It's the steps before. It's getting the community to feel that they own it, that it's theirs, so that they are protecting it, rather than never using it or not caring if it gets blown up.
That would be, in my books, more development. And humanitarians have made so many mistakes over such a long period in learning how to do good development that I think if the military is doing it, at the minimum it shouldn't be repeating our mistakes, thinking that by constructing the building you've solved something. For that community, there are implications for costs, who the teachers are, whether the girls can go in, how long it's going to run, who's going to pay the cost, does the community feel that it's its own, and so on.
I'm not saying this because the military can't do it. If the military decides to do it in that way, they can. I'm just saying that I'm not sure it's the most effective way of using military assets.