, human rights).

• Background on life-sustaining and life-saving (protection) potential of education in emergencies.

• Providing education during emergeny or early reconstruction situations is an opportunity for positive change.

• Quality education is always the minimum standard, regardless of the phase of emergency. Quality of education is never to be compromised even during the onset of emergencies. Definition of quality education:

  • Relevance
  • appropriateness
  • participation
  • flexibility
  • inclusion

   

  The goal of education in emergencies is for people to gain the essential knowledge, skills and attitudes to cope with the crisis faced by themselves and their community.

  • All categories have overlap and need to look standards in a holistic, coordinated way.
  • To build upon: Quality, genuine participation from all stakeholders (what does this mean and how to measure it?).
  • To build upon: The introduction should answer the questions: For whom are the standards? What is the target (age) group in emergency education? Formal vs. Non-formal ?

   

  Basic definitions that need to be provided: Access Equity Inclusion Learning environment (includes all learners and learning personnel) Community stakeholders

   

  I. SITUATION ANALYSIS:

  Introduction

  Humanitarian agencies should prioritize education in emergencies as part of standard response as an essential form of protection. Education must be raised on the emergency agenda, but not put ahead of other life saving sectors.

  Situation Analysis Standard 1: Initial Assessment: An immediate, coordinated, participatory assessment of the emergency situation and its implication for education collects and analyses qualitative and quantitative data for strategic response.

   

  Key Indicators

  1. A participatory initial assessment targets as many stakeholders as possible (see guidance notes 1, 2 and 3). Cross reference with Community Participation
  2. Standarised assessment tools and formats for qualitative and quantitative data collection are agreed upon and used in order to ensure consistency among actors (see guidance notes 4 and 5).
  3. The assessment considers impact of the political, social, economic and security environment as well as the impact of and linkages between all relevant sectors (water and sanitation, nutrition, food, shelter, health, livelihood) on education (see guidance note 6).
  4. Local capacities and strategies for learning and education, both prior to and during the emergency, are identified (see guidance note 6).
  5. The assessment analyzes potential and existing threats to the protection of children and youth (see guidance note 6).
  6. Local capacities and strategies to cope with the disaster, both those of the affected population and the surrounding population, are identified
  7. The assessment identifies local perceptions of the purpose/role of education (see guidance note 7). Cross reference with Community Participation
  8. An appropriate response is designed based on assessment findings, including relevant intervention, advocacy for meeting gaps and/or support (see guidance note 8).
  9. A forum for sharing assessment findings and creating a database is established (see guidance notes 6 and 9).
  10. Regular coordination meetings to minimise duplication and identify gaps in intervention are held (see guidance note 9).

   

  Guidance Notes

  1. When possible, the findings of the initial assessment should be available within the first two weeks (no consensus on this time specification) of the emergency so that activity planning can take place.
  2. General emergency assessments must include an education or child protection specialist on the emergency team to collect data on education need s and resources Agencies should commit resources to and build staff and technical capacity to carry out these activities. In order to ensure that this occurs, education and child protection specialists must sensitize their own agencies and partners about the need to see education as a vital component of protection. No consensus: should this information be a guidance note or within the introduction to the section on Situation Analysis?To build upon: how to conduct an initial assessment on education when no specialist has been put on the team?
  3. Participation is limited in initial assessment and should be increased moving toward continuous assessment, response and monitoring (see standard 2 and 3). Participatory nature of the assessment needs to be maintained through the monitoring phase. To build upon: how measure community participation?
  4. Standardized data collection form will facilitate the comparison of projects on an interagency level. To build upon: identify assessment tools for appendix. Look at the Assessment Checklist in Education in Emergencies Toolkit (Save UK) and other resources for guidance. Some ideas on data re: education needs and education resources to be collected: number of children and number of children in school (disaggregate by age and sex), vulnerabilities and protection issues for children, number of trained teachers and/or possible teachers, remuneration for teachers, historical context of education within society, the previous education system/ situation, school infrastructure (damage, present use and potential future use), learning equipment and materials and factors affecting the safety and security of the affected population and humanitarian staff. Qualitative data collected on what students, teachers and parents say education needs and resources are.
  5. In order to avoid data bias, it is important to triangulate data from multiple sources during analysis before conclusions are drawn.
  6. Pre-crisis data and post-crisis assessments (government, NGOs, specialized agencies within the humanitarian community and the local community) that identify existing education needs and resources should be readily available to all actors. This may be particularly useful if actors cannot access the site during an emergency.
  7. An effective response must analyze and utilize local perceptions of the role and function of education in order to make use of the window of opportunity to question prior practices and to influence response. This is important so that humanitarian workers do not design response based only on THEIR perceptions and priorities rather than local perceptions. In a given location, a school setting may not be the place to resolve conflict; instead, it may be more effective to address these issues within broader community settings.
  8. Proposals for response must ensure that essential activities are budgeted for and adequately funded, including capacity-building of staff for data collection and analysis and carrying out the tasks of monitoring and evaluation; these are often not taken into full account during the proposal process.
  9. There should be a lead actor (such as OCHA or a relevant government ministry) to head up the coordination of assessment, sharing of the findings and coordinate response planning.

   

  Situational Analysis Standard 2: Continuous Assessment, Monitoring and Response: On-going monitoring identifies changes in education needs and resources and leads to periodic adjustment.

   

  Key Indicators

  1. Assessment categories identified in initial assessment are broadened, deepened and diversified and the needs of additional learner categories are addressed (see guidance note 1).
  2. Monitoring and review of data identifies changes, trends and new resources.
  3. Periodic adjustments are made based on monitoring and review of assessment findings with consideration of long-term implications (see guidance note 2).
  4. All stakeholders participate in the continuous assessment of needs and resources and response, including community members such as parents, students, young people (see guidance note 3).
  5. Findings from on-going monitoring and assessment are shared and database is updated to allow for informed decision-making.
  6. Regular coordination meetings to minimise duplication and identify gaps in intervention are held.

   

  Guidance Notes

  No consensus: timeline for periodic assessment and adjustment.

  1. Initial assessment: Data to be collected includes education needs and education resources (number of children (disaggregate by age and sex), number of trained teachers and/or possible teachers, vulnerabilities and protection issues for children, historical context of education within society, the previous and current education system/situation; school infrastructure (damage, present use and potential future use), learning equipment and materials and factors affecting the safety and security of the affected population and humanitarian staff. Categories for continuous assessment should be diversified to also include: education for all (not just children); type of school, data on teachers and other education personnel (teacher support, training and supervision, education management, curriculum, availability and access to learning opportunities and school (including barriers, such as security, working children/livelihood needs that supercede learning opportunities), etc (refer to established assessments).
  2. Budget negotiations must take place according to the adjustments required, to ensure that essential activities are budgeted for and adequately funded.
  3. All efforts should be made to ensure that the entitled authority participates in the coordination of assessment and response.

   

  Situation Analysis Standard 3: Final Evaluation: A transparent evaluation measures the impact of the intervention.

   

  Key Indicators

  1. The education intervention is evaluated against original objectives.
  2. Local education committees, including teachers and other education personnel and students, participate in the evaluation (see guidance note 1).
  3. Lessons learned are shared with the broader local community and humanitarian community and fed into post-emergency advocacy, programs and policies (see guidance note 2).
  4. Lessons learned are shared widely to contribute to global education goals.

   

  Guidance Notes

  1. If none exists, it may be useful to form a committee for monitoring, review and evaluation, including participation from all stakeholders (parents, students, teachers and other education personnel, government, and humanitarian workers).
  2. Potential barriers and resources are identified in the evaluation

   

  II. ACCESS, EQUITY, AND LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

   

  Access Standard Free and safe access to education is available to all. Barriers to access are systematically reduced.

   

  Key Indicators

  1. Social, economic, cultural, religious, political or military barriers are not limiting free and full access to education (See guidance note 2)
  2. Educational facilities are accessible for all, including those with special needs.
  3. Learners horrors and fears are allayed and their psychosocial needs are met.
  4. Education laws and regulations are flexible to enable access for learners during emergencies (see guidance notes 4 and 5).
  5. Education is provided free of fees.
  6. School uniforms are not required (see guidance note 7).
  7. Educational institutions are located within walking distance of learners homes.
  8. Education is available in the languages of the learners.
  9. The curriculum is appropriate and acceptable to the community (Cross reference: curriculum)
  10. Adequate numbers of qualified teachers are available (Cross reference: educational personnel).

  Guidance Notes

  1. International humanitarian law (Geneva and Hague conventions) protect the right to access and : Convention on the Rights of the Child articultate that children have the right to basic education, regardless of state of emergency.
  2. To compensate families for the opportunity cost of sending their children to school, incentives should be provided if/where required e.g. take home rations
  3. Political and social awareness on the right to education is raised.
  4. National overall responsibility for educational institutions is in place.
  5. National partners and other stakeholders are mobilized.
  6. Admission and enrolment are simple and documentation requirements are flexible e.g. without requiring citizenship, birth certificates, identity papers, school reports etc. Enrolment part-way through the school year or term is permitted. Second chance re-enrolment of drop outs is permitted. The documents and enrolment information must be confidential.
  7. Flexible time scheduling, including variable school hours, shifts and variable vacation periods, allow all learners to benefit from educational opportunities.
  8. Provide incentives for those in need, e.g. school feeding, transportation, clothing etc.
  9. Provide appropriate clothing and sanitary item

   

  Equity Standard : All who wish to participate are included and treate Home About Join Resources Donate to INEE INEE © 2012 Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies With current support from: