Scottish Government

5. CHAPTER FIVE DISCUSSION

5.1 Conclusions

5.1.1 The legislation, guidance and practice surrounding school transport have grown up through a variety of routes and it is not always readily possible for a lay person to understand and interpret what should be provided and why.

5.1.1 For example, potential tensions and conflicts relate to:

5.1.2 As a result, parents, schools and those new to the industry may perceive that school transport is inconsistent and requirements are not being met, even where this is not the case. The result of this confusion is evident in some of the ill-informed debate which takes place between authorities, parents and the media.

5.1.3 Many authorities have sought to overcome this confusion by giving information to parents using written material, or face to face at open days. Others, however, do not appear to have clear policies in place (for example, on seatbelts and penalties for misbehaving) or fail to inform their staff of these policies (as evident in the number of "don't know" responses to our questionnaire).

5.1.4 Generally we have found that authorities are performing well in the provision of school transport and associated measures to improve behaviour and reduce car dependency. The representatives we spoke to during the case studies were professionals who were dedicated and motivated to deliver continuous improvement. We hope that the examples of good practice discussed in this report will give them ideas for their areas.

5.2 Key Lessons

5.2.1 Councils retain a great deal of flexibility in how they provide school transport. There are also various ways of procuring services and managing contracts which has dissipated responsibilities. Many of the examples of good practice highlighted here have evolved from various parties working together to achieve a common aim, be it to raise standards, address behavioural problems, or reduce car use.

5.2.2 The pooling of resources can lead to greater efficiency and/or better quality of service. The model operated by SPT provides an example of how pooling can result in a systematic approach across authorities and how smaller authorities can benefit from buying into a larger system in terms of access to personnel ( i.e. inspectors etc) that they could not afford individually.

5.2.3 Many councils have delegated responsibility for school transport to their Transport Departments. There are benefits to this in that transport staff can provide expertise in planning services (for example, in integrating school buses with local buses), They can also use industry products such as software to specify efficient packages of routes, and industry knowledge to ensure that their approach complies with the frequently changing legislation affecting transport.

5.2.4 The tendering stage offers many opportunities for introducing improvements to the quality of service provided. It is possible to offset some of the costs of higher standards with longer contracts and better use of resources (for example, by staggering hours, and doubling up minibuses).

5.2.5 Only a few authorities are proactively and imaginatively tackling issues of bullying and bad behaviour on school buses. Many of the core messages regarding pupil safety and security are already included in the school curriculum, but these are not always linked explicitly to the school journey. Small changes to existing initiatives may make the links more clear and there may be room for building bullying and stranger danger issues into existing codes of conduct for pupils, drivers and attendants/escorts to consolidate existing messages.

5.3 Emerging Issues

5.3.1 There is a move away from the use of attendants and monitors to keep control on school buses, in favour of CCTV which is seen to provide more objective evidence regarding pupil behaviour. The cost of CCTV systems has dropped dramatically and is now typically less than £2,500 per vehicle. Authorities should be actively considering including this in school contracts, especially on routes where there have been behavioural problems, to assist drivers identify troublemakers and give schools evidence so that they can punish pupils. Footage is also useful if there is an accident to understand the contributory factors, provide evidence to insurance companies, and take action to reduce the risk in the future.

5.3.2 Spot checks are giving authorities confidence that the vehicles used for school work are fit for purpose, and as the average age of the fleets is falling over time, these checks are becoming less important. VOSA already check roadworthiness and so authorities should be turning their attention to compliance with the conditions of contract, such as the presence of a named (and vetted) driver, the correct type of vehicle and valid insurance. There appears to be less need to check timekeeping, but rather to ensure that parents, pupils and schools know who to complain to in case of problems. Few authorities are proactively engaging pupils in discussing their views about school transport and what they would like to see changed.

5.3.3 Misunderstandings regarding responsibilities for different parts of the school journey appear to be leaving gaps in coverage among schools, operators and parents. We believe that responsibilities need to be made more explicit to parents - including their own. For example, rather than just issuing a code of conduct, authorities could get the parents to sign up to it to ensure that they have read it and are committed to playing their part in ensuring that their children abide by it.

5.3.4 In the past, many schools have been reluctant to engage with school transport issues. However, this appears to be changing with growing emphasis on their duty of care towards young people and the competition from other schools that has resulted from parents being given more choice in decisions about where they send their children to school. This bodes well for future partnership initiatives aimed at tackling bad behaviour.

5.3.5 Perceptions of stranger danger and bullying appear to be much worse than the actual risk. Kerbcraft and other pedestrian training is aimed at young children, and there is a case for training those in secondary school to give them and their parents confidence that they can cross roads safely and deal with strangers. This will help to overcome the current obstacles to healthier, sustainable travel.

5.3.6 Many of the schemes which link school transport to wider transport policies rely on the input of School Travel Co-ordinators. The posts are not permanent and the discontinuity and loss of knowledge is likely to affect the effectiveness of school travel plans.

5.4 Knowledge Gaps & Further Research

5.4.1 Parents and pupils have mixed views on the quality of drivers, and there is evidence that driving training, if it is given, does not go far enough in teaching drivers how to handle school children. A number of resources have already been developed in this area; some use role play or workshops to encourage drivers to work out for themselves how they should react in various situations that are likely to come up. There is a need for authorities to investigate what form of training their contractors are giving to drivers, and if necessary, to work together, for example through ATCO, in standardising driver training and improving consistency.

5.4.2 Many authorities do not have information on modal shares for school travel in their areas. This is a concern as it suggests they do not have baseline data for monitoring the effectiveness of local transport policies or school travel plans, and evaluating whether their policies and spending are having the desired impact.

5.4.3 There are a number of apparently successful schemes that have tackled bad behaviour on school buses. These use a variety of measures including DVDs, theatre and talks. There has been no formal cost benefit analysis of these, including how long children are able to retain the messages they contain before they need to be repeated.