2'3 P 1

1
District Primary Education Programme

• INTRODUCTION
• Coverage 275 Districts in 18 States
• Objectives
• Universalisation of Primary Education
• through
• Universal Access
• Increasing Retention - Reducing dropouts
• Improving Quality through Capacity Building
• Financial Allocations
• Upto Rs. 40 crores per District
• Civil Works Upto 33.33 of Project cost
• Total civil works cost 3667 crores
  (approximately)

2

• Civil Works Activities under DPEP
• Access - Construction of School Buildings (New
  Building less)
• Retention - Provision of
• Additional Classrooms
• Repairs
• Toilets
• Drinking water
• Quality Improvement - Block Cluster Resource
  Centres
• Civil works Focus areas
• Community participation
• Quality construction
• Cost-effective construction

3

• DPEP I
• 7 States 42 Districts Initiated in
  1993-94
• Effort was to meet targets within stipulated time
  and ensuring quality of construction.
• First instance when large number of constructions
  were attempted to be taken up through community
  involvement.
• Being the initial stages of the programme there
  were teething problems in terms of Implementing
  Agency, Supervision System, Approval
  requirements etc.
• Cost effective constructions were therefore not
  the focus.

4

• Constructions under DPEP I were based on
  traditional designs built with conventional
  materials and technologies.
• These conventional materials were RCC and brick
  masonary in most cases but also included stone
  masonary in stone intensive areas (of
  Maharastra, Kerala and M.P) and CGI roofing in
  Assam.

5

• DPEP Initiatives
• Effective Community Construction Process
• Development of functional school designs- design
  renewal process
• Identification and use of local resources -
  resourcemapping exercise
• Cost- effective construction methodologies
• Child friendly environment
• Capacity building for State, District and site
  personnel and also community in community
  construction process as well as cos-effective
  construction technologies.
• National cross-state sharing workshops

6

• Design Renewal process
• Workshop at national level with pedagogues and
  Architects - Design manual
• State level workshops with teachers and
  competitions for children
• Appointment of state/ district level consultants
• Design brief
• Resource mapping exercise
• Preparation of of draft designs
• Discussions at national level on the same for
  suggestions and modifications
• Final designs

7

• EFFORTS TOWARDS COST-EFFECTIVENESS
• A savings of 10 on the civil works cost would
  amount to about 367 crores which can be used to
  construct 30,000- 35,000 more classrooms.
• Efforts towards cost-effectiveness started with
  DPEPII
• An amount of Rs.50 lakhs was allocated to all
  states as Innovation Fund for the development
  of cost-effective constructions.
• Experience of APPEP CECT programme was shared at
  the Vidyalayam workshop - first exposure of
  states to CECT.
• 1st Cross State Sharing Workshop on Civil Works
  at Trivandrum - sharing of ideas on Innovation
  Fund and CECT applications amongst the various
  states.

8

• 2nd Cross State Sharing Workshop on Civil Works
  at Patna - Innovation Fund was one of the Focus
  areas. States worked out strategies for
  implementation of Innovation Fund. Practical
  demonstration of technologies and site visits to
  Bihar CECT sites dispelled doubts on the
  practicality of such technologies in rural areas.
• Engineering personnel of all states under DPEP
  are now sufficiently exposed to the concepts of
  cost-effectiveness and alternative technology.
• DPEP focuses on achieving cost reduction through
  all the above ways.

9

• COST-EFFECTIVENESS IN DPEP
• Efforts towards cost-effectiveness in DPEP is not
  limited to Alternate Technologies only.
  Significant cost reductions can also be achieved
  through
• Cost-effective Designs
• Architectural designs can create a combination of
  various spaces like rooms, verendahs, pavilions
  and courts to provide more teaching space within
  the same cost.
• Structural designs in many cases can be
  rationalised reducing quantity of cement and
  steel used.
• Utilisation of local materials and skills in
  construction.
• Proper site management and good construction
  practices thereby reducing wastage of labour and
  materials.
• Involvement of the community in construction.

10

• Alternative technologies are also seen as a way
  of significant cost reduction provided such
  technology
• is based on local materials and skills.
• is accepted by the implementing agencies.
• is easily replicable in a large scale through
  regular implementing agencies.
• does not lead to a compromise on the functional
  requirements of a child friendly school

11

• Achievements
• New functional state/ district/ site specific
  designs
• Use of local resources
• Application of Cost-effective construction
  technologies
• Exposure to state/ district/ site personnel
• Trained and skilled manpower in the areas of
  community and cost-effective construction
  methodologies.

12

• CONSTRAINTS
• Scale of the Programme - huge targets to be met
  within a scheduled time frame.
• Centralised designs with little flexibility to
  accommodate local materials and skills had to be
  adopted for administrative advantages.
• The construction programme require the mandate of
  the district administration and engineering
  departments, who are not always sensitised.
• Government implementing agencies (PWD, PRED,
  ZPED) has to work within their Schedule of Rates,
  which usually does not include CECT.
• A belief that alternate technologies require
  intensive supervision beyond what is required for
  conventional construction.

13

• Excessive frontloading of civil works did not
  allow much time to be spent on experimenting and
  analysing CECT.
• Being a large programme with multiple objectives,
  the process of development of suitable
  cost-effective technologies has been a slow and
  cautious one.

14
Repairs Rehabilitation - DPEP Experience

• National level initiatives
• Organised a workshop with National level experts
  and states
• Prepared a repairs manual with suggestive
  procedure for repairs execution based on the
  experiences of states
• Shared the manual with all the states in national
  workshops
• Organised state level workshops to workout state
  specific strategies for execution of repairs

15
Reasons for low priority

• Lack of clear understanding about repair works
• Difficulty in generalisation of repair works
• Non-availability of systematic procedure like new
  construction
• Lack of effective supervision and monitoring
  systems
• Difficulty in estimation - non-workable rates,
  site specific estimates
• Apprehensions about effective utilisation of
  funds and quality of work

16
Repairs

• Correction/ rectification of defects/ damaged
  parts to bring the structure to normal condition
• Rehabilitation
• Bringing the building into usable condition for
  which it intend for.

17
Classification of Repairs

• Repairs may be classified on two parameters
• Financial
• Technical
• Minor repairs Repairs doesnt require major
  technical input
• Major repairs Requires technical input
• Special/ Critical Repairs requires specialist/
  experts advice.
• Financial limitation may also be included if
  required.

18
Unit cost for Repairs

• This may not be uniform for all school buildings.
  This may vary depending upon type of repair and
  number of classrooms required repairs.
• Unit cost may be fixed per classroom instead of
  school
• If the cost of repairs exceeding the 50 unit
  cost of new classroom, it is suggestable to go
  for new construction than repair.

19
Implementation process

• Identification
• Schools required repairs may be identified by
• Using existing data
• Undertaking surveys (infrastructure plans)
• Non-Technical
• Technical
• Prioritisation
• This may be on the basis of
• Need (Enrollment, no. of classrooms available and
  no. of classrooms in good condition)
• Urgency of repair
• Girls school/ Girls enrollment
• Area/ locality (Rural/ Urban/ Tribal)
• Community involvement
• Natural calamity (Earthquake, cyclone etc.)

20

• Estimation
• With the help of VEC/ Community for minor repairs
• With the help of technical people for major and
  special repairs
• (Site specific child friendly elements must be
  considered while preparing repairs estimate)
• Implementation (similar to community construction
  process)
• Supervision and Monitoring
• SPO
• DPO
• Engineers
• BRC CRC
• VEC

21
Gujarat Experience

• First time Gujarat established procedure for
  execution of repair works
• Undertaken identification/ technical survey
• Estimation procedure - Site specific estimates,
  Prepared SOR based on market rates
• Established effective supervision monitoring
  process with the help of technical and
  non-technical personnel

22
Gujarat Experience Earth quake Reconstruction
programme

• DPEP, Gujarat has been given the reponsibility of
  repairs rehabilitation and reconstruction of
  all primary schools in earthquake effected areas.
  
• Rapid damage assessment survey and estimation
  with the help of CEPT, Ahmedabad
• Around 200 engineers have been hired and trained
  in community construction process and repairs
  execution retrofitting techniques and CECT.
• Major part of the work has been completed
  successfully.