Pilot programme of assistance for schools developing a school travel plan
Executive Summary
Introduction
This report describes work undertaken in delivering a pilot programme of assistance for schools in developing school travel plans. The project, one of a number recommended by the Governments School Travel Advisory Group, has been undertaken for the Department of the Environment Transport and the Regions (DETR) by transport consultants Oscar Faber working in association with Sustrans, Sian Thornthwaite Consultants and Adrian Davis Associates. The report provides details of the pilot programme, general observations about the success of alternative approaches and what lessons can be learned for any future and similar initiative to provide assistance directly to schools. It was not the purpose of the study, nor is it the purpose of this report, to provide a detailed evaluation of the effectiveness of the pilot programme. This is the subject of a separate study being undertaken by the University of Westminster and due to report in the autumn of 2000.
Given the low base of current school travel initiatives and the barriers identified within schools, achieving a significant take up of school travel plans represents a huge task. This study has tested an approach where short periods of consultancy and other forms of support have been provided directly to 38 schools across England, Scotland and Wales. A different approach to providing advice was adopted in Northern Ireland because even though they were extremely keen to take part, the tight programme for the study precluded their involvement within the time available. The pilot approach in Northern Ireland consists of delivery of school travel plan guidance seminars to one school from each of the five Education and Library Boards.
Advice to the schools on the development of a school travel plan has consisted of a range of services, including visits, telephone support, and training seminars.
The overall aims of this pilot project and the independent evaluation have been to:
- determine the cost-effectiveness of providing site specific support to schools;
- identify the most effective assistance for different types of school; and
- identify the most effective ways to ensure that action continues after support has ended.
If, based on the evaluation of effectiveness of the pilot programme, the DETR judges it has been a success, consideration will be given to establishing a national programme of support.
The Governments integrated transport White Paper A New Deal for Transport: Better for Everyone published in July 1998 specifically notes how significant reductions in car commuting and the school run would help to tackle peak-time congestion, and that there is a shared responsibility to bring about the changes that are needed.
The journey to school has changed significantly in recent years - more traffic, longer journeys, more to carry, more pressure of time and as a result of a rising share of journeys to school being made by car, traffic and congestion have increased. In many areas a vicious circle has come into being - fears about safety in traffic have lead to less walking and cycling and more driving which in turn have increased traffic.
The potential benefits of a change in school travel behaviour include:
- the opportunity for children to experience more independent travel and greater freedom - an important part of growing up;
- building exercise into the day improves fitness and protects against coronary heart disease in the longer term; and
- reductions in local pollution and congestion will improve quality of life for everybody.
A small Steering Group was set up at the inception of the project to advise on the pilot programme and the schools to be included. Members were drawn from a broad range of organisations which included:
- Department of Transport Environment and the Regions (DETR)
- Department of Health (DoH)
- Department for Education and Employment (DfEE)
- Scottish Executive
- Northern Ireland Department of Environment (now Northern Ireland Assembly)
- Welsh Office (now National Assembly for Wales)
- Local Authority TravelWise (represented by Hertfordshire CC)
- Transport 2000
- Local Authority Education Department (represented by Surrey CC)
The approach adopted for the pilot programme was based on piloting nine different techniques to guide, encourage and facilitate schools to prepare, adopt and implement school travel plans. The different methods were designed to allow the DETRs independent evaluation to determine whether site specific assistance could significantly aid the process of plan development and what approaches were likely to be most successful and most cost effective.
The nine methods adopted were:
- telephone help-line at distance practical advice including the provision of source materials to assist in such things as preparation of questionnaires, surveys and outline travel plans.
- school working group organisation & co-ordination - the advisers role was to help identify working group members, set the agenda for meetings and facilitate up to three meetings spread across the school year.
- single visit - a structured and pre-organised visit to include presentations to staff, governors and pupils and to provide site-specific advice.
- assistance for local authority school travel co-ordinator - a day spent working directly with the local authority school travel co-ordinator and a second day working with them in school.
- out of school training for a schools travel co-ordinator - a one-day seminar including a combination of presentations, small group and practical work.
- use of the best practice guides time for a schools travel co-ordinator to read the guides, supplemented by a day in school with the school travel adviser to address issues, problems and the practicalities of implementation.
- school travel survey and preparation of issues, problems and options report - on and off-site guidance given to the in-school travel co-ordinator on travel surveys, problem identification and plan reporting.
- media and community approach - working closely with the school and local media to help raise the profile of issues surrounding the school journey and explain the need to take action.
- classroom work - direct working with children in a classroom environment using available teaching resources.
Project Advisers
The project advisers were:
- David Pontefract, David Newton, Neil Brownbridge and Tobias Gould of Oscar Faber;
- Paul Osborne, Geoff Gilbert, Celia Beeson and Andy Dunn of Sustrans;
- Adrian Davis of Adrian Davis Associates;
- Sian Thornthwaite of Sian Thornthwaite Consultants; and
- Martin Saunders an independent consultant and former teacher.
All advisers had previously been involved in working with schools on school travel planning issues and were allocated to particular approaches based on their individual experience.
Different methods were used to inform schools about the project and seek expressions of interest in taking part in the pilot programme. All 169 schools who registered interest were sent background information on the project and a questionnaire seeking further details about the school and their preferred type of assistance.
71 schools responded to the questionnaire and from them a short list of suitable schools was identified and the most appropriate type of approach determined. The choice of approach took into account the schools own indicated preference and the need to keep travel distances for the adviser specialising in that approach to a reasonable minimum.
The target for the programme was 40 schools, with four schools allocated to each approach, excepting the out of school training which was allocated eight. The final number who took part in the pilot was 38 with two schools dropping out before work commenced. The schools can be categorised as follows:
- 20 Primary
- 1 Middle
- 17 Secondary, and
- 33 in England
- 3 in Scotland
- 2 in Wales
Work started with the schools during the autumn term in 1999 and carried on in most cases through until the end of the summer term of 2000.
In all cases the local authorities representing each school were formally notified of proposals to work with individual pilot schools in their area and given an open invitation to get involved if they wished. In a number of cases this resulted in joint working and co-operation.
Summary of Progress with Different Approaches
Despite being the simplest and least time intensive form of advice the approach was nonetheless successful in as much as two of the four schools have produced a draft school travel plan. A common theme amongst all approaches, which was particularly relevant here, was the need to keep in regular contact with the school to ensure no loss of impetus. This could have been a significant problem here if it had been left to the school to instigate the telephone contact on each occasion. To help ensure continuity and progress the adviser rang the schools on a regular basis.
School Working Group Organisation & Co-ordination
In most cases it proved difficult to set up and maintain a broad school working group. Pressures of work, competing priorities and problems of arranging meeting dates all added to the difficulties. In effect the adviser and the school champion became the working group and this was particularly effective where regular contact and meetings were maintained. Two of the four schools have completed draft school travel plans.
Single Visit
The success of this approach depends very heavily on the ability to pre-plan a whole series of activities over a short period and also relies on the schools co-ordinator having the confidence to take the process forward with only limited assistance. In two cases the school contact was reluctant to organise the visit until such time as they felt sure in their own minds about what was to be done and as a result the visits were delayed until late in the school year. Draft plans have been prepared in two of the schools and a further school has one planned.
Assistance for Local Authority School Travel Co-ordinator
In the main, working in partnership with the local authority has been valuable and where it has worked most effectively has lead to added value to the school. However there was concern from one local authority that the time inputs if repeated on a wider scale may not be feasible for a small authority/team. School travel plans have been produced in two schools and a plan is programmed in one of the two others.
Out of School Training for School Travel Co-ordinators
Overall, reaction to the training day was very positive with the majority of the trainees finding the day very useful in providing a focus for what they were trying to achieve, the opportunity to discuss ideas with other schools and the motivation to proceed with development of a school travel plan. Whilst the pilot training group was limited to eight participants it would be possible to increase the number to say twelve without a significant loss of impact. Plans have been prepared in two schools only but are planned in a further five.
In each case the advisers work started with provision of the DETR and Transport 2000 school travel guides and was followed up by two visits to each school to address issues raised by the guides and a practical approach to implementation within each school. In the follow up visits it was apparent that the guides were a good aid, by virtue of their references, examples and suggested processes, but the school contacts felt they benefited more from a combination of the guides and the assistance of an expert to help steer them in the right directions. Three of the four schools have produced draft school travel plans.
School Travel Survey and Preparation of Issues, Problems and Options Report
The problems and issues approach appears to work best in schools which have a focus on problem solving and an ethos of strong project management. Additionally schools need to see the clear benefits of consultation and data gathering and the link into the school travel plan process. If they do not see the link or they perceive there are simpler or quicker ways they can be less enthusiastic. No plans have been produced to date although two are programmed.
Attempting to restrict the advisers input to media and community influences may have slowed the rate at which the school travel plan was being developed. This in turn reduced the opportunities for involving the media and the community - given the fixed term of contact time with the school allowed by the pilot programme. Additionally the schools were concerned to avoid unfavourable publicity. One school has produced a draft plan with another school having one programmed.
It is not possible to comment on the approach because neither of the two pilot schools, after initial interest and some apparent enthusiasm, proceeded with the project.
By the end of the 2000 summer term, draft and in some cases final school travel plans had been produced in 14 of the 38 schools. In a further 10 cases plans were either in preparation or were programmed.
Throughout the process it became evident that there were many common issues and problems related to working with schools in general and encouraging the development of a school travel plan in particular. The most important of these were:
- A schools year is very structured and it is unlikely that a school will be in a position to develop and adopt a school travel plan in less than a full academic year.
- If the co-ordinator of the school travel initiatives within the school is a teacher more will be achieved if the individual is allowed dedicated out of classroom time.
- The school travel co-ordinator need not necessarily be a teacher, as much or more can be achieved by an active governor or parent teacher association member.
- In comparing the different approaches it became apparent that visits on a little and often basis were more productive than single extended visits.
- Schools commented that they would have benefited from access to a database of schools actively involved in plan preparation with whom they could share ideas.
- Choosing the right medium of communication between the adviser and the school can make a big practical difference.
- The actual approach with the school may need to diverge from the initial initiative in order to promote continued involvement.
- Maintaining enthusiasm can be problematic.
- Advisers have found it important to be aware of and sympathetic to the schools own travel agenda.
- The schools need to be re-assured that the process including surveys, analysis, consultation and plan preparation does not have to be complex or over arduous.
- The importance of identifying and engaging a pro-active school champion cannot be overemphasised.
- The plan development process benefits from a multi-agency approach. Wherever possible the assistance of appropriate local authority officers can be very valuable.
