The National Plan for Educational Infrastructure 2015-2025 [PNIE] is an instrument of long-term planning with an integral focus looking into the improvement, rehabilitation, reconstruction, extension and management of current infrastructure, as well as the planning of new infrastructure.
The General Directorate of School Infrastructure of The Ministry of Education (MoE) developed the PNIE in order to guide the policy and investments in school infrastructure for the next 10 years. The objective of this project is to establish guidelines and criteria that will allow to prioritize the different needs of the schools to improve them nation wide.
The PNIE’s structure has two parts and six components. The first part has three components: (i) the framework and main objectives, (ii) the diagnosis of school infrastructure, and (iii) the estimation cost of the infrastructure gap. Besides, the second part has the other three components: (iv) the intervention strategy, (v) the implementation strategy, and (vi) the mechanisms of funding.
School distribution nationwide
The educational scenarios are classified into five, three urban and two rural scenarios. The classification proposes five territorial scenarios based on rural-urban characteristics in terms of accessibility and geolocation. Complementary, the bioclimatic zones is nine-zones classification based on environmental and geographical conditions. Both classifications were developed to avoid political boundaries that oftentimes don't reflect the reality of the communities. The later was necessary to propose design interventions and obtain thermal and light comfort with energy efficiency in all school buildings. The zones were defined based on the Norm EM.110 Thermal and light comfort with energy efficiency.
Diagnosis of Schools Facilities' physical conditions
The diagnosis of the physical conditions of school infrastructure were developed using the National School Infrastructure Census 2014 of 60,000 schools facilities. The census provided the baseline for the formulation of the plan. The statistics demonstrated that a big share of rural schools do not have access to basic services such us water, sanitation, and electricity, and the school buildings have poor seismic design level. In contrast urban schools require additional capacity (sqm2/student) to provide an adequate learning environment.
Access to basic services
Nationwide seismic risk assessment of school infrastructure
According to a probabilistic seismic risk assessment of school facilities, which was carried out countrywide to provide an estimation of expected losses, 60 percent of Peru’s school facilities are located in high– and medium–seismic hazard zones. 48% of school facilities are in high risk of collapse, and thus requires immediate action while 18% of school require a retrofitting solution to prevent children's lives.
Investment needs
The results showed that the total investment the government requires to suffice the architectural and structural needs of the school facilities is over US$ 30,000 million. With a limited budget of US$ 1,600 million per year, most of those schools will probably receive a suitable service in 10 or 20 years. The PNIE, established a strategy of intervention following with a criteria of prioritization to equally attend schools needs nation wide. The following table shows the investment needs by group of intervention.
Criteria of prioritization
The criteria of prioritization aims to equally allocate public resources to all school facilities. The algorithm of prioritization was the combination of three indicators.
- Seismic risk indicator refers to the structural conditions of the school buildings. Based on the seismic risk assessment, a school facility can have one of the four levels of risk: very high, high, medium and low.
- Efficiency indicator refers to the efficiency ratio of each school defined by the number of benefitted students by one million soles invested.
- Equity indicator refers to equally weight students with need nation wide. There are four equitable groups identified for the prioritization methodology: Apurimac, Ene and Mantaro’s rivers valley (VRAEM) or the borders of the country; districts with poverty greater than 50%; rural areas and urban areas.
Results of the ranking to intervene schools
Extreme priority: the school facilities with 70% of collapse risk are in the extreme priority group. The school order within the group was ranked by the efficiency Indicator and total enrollment.
Very high priority: school facilities located in the VRAEM region or frontier districts or were very efficient in terms of investment. The school order within the group was ranked by the factor of the risk indicator.
High priority: school facilities located in poorest areas or were very efficient in terms of investment. The school order within the group was ranked by the factor of the risk indicator.
Medium priority: School facilities located in rural areas or less efficient in terms of per student capita investment. The school order within the group was ranked by the factor of the risk indicator.
Low priority: School facilities located in urban areas or non-efficient in terms of per student capita investment. The school order within the group was ranked by the factor of the risk indicator.
