School Safety Index
DELHI · JAIPUR · PUNE
Schools / Pune
Only what the imagery could actually resolve is scored (76% of the rubric here); the rest is left uncounted rather than guessed. A road with full protective infrastructure scores near 100.
Before the checks: what kind of road this is, how it meets other roads, and what passes it. These lines describe the road and its surroundings — they do not change the score.
Road layout data © OpenStreetMap contributors (ODbL), retrieved 13 Aug 2026 · crash data: Jaipur Police · derivations: `exposure_v1` on the Data page.
Each check was read once, then verified blind by a second reader on a separate account. The photo each finding came from sits right beside it. Tap “see how this was judged” for the full reasoning.
No speed hump, table or rumble strip on the approach — vehicles reach the gate at full speed.
No speed humps, tables, rumble strips or markings visible along the flat paved frontage in the visible stretches on either side of the gate.
No marked or raised pedestrian crossing at or near the gate.
An independent second reader changed this — the two readings disagreed, and the evidence below settled it.
The two reads diverge only on Yya3eYnGK7Ui_h094: the blind read scored L1 on 'faint transverse/zebra-type markings far down the street near a blue directional sign'. Re-examining that image, the street is under heavy dappled tree-canopy shadow and the distant lighter band is not resolvable as a legible or faded pedestrian crossing (most consistent with tree-shadow / surface discoloration at range). No crossing marking, refuge or signalised crossing is present at or near the gate, where the carriageway is clearly seen. Blind read fell; audit's L0 upheld.
A walking edge exists but is broken or blocked for most of the frontage.
Local street: walkable edge is discontinuous. A raised plinth/footpath fronts the school compound, but several frontage stretches are bare narrow lanes with no built footpath (pedestrians on carriageway), permanent geometry. Broken/absent along most of frontage.
Drivers get no warning that a school gate is here.
No school-warning signs, speed-limit signs, carriageway speed stamps or zone-identity assets visible on the road along either approach. Signage seen is commercial/directional only; the school name board is on the gate, not a road sign.
A clear setback or railing gives room to gather off the carriageway.
Gate does not open directly onto the carriageway: a raised plinth/footpath with a metal railing and continuous compound fence line runs along the frontage, giving off-carriageway assembly space. Setback is modest and a distinctly separate pedestrian opening is not clearly resolvable, so not L3.
Each action maps to a failing check, the relevant IRC:SP:32-2023 clause, and the responsible agency. Agency labels are provisional and correctable through the dispute channel.
Speed humps near schools roughly halve child-pedestrian injury odds (Tester 2004); 30 km/h calmed zones ≈ 40% fewer casualties (Grundy 2009).
Raised crossings cut vehicle speeds at the exact conflict point.
A continuous footpath keeps children off the carriageway on the approach, not only at the gate.
The zone must announce itself to drivers before the gate.
Children should not step from the gate into a moving traffic lane.
Responsible-agency labels come from the CFI field instrument’s mapping and are correctable via the dispute channel.
Every published road is re-read every six months, or as soon as new Street View imagery lands, or on a sustained dispute.
The entrance, the imagery, a finding — if any of it is wrong, tell us. A dispute pauses this page while the audit is re-verified, and the correction is logged in the public record.
Dispute this audit