Local Sustainable Transport Fund Walk to School Outreach Bid Summary

A targeted approach will be adopted, identifying locations where the school run is having a particularly significant negative impact on congestion, journey times and economic growth. Bespoke measures (based on a successful Department for Transport funded pilot project) will remove barriers to walking, along with delivery of three proven school-based interventions. Over 1,000 schools will be supported through the programme.

The programme has a total value of £17,376m and requires a grant of £4,761m through the Local Sustainable Transport Fund to enable successful delivery.

Background

In many locations across England, the school run has a significant negative impact on network efficiency, affecting business and commercial travel at crucial times, particularly the morning peak. A partnership of eleven local authorities will be supported by national charity Living Streets to roll out an outreach programme, aimed at increasing levels of walking to school at primary and secondary schools in target locations.

Our package of measures will focus on a whole school approach, based on the demonstrable track record of the national Walk to School Campaign. It will also capture the benefits of Living Streets’ current demonstration outreach project, funded by the Department for Transport (DfT) during 2011-12 and operating in Hertfordshire.

A strong partnership

Durham County Council is the lead partner. Other local authority partners are: Leicester City Council; Hertfordshire County Council; Hartlepool Borough Council; Blackpool Council; Tameside MBC; Wirral Borough; Buckinghamshire County Council; Hampshire County Council; West Sussex County Council; and Stoke on Trent City Council.

Living Streets has been running the Walk to School Campaign since 1995, and will be a key partner in each local authority area; locally-based Living Streets Coordinators will deliver our coherent, locally responsive package of support measures. The sharing of emerging best practice both within the partnership and to a wider stakeholder group, will be integral to our work from the start.

Identified economic and transport issues

The partnership has identified a number of key transport issues that are having a negative effect on economic growth, local congestion, journey times/reliability, carbon emissions and related issues such as road safety, air pollution and health.

For example, the majority of partners are seeing an above average rise in journey times during the weekday morning peak, and in depth analysis (e.g. in Hertfordshire) demonstrates significantly higher levels of congestion during school term times, particularly on certain parts of the network. In addition, a number of partners are seeing an above average percentage of end-user emissions attributable to road transport. This is coupled with a risk of increased traffic over the coming years placing even greater demand on the road network and worsening key link and junction efficiency problems. These local challenges therefore demonstrate strong links with the Local Sustainable Transport Fund objectives of growing strong local economies and addressing the urgent challenges of climate change, as well as having wider benefits.

Delivering change

The programme will support a sustained increase in the numbers of children walking to school. These increases will be achieved in target areas where there will be a resulting economic benefit and will be selected using a robust selection framework, to maximise our impact.

Our proposed package of measures directly responds to the most up to date literature on behavioural insights and responds directly to the needs identified through a survey of schools in potential target areas:

– Outreach workers and programme management (package 1) will include Walk to School Coordinators in each local authority area, responding to local needs. A national project steering group will oversee progress against targets and sharing of learning, facilitated by robust monitoring and evaluation.

– We will identify and tackle local barriers to walking (package 2), with direct support for 364 school and physical improvements implemented in 90 locations, delivered through community action and local contributions.

– WoW (Walk once a Week), Living Streets’ primary school intervention (package 3) will act as a year round incentive scheme in 854 target primary schools (average 15 percentage point increase in regular walking).

– Free your Feet and Campaign in a Box are Living Streets’ successful secondary school interventions, which will reach 182 schools (package 4). Free your Feet is a whole school walking challenge, while Campaign in a Box focuses on facilitating a team of young people to create and deliver their own walking campaign (average 5% percentage point increase in regular walking).

– Finally, Marketing and promotion (package 5) will support local awareness raising, as well as the sharing of learning nationally at the end of the programme.

This type of intervention demonstrates an excellent benefit cost ratio. Our target outcomes are:

– Improved economic performance in our target areas: new investment/developments, current/projected business startups in our target areas.

– 3.59 thousand tonnes of CO2 saved as a result of increased walking to school.

– 4.2m journeys to school converted from car to walking and 2.8m converted to park and stride, contributing to reduced congestion and reduced journey times on key target routes in each local authority area, particularly during the morning peak.

– A safer environment and reduced congestion around the school.

– Improved health for participating children and their families, as well as a contribution to reduced childhood obesity, resulting from increased active travel.

– Improved local air quality.

Budget and local contributions

The programme has a total budget of £17,376m (including local contributions of in-kind, revenue and capital funding from local authority partners) and requires a contribution of £4,761m from the Local Sustainable Transport Fund to be delivered. Further information is provided in the full bid.

Living Streets (The Pedestrians Association) is a Registered Charity No. 1108448 (England and Wales) and SC039808 (Scotland), Company Limited by Guarantee (England & Wales), Company Registration No. 5368409. Registered office 4th Floor, Universal House, 88-94 Wentworth Street,, London E1 7SA.

Local Sustainable Transport Fund - Application Form

Applicant Information

Coordinating Local transport authority name: Durham County Council

Participating local transport authorities: – Blackpool Council – Buckinghamshire County Council – Hampshire County Council – Hartlepool Borough Council – Leicester City Council – Stoke on Trent City Council – Hertfordshire County Council – Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council – West Sussex County Council – Wirral Borough

Senior Responsible Owner name and position: John McGargill, Strategic Traffic Studies Manager Contact telephone number: 0191 383 3456

Bid Manager name and position: (1) Durham County Council: John McGargill, Strategic Traffic Studies Section Manager Contact telephone number: 0191 383 3456 Email address: [email protected] Postal address: Room 4/98, County Hall, Ayckley Heads, Durham, DH1 5UQ

(2) Living Streets: Ellen Midwood, Director of Delivery Contact telephone number: 020 7377 4907 Email address: [email protected] Postal address: Living Streets, 4th Floor, Universal House, Wentworth Street, London E1 7SA

Website address for published bid: www.durham.gov.uk

SECTION A - Project description and funding profile

A1. Project name: Walk to School Outreach

A2. Headline description:

“[T]he performance of the UK’s transport networks will be a crucial enabler of sustained productivity and competitiveness: a 5 per cent reduction in travel time for all business travel on the roads could generate £2.5 billion of cost savings – some 0.2 per cent of GDP.” The Eddington Transport Study, December 2006 In many locations across England, the school run has a significant negative impact on network efficiency, affecting business travel at crucial times, particularly the morning peak. Converting such journeys to walking can support economic growth, reduce traffic congestion, ameliorate transport-based carbon emissions, enable a safer transport environment, increase childrens’ transport independence and help families improve their health through exercise.

A partnership of eleven local authorities, led by Durham County Council, has linked up with national charity Living Streets (who deliver the successful Walk to School Campaign) to roll out an outreach programme. Peripatetic staff will work directly with children, schools and the community to overcome obstacles to walking, increasing levels of walking to school at primary and secondary schools. Together we will target locations where the school run is having a particularly significant negative impact on congestion, journey times and economic growth.

The package of measures will focus on a whole school approach - using promotion, community and parental involvement and targeted highway infrastructure improvements to make walking to school the norm over the long term. It is based on the demonstrable track record of the national Walk to School Campaign, and captures the benefits of the current demonstration outreach project – funded by the Department for Transport (DfT) during 2011-12 - operating in Hertfordshire. This will ensure that the project’s legacy benefits are fully realised.

The programme – with a total value of £17,376m and requiring a grant of £4,761m - is a highly cost effective method of influencing households’ travel behaviour. We will target 98 areas, where we know that economic benefits can be achieved through making the school journey more sustainable. Regular walking to school will be increased in 854 primary schools (average 15 percentage points) and 182 secondary schools (average 5 percentage points), along with infrastructure improvements in 90 locations.

A3. Geographical area:

This initiative will cover a total of eleven local authority areas, representing the majority of English regions: – East Midlands: Leicester City Council – East of England: Hertfordshire County Council – North East: Durham County Council, Hartlepool Borough Council – North West: Blackpool Council, Tameside MBC, Wirral Borough – South East: Buckinghamshire County Council, Hampshire County Council, West Sussex County Council – West Midlands: Stoke on Trent City Council.

The partnership represents a diverse range of locations, including urban and rural authorities. It is an excellent opportunity to implement our proven approach in a range of settings, and for partners to share knowledge and experience.

A partnership meeting took place in December 2011 and all partners have been involved in the development of the programme proposal.

A4. Type of bid (please tick relevant box):

Small project bids Tranche 1 bid Expression of interest for Tranche 2 (please complete sections A and B only) Tranche 2 bid X

2 A5. Total package cost (£m): 17,376

A6. Total DfT funding contribution sought (£m): 4,761

A7. Spend profile:

£K 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total Revenue funding 0 1,165 1,692 1,904 4,761 sought Capital funding 0 0 0 0 0 sought

Local contribution 0 5,836 3,858 2,921 12,615 Total 0 7,001 5,550 4,825 17,376

A8. Local contribution

Local contributions are from local authority sources (see Appendix 1 for full details):

In kind contributions from all partner local authorities: i. Office accommodation for Living Streets Coordinators, costed at £3,000 per Coordinator per annum, for the whole period of employment. ii. Access to meeting and training rooms, costed at £400 per annum. iii. In kind time from a local authority ‘link officer’, based on 1 day per month, for the whole period that the Coordinators are employed. All in kind costs are uplifted by 3% each subsequent year, to account for cost increases.

Additional revenue contributions, as identified by individual partners – Additional officer support, where it is expected that a proportion of their time will be spent on this work (e.g. Road Safety Officer in Hartlepool). – Revenue budgets for school initiatives (e.g. child pedestrian training in Leicester).

Additional capital contributions, as identified by individual partners – Local Transport Plan (LTP) spend that will be directed at walking environment improvements in our target areas, and may be influenced by community needs identified through this programme (e.g. pedestrian and cycle improvements, including crossing facilities, in Tameside). – Safe Routes to School funding (e.g. annual budget for Safe Routes to School and School Safety Zones in West Sussex). – Other secured capital funding (e.g. Area Action Partnerships, specific member budgets capital bids in Durham).

A9. Partnership bodies

Walk to School Outreach will deliver a significant impact across eleven local authority areas. Local authorities will work in partnership with Living Streets in each location. Partnership working and the sharing of learning is integral to the programme. We will also share emerging best practice with stakeholders, maximising our impact nationally.

Local authority partners Eleven local authorities will participate in the project. Local authority link officers will champion the initiative within the local authority, act as the liaison between the local authority and Living Streets, and ensure programme requirements (e.g. securing match

3 funding, agreeing target areas on the basis of project criteria) are fully met. Integrating this project with the LTP programme and other local initiatives will maximise value for money.

Local authority partners will also be a crucial link with local stakeholders, ensuring that the interventions used in each area are appropriate and meet local needs.

Durham County Council Durham County Council, as the bid’s lead partner, will be the accountable body with DfT, as well as being an active local authority partner.

Living Streets Living Streets is the national charity working to create safe, attractive and enjoyable streets across the UK and will be a key project delivery partner for this programme. They work to see streets designed with people in mind, which can be enjoyed by everyone. Our public spaces should be safe, accessible places where local economies can thrive, communities can be vibrant, and people can choose to travel actively and sustainably. They have extensive experience of managing complex projects and programmes of work which get more people walking.

The charity has been running the national Walk to School Campaign since the first Walk to School Week in 1995. It has demonstrated its value as a mechanism for behaviour change among pupils, families and the wider school community and has grown to become a national programme involving over 1.6 million children annually. The campaign incorporates large scale promotional events, school based support and resources, incentive schemes and innovative projects that break down barriers to walking.

This programme will build on its DfT-funded pilot project in partnership with Hertfordshire County Council, which has increased walking levels significantly. A local Coordinator works with schools, parents, children and the local community, delivering locally responsive support measures. Bespoke measures are developed to remove barriers to walking (see case study, below, for examples) along with delivery of three proven school- based interventions:

1. WoW (Walk once a Week) is a successful year-round incentive scheme that encourages primary school aged children and their families to walk at least once a week for their school journey (though many schools use WoW to promote more regular walking).

The scheme uses collectible WoW badges, which pupils earn each month for walking to school at least once a week. In addition, we plan to roll out innovative new whiteboard software to monitor walking levels, developed through the Hertfordshire pilot project.

Independent evaluation of the WoW scheme1 in 2009 found that: – Just under a fifth of pupils surveyed reported that they started walking to school because of WoW. – In the WoW schools an average of 59% of children walked to school - a significantly higher incidence of walking than the national average of 48% according to the National Travel Survey 2008. – Teachers and classroom staff said that WoW is easy to administrate in the classroom and that children understand it and want to participate.

Further evaluation of WoW, for a Department of Health-funded programme targeted at schools with low walking rates (2010) in areas of high childhood obesity, found that walking to school rose from 42% to 59% when WoW was introduced. Across the same

1 Survey sample consisted of over 23,000 children

4 period, getting a lift in a car or taxi fell from 42% to 36%. Some are achieving even more. For example, Holy Trinity Rosehill Primary School has seen walking rates increase to nearly 95% of children walking at least once a week (from a walking rate of 50%) since joining the scheme in September 2010.

Case study – Hertfordshire pilot project In 2011-12 Living Streets is delivering a pilot walk to school outreach project, funded by the DfT, in partnership with Hertfordshire County Council.

Currently, ten primary and two secondary schools are being supported. All suffer localised congestion around the school, and consequent road safety issues. The primary schools are being supported to deliver WoW. Many have also set up ‘park and stride’ schemes. The secondary schools are implementing a version of the Campaign in a Box, with an action group of 10-15 students being supported to develop and run a walking campaign, as well as undertaking walking audits to identify local environmental issues.

Innovative monitoring tools are being developed (and are being tested in schools in early 2012) using whiteboard technology. This enables children to simply touch on their name and how they got to school on a daily basis, providing a fun interactive method to get children thinking about their journey to school, that easily integrates into the school day and provides immediate access to monitoring data for the Council and Living Streets.

Local stakeholder involvement has been crucial from the start. School staff were engaged at an early stage, and parent and pupil workshops with a sample of schools identified barriers to walking. This enables local issues to be tackled. – At Martins Wood Primary School, pupil and parent workshops identified a back gate at the school that previously provided an excellent walking link, but had been replaced by a fence. Living Streets is working with the school to reinstate the gate. – At St. Bernadette Catholic Primary old school driveways close to the pedestrian gates are being used by parents to drop their children off, causing significant safety issues. Living Streets is working with the local authority to prevent this misuse while also greening up the school front, with planters blocking driveway access. – At Marriotts Secondary School an underpass has been identified as a barrier to walking, as it feels unsafe. Living Streets is taking the school council to the site to consider how it can be improved, and will then feed this back to the Council.

Initial monitoring data demonstrates the cost effectiveness of the approach, which is leading to significant increases in walking over and above the use of resources only. For example Martins Wood achieved 89% walking once a week in November and 64% walking every day (up from 40% baseline). One class has recorded 96% walking every day. Ashfield Primary School achieved 65% walking every day (up from 44% baseline) with one class recording 90% walking daily (up from 49%).

Mary Warren, a year 2 teacher at Martins Wood Primary School said, ‘Our school is on a bus route to Stevenage Town Centre. We had a lot of cars and school coaches parking outside the gates. It could be quite chaotic at times but we now have a lot of children getting involved in the Park and Stride scheme. Our school coaches are also parking a little further down the road and the pupils are walking the last bit of their journey. As a result, the buses find it easier to get up and down the road outside.’

2. Campaign in a Box supports secondary school pupils to develop their own walk to school campaign, consider local environmental issues, and take action to raise walking levels. It promotes citizenship skills and is designed to provide opportunities for young people to get involved in decision-making in their community. The work is all student-led, facilitated by a Living Streets staff member, with young people deciding their campaign aims and how to achieve them.

5 For example, students at St Peters College in Redcar and Cleveland developed a campaign aimed at Year 7 pupils. They set up a walking competition between school houses. A baseline survey by the team showed a walking rate of 45%, rising to 61.5% during the competition week.

3. Free your Feet is a week long challenge for secondary schools to get more students walking. Evaluation of Free Your Feet has found that it generates an average of 4.9% sustained modal shift beyond the end of the walking challenge week, achieving 25% sustained modal shift in one school. In 2011, 319 schools across the UK took part in Free Your Feet, from Edinburgh in the north to the Channel Islands in the south.

Sharing learning This programme will provide significant added value, through partners sharing knowledge and learning. The programme’s national steering group will manage this process, facilitated by the team of Living Streets Coordinators, and an annual meeting of the full partnership will be held. Living Streets also has access to existing networks beyond the partnership, enabling us to spread the learning nationally. Some key topics have already been identified as either areas of expertise, or of interest to share knowledge, including: – Supporting families travelling longer (but below statutory) distances who are no longer entitled to school transport; – Developing park and stride schemes; – Guidance from experienced engineers, for implementing effective public realm improvements.

A practical ‘best practice guidelines’ document will be produced towards the end of the project, based on learning from the work. It will be available online and promoted to professionals at a dissemination event.

SECTION B – The local challenge

B1. The local context

The school run increases traffic levels, congestion (particularly in the morning rush hour) and carbon emissions in all partner local authority areas. As a short, regular trip, the journey to school represents an excellent opportunity to change behaviour by tackling the barriers to change. This is demonstrated through the success of Living Streets’ pilot work in Hertfordshire.

Impact of the school run on traffic flows and congestion Evidence from partners demonstrates that, in the local context, school run traffic has a significant impact on the economy, in particular increasing traffic flows and congestion at key times and in key locations.

For example, in depth school traffic flow analysis comparing traffic flows during the year against school holiday times was undertaken by Hertfordshire County Council in 2006. The overall traffic reduction during school holiday times, based on a five day, 16 hour (6am to 10pm) count, was 6%. However, based on the am peak flow (traffic flow between 7 and 9 am) - which is the better indicator as it captures the main bulk of school traffic - the overall average traffic reduction was 15.5%.

Further analysis of the am peak flow changes shows a much larger average percentage change during some school holiday periods. Summer 2005 showed an average 20.9% change in traffic flows between the week before half term and half term week, and then the half term week and the week after half term.

6 Furthermore, the analysis showed significant variations between individual sites (averaged for all terms). Five sites were identified that experienced an average change in excess of 25%, with one reaching 46.5%. These sites were a mix of rural and urban and two of the five sites were identified as being the sites of clusters of schools.

This analysis highlights issues that the programme will tackle: – As well as having an overall impact on increased traffic flows, the school run has a particularly significant effect on congestion, journey times and access to local economic centres (e.g. retail, industrial) in high pressure locations. It is these locations that we will particularly seek to target through our work. – While some congestion locations will correlate with school clusters, in other cases we may find that target schools are not directly alongside the congestion they cause.

This issue is expected to get worse over the coming years. In Hartlepool, recent studies have estimated that traffic will increase by 10% over the next 15 years. Similarly, in Stoke City traffic modelling found that demand for travel will continue to increase, with significant link and junction efficiency problems in hotspot locations. Without action, costs of congestion will increase and growth in the economy will be suppressed.

Impact of the school run in specific locations The school run impacts on network efficiency on crucial routes and a range of employment sites and areas of economic growth in our target local authority areas. All partners are considering locations where the school run is impacting on journey times, economic development and/or local economies. This will define target areas and identify those schools that will be invited to take part. For example: – In South Durham, a new Hitachi development at Newton Aycliff Industrial Park (where the HS2 carriages will be built) will lead to the creation of 7,000 new jobs, but will place significant new pressures on the network. Reducing traffic caused by nearby schools will free up the network and help accommodate the additional traffic from this increased economic activity. – In Hampshire, West Fareham suffers from pockets of congestion, with parents driving on to work via the M27/M3 commuter route. Brookfield School is located in this area. It is one of the largest secondary schools in the county and situated on a road which suffers from speeding traffic, leading to safety issues. – Blackpool Sixth Form College, Collegiate High School and Highfurlong Special School are located next to each other on a busy stretch of road in Blackpool, with an industrial estate across the road. The Sixth Form has recently invested in new buildings and facilities, expanding its student numbers and increasing traffic and parking pressure as a result.

This local analysis will enable us to target schools located where the greatest benefits can be achieved to support local economies and reduce congestion.

Impact of the school run on other local issues Making the school run more sustainable will also tackle other local issues. Hartlepool’s Local Transport Plan 3 (LTP3), for example, aims to ‘contribute to better safety, security and health and longer life expectancy by reducing the risk of death, injury or illness arising from transport, and by promoting travel modes that are beneficial to health’. Safety messages will be integrated into our messages, and actions to reduce congestion at the school gates will also reduce collision risk at the start and end of the school day. Similarly, increased walking will benefit the health of all participants.

B2. Evidence

Statistical evidence also demonstrates that, while local issues vary, in every case significant local economic benefits could be achieved through this initiative.

7 Vehicle journey times and congestion “Some types of schemes that show good welfare returns, such as …walking and cycling, will also have environmental benefits due to their….impacts on congestion reduction.” The Eddington Transport Study, December 2006

Reducing lost productive time by improving journey time reliability on key parts of the strategic road network for business, freight and communities is crucial to developing local economies.

Average vehicle journey times (flow weighted) during the weekday morning peak on locally managed roads2 Buckinghamshire Local authority Local authority Stoke on Trent West Sussex Hertfordshire Hampshire Hartlepool Tameside Blackpool Leicester Durham Wirral

Average 3.36 2.11 1.82 1.86 1.76 2.13 3.62 3.12 3.72 1.93 2.54 journey times % change 5.0 -0.3 1.0 -1.1 1.9 2.8 0.5 1.6 1.6 -1.9 -0.1 2009/10 – 2010/11 Key: Red = worse than national average; amber = equivalent to national average

The majority of partners showed an increase in journey times between 2009/10 and 2010/11, above the national average of -0.1%. This is particularly marked in Blackpool, for example, showing an increase of 5%. Local evidence suggests that the reasons for these challenges vary between areas. In Stoke City, for example, the unique polycentric geography means that principal routes have slow average journey speeds and high congestion in the peak hours due to complex demands, although many trips are short. The network, as a result, is operating very inefficiently. Car journey times into the city centre in non term time are 73% shorter than during term time (March: 3.34 minutes per mile; August 2.45 minutes per mile).

Average vehicle speeds (flow weighted) during the weekday morning peak on locally managed A roads Hampshire Stoke on T Authority Authority Hartlepool W Sussex Tameside Blackpool Leicester Durham Bucks Wirral Local Herts

Average 17.8 28.4 33.0 32.3 34.0 28.2 16.6 19.2 16.1 31.2 23.6 vehicle speeds % change -4.7 0.3 -1.0 1.1 -1.8 -2.8 -0.5 -1.6 -1.5 1.9 0.1 2009/10 – 2010/11

Similarly, many of the partners demonstrate issues with vehicle speeds during peak hours below the English average and seven partners showing a reduction in average speed between 2009/10 and 2010/11.

Climate Change “In the case of climate change, individual preferences play a particularly important role. [Avoiding dangerous climate change] will take behavioural change by individuals and communities, particularly in relation to their housing, transport and food consumption decisions.” The Stern Review, October 2006

2 Table 1 and Table 2 source: DfT congestion data, November 2011

8 CO2 emissions by partner local authority, 20093 Hampshire Stoke on T Authority Authority Hartlepool W Sussex Tameside Blackpool Leicester Durham Bucks Wirral Local Herts

Total 710 3,550 3,516 10,02 831 7,239 1,763 1,542 1,133 4,908 1,644 emissions 7 % transport 18.3 39.4 27.9 33.3 19.4 36.2 18.5 21.6 24.2 32.2 25 emissions Per capita 5.1 7.2 6.9 7.8 9.1 6.6 5.8 6.5 5.3 6.2 5.3 emissions

Nationally, 27% of end-user emissions were attributed to road transport. Interestingly, while Buckinghamshire, Hampshire and West Sussex appear to have fewer problems with vehicle speeds and journey times, they are among those with the highest percentage of emissions attributable to transport.

The Sustainable Development Commission estimates that the carbon footprint of the English schools sector is 9.4 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents each year. School travel forms 16% of a school’s carbon footprint, around half of which is due to the home-school journey4.

The school run – an opportunity to change behaviour The journey to school is a short journey that can be taken more sustainably, and is therefore a significant contributor to network inefficiency, particularly during the morning peak. Over 30% of primary aged children live less than half a mile and a further 20% travel between 0.5 and 1 mile5. 16% of school journeys under a mile are driven to school, a distance that could be walked within 20 minutes6. Similarly, of secondary aged children 53% travel less than 1.5 miles.

The DfT Behavioural Insights Toolkit (November 2011) uses evidence from the literature on behavioural insights. It states that ‘Targeted communications and marketing can be effective, over time, in bringing about a change in attitudes’. It identifies key features of campaigns that have been successful in changing attitudes, which reflect our proposed approach here: – ‘They are targeted at particular groups in the population, and carry a message that is relevant and meaningful to that group.’ By targeting a specific journey, taken by families, we will ensure that the messages have maximum impact with our audience. Schools also have existing systems and networks that are excellent for communicating our messages. – ‘They highlight the implications of current or future behaviour for the individual.’ Different benefits of walking will be promoted each year, with appropriate messages developed and resources designed to promote the message to our target audience. – ‘They are introduced alongside measures that address other barriers to change.’ Barriers to walking range from individual circumstances, broad perceptions of convenience and safety and practical reasons such as the provision of crossings and poor lighting – so taking steps to improve pedestrian infrastructure can help improve this perception. Similarly 62% of primary aged children said the main reason they did not walk was because it was too far7. This is often a perception issue, as the statistics above show: part of the solution is to get people to try their walk, so they can find out how easy it is to do; promotional events can help in demonstrating this.

3 Unit: Kt CO2; Source: 2009 Carbon Dioxide Emissions at local authority and regional level, DECC, 2011 4 5 , Department for Children, School and Families, 2009 6 DfT, 2009 7 Living Streets, 2011

9 – ‘They use an appropriate messenger to communicate information.’ A ‘trusted independent source’ is recommended, stating ‘information provision is not necessarily a job for government or local authorities, and there are advantages to an ‘extended sales force’ of external individuals and organisations performing this role.’ Living Streets is an excellent organisation to act as our ‘extended sales force’, with a strong track reputation and track record around walking, including walking to school.

Other benefits A range of other benefits will also be seen as through increased levels of walking to school as a result of this programme: – Air quality. It is estimated that the health impact of man-made particulate air pollution experienced in the UK in 2005 cost between £8.5 billion and £20.2 billion a year8. Road transport produces an estimated 50% of total emissions of nitrogen oxide and is a major source of carbon monoxide. On short journeys like the school run, car engines and catalysts do not reach their optimum operating temperature, causing greater air pollution. – Road safety. Walking to school allows children to practice road safety skills while supervised, before they get older and start travelling independently9. The most recent report on child casualties shows an average of 180 reported KSI at age 10 compared to 310 reported KSI for ages 11 to 1510, reflecting an increase when independent travel is more common. – Social. Walking to school allows children time with their family and friends and can help improve a child’s social development in future years11. The benefits can also be felt in the classroom. For example, an American study found that after as little as five minutes of moderate to vigorous activity (i.e. running, walking), teachers reported that the children were able to get more done and maths fluency increased12. – Health. The National Child Measurement programme shows that over a third of children in year 6 at primary school are overweight or obese. Direct costs of obese and overweight individuals are estimated to be £4.2 billion and Foresight forecast these will more than double by 205013. Three out of ten boys and four out of ten girls do not take the recommended minimum of one hour a day of physical activity14: a mile walk each way would achieve two-thirds of the recommended daily activity.

On the basis of this local and statistical evidence there is a strong link – particularly in specific target areas in each local authority area – between issues such as congestion, increased journey times and school run traffic. Furthermore, the nature of the school run – a short, regular journey – means it provides an excellent opportunity for modal shift. The programme has been set up to reflect best practice in effecting behaviour change.

B3. Objectives

The following aim and SMART objectives are based on Living Streets experience of delivering the pilot project in Hertfordshire. Associated targets and outcomes are in D1, with the package description providing more detail about how they will be achieved.

Aim The Walk to School Outreach programme will support a sustained increase in the numbers of children walking to school. These increases will be achieved in target areas where there will be a resulting economic benefit.

8 Defra, The Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, 2007 9 Living Streets, 2008 10 Department for Transport, 2008 11 Tolley, 2003 12 Maeda & Randall, 2003 13 Healthy Weight, Healthy Lives, Department of Health, 2008 14 Craig & Shelton, 2008

10 Objectives In each local authority area, each year: – Identify target areas (1 in year one and 3 in each subsequent year) where making the school run more sustainable will achieve the greatest economic benefits. – Work with primary schools in these areas, providing support to deliver WoW. – Work with secondary schools in these areas, providing support to deliver Free Your Feet and/or Campaign in a Box as appropriate to the local circumstances. – Provide in-depth support to schools where pedestrian infrastructure is acting as a barrier to increased walking. – Ensure wider dissemination of programme messages through events and associated local press work.

Across the project: – Annual partner meetings and produce annual monitoring/evaluation reports, to facilitate sharing of emerging partner knowledge; – National sharing of learning with professionals in the final year of the project through a best practice document and event.

Selecting target areas In achieving our aim, objectives, targets and outcomes, selecting target areas where the greatest impact can be achieved will be crucial. All partners are identifying target locations. Each local authority monitors these issues in different ways, but some key themes have emerged, to inform our selection framework.

Key criteria: – Statistical correlation between school holidays and reduced peak traffic flow, based on analysis of traffic count data. – Statistical identification of high car use for the school run (e.g. through school census data), and location close to (or on key route to) key employment site/retail centre. – Locations with high car usage coupled with the greatest potential to change (e.g. high car use in a 1-2 mile radius).

Secondary criteria: – Schools and businesses clustered in Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs). – Road safety issues affecting the school, and/or nearby businesses/communities. – Poor health/low levels of physical activity identified in the school community (e.g. using school census data and health sector indicators).

SECTION C – The package bid

C1. Package description

Our package of measures has been developed to remove barriers to walking, enhanced by delivery of three proven school-based interventions, based on a successful pilot project by Living Streets in Hertfordshire. Focusing on modal shift for the school journey gives us a clear focus on one journey type.

Package 1: Outreach workers and programme management This package includes monitoring and evaluation (see question E4), as well as national project steering group delivery and sharing learning (see E1).

Programme management and staff recruitment will be delivered by Living Streets, which has extensive experience of managing complex programmes, and existing systems (e.g. financial, project management) to support this. 14 Coordinators will be recruited (one for each local authority area, with two for Durham, Hertfordshire and Hampshire) along with three team managers (to each line manage four or five Coordinators), and an administration support post. The Head of School Projects will oversee delivery.

11 An annual assessment of target locations will take place in each local authority area. An average of one target area will be identified for the first year (allowing time for recruitment, and project set up), rising to an average of three areas per local authority in subsequent years.

Package 2: Identifying and tackling barriers In each local authority area, schools that suffer from physical barriers to walking will be identified for in-depth support (6 in year 1 and 10 in years 2 and 3). Coordinators will support the school, local authority and/or community to identify and tackle barriers to walking. Interventions will include: – Direct support for each participating school to identify barriers. Parents, teachers and pupils will be engaged – methods will vary but are expected to include focus groups, on street audits, surveys, informal meetings and feedback. – Improvements implemented in our target locations, based on the needs of the local community. A small budget will be held by each Coordinator to aid small scale improvements, or purchase equipment for community led action (e.g equipment for a community litter pick). Local contributions will also be crucial to delivery here, enabling walking environment improvements, influenced by community needs.

Package 3: WoW15 The package (described in more detail above) will be provided to an average of 15 schools in year 1, 38 in year 2 and 61 in year 3 per local authority, depending on local needs (cumulative totals: once a school has joined they will be provided with resources for the remainder of the programme) and will include collectible WoW badges, whiteboard monitoring technology and certificates for children walking set numbers of school journeys, meaning those that walk more gain greater rewards. Coordinator support will also be provided to ensure success.

Package 4: Free your Feet / Campaign in a Box Free Your Feet resources will be provided to an average of 3 schools in year 1, 8 in year 2 and 13 in year 3 per local authority (cumulative totals), including posters, a railing banner, record cards for participating students, a PowerPoint presentation for assemblies or foyer screens and a high street voucher, which will be used as a prize for one participating pupil. Monitoring tools will also be provided, for use by the pupils.

Campaign in a Box will be provided to an average of 1 school in year 1 and 2 schools in subsequent years per local authority. This will include direct support for participating secondary schools, for pupils to develop and deliver their campaign to get their peers walking to school more. It includes facilitating volunteer/ in class sessions (and on-street audit work, identifying local public realm issues, if appropriate). We will also provide resources, including supporting booklets and action cards, as well as access to web resources (including a blog site) for the pupil team to update. Pupil action groups are also provided with small funds to help implement their campaign.

Package 5: Marketing and promotion At the national level, our marketing and promotion will include a web presence, including via www.walktoschool.org.uk. Living Streets is currently delivering an online strategy that will prioritise building communities.

Production of a best practice guidelines document in the final year of the programme will look to bring together the learning from our work into a practical guide. This will be disseminated via www.walktoschool.org.uk, and promoted via the regular Walk to School and Living Streets ebulletin (currently received by over 13,500 people). An event for professionals in the final year will also be used to promote our learning.

15 NB Buckinghamshire deliver their own walking scheme, Going for Gold, which has the same objectives. This will continue to be delivered through this programme, to maintain local momentum.

12 Events will take place in every local authority area each year. Living Streets will coordinate communications and press for the events, liaising closely with local authority communications/press departments and ensuring promotional opportunities are maximised.

C2. Package costs

Scheme element 1 £K 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total Outreach workers/ Revenue 0 788 1,164 1,207 3159 prog management Capital 0 0 0 0 0 Scheme element 2 £K 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total Identifying/tackling Revenue 0 140 144 149 433 barriers Capital 0 Scheme element 3 £K 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total WoW Revenue 0 88 225 369 682 Capital 0 Scheme element 4 £K 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total Campaign in a Box Revenue 0 40 41 57 138 Free your Feet Capital 0 Scheme element 5 £K 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total Marketing and Revenue 0 109 118 122 349 promotion Capital 0 GRAND TOTAL 4761

C3. Rationale and strategic fit

Rationale The matrix below takes the key issues identified in section B, considers key solutions and demonstrates how our proposed outputs will each contribute to tackling the problem.

Issue Key solution Outputs

Walking Infrastructure Marketing and interventions improvements Promotion 1. Support Reduce demand for Walking promotion for Optimise pedestrian/ Public: awareness economic car-based short trips, short trips, as part of traffic flows, to raising growth not related to the school run. encourage use of most Professionals: sharing economic growth. appropriate transport best practice. mode. 2. Improve Reduce demand (in Walking promotion for Optimise pedestrian/ Public: awareness journey particular school run short trips. traffic flows, to raising times/ traffic during term encourage use of most Professionals: sharing reliability times) appropriate transport best practice. mode. 3. Improve Reduce demand Walking promotion for Optimise pedestrian/ Public: awareness network short trips. traffic flows, to raising efficiency encourage use of most Professionals: sharing appropriate transport best practice. mode. 4. Carbon Reduce car use Sustainable travel Making it easier to Public: awareness emissions/ replacing car use. walk for short trips. raising air quality Professionals: sharing best practice. 5. Road Road safety Safety messages Some infrastructure safety/ information/training. integrated into primary improvements will reducing and secondary school focus on safety, e.g. collisions interventions. Training improved crossing delivered by local points. authorities if appropriate. 6. Child/ Increased levels of Walking promotion for Encouraging healthy Public: awareness family active travel short trips. activity through raising health improved infrastructure.

13 Strategic fit All local authority partners recognise the link between congestion and the economy, at strategic level. For all partners breaking this link is a Local Transport Plan objective; in some areas, local circumstances mean other strategic documents also refer to the issue.

For example, a clear relationship is evident between DfT’s goals and those contained in County Durham’s LTP3, Regeneration Statement, Sustainable Communities Strategy and the County Durham Plan. Prominent in our common approach is the aspiration to support economic growth through regeneration. Alongside this headline objective are the goals of reducing carbon emissions, contributing to better safety, security and health, promoting equal opportunity, improving accessibility and improving the quality of life and a healthy natural environment. The proposed package of measures to encourage young people to walk to school supports these.

Similarly, in Wirral’s LTP3, Goal Two is to ‘Provide and promote a clean, low emission transport system which is resilient to changes to climate and oil availability’. Goal Four is to ‘Ensure equality of travel opportunity for all, through a transport system that allows people to connect easily with employment, education, healthcare, other essential services and leisure and recreational opportunities’.

There are links with a range of plans and strategies among the partner authorities, depending on identified local needs. To take some examples: – In Buckinghamshire, High Wycome Town Centre Masterplan identifies local road congestion as a problem for 85% of businesses and a significant problem for 45% with the school run perceived to be the greatest congestion source. Similarly, in Stoke on Trent the North Staffordshire Chamber of Commerce & Industry Business Manifesto says that ‘road traffic congestion [is] imposing damaging restraints on the local economy’. – In Hertfordshire, promoting sustainable travel for short trips has been identified as a key priority. A separate walking strategy has been developed to support this. Promoting walking to schools is part of this strategy, alongside improving routes to schools to ensure walking is easy and safe. The county’s 2009 travel survey showed that half of primary aged pupils walked to school whilst this drops to less than half of secondary school pupils (47%) and sixth form (46%) students. – Leicester City Council has identified poor health and a growing youth population as a local issue. The 0-18 year old population is growing more quickly than the national average - of these children and young people there are already high levels of overweight and obesity, up to nearly 50% in some wards. The LTP has specifically highlighted the need to increase activity levels in schools (along with individuals and businesses) to combat this.

As with all local authority strategies, equalities impact assessments have been undertaken to ensure that they do not impact negatively on particular groups within the community. This work will ensure that such commitments are strengthened. Similarly, the bid’s geographical and adjacent areas will not be adversely affected, and where for example interventions are on a council boundary we will seek to engage the bordering council to maximise our impact.

C4. Community support.

Schools survey A survey, sent to schools in potential target areas, demonstrates that their needs match those identified by the partnership. 168 responses were received, providing an excellent overview of the issues experienced by schools in those locations where we would seek to change behaviour. The full survey results can be found in Appendix 2.

14 We asked the respondents to tell us about any issues their school experiences on the school run. The top three responses were ‘traffic congestion at the school gates’ (74.5%), ‘issues with local residents regarding traffic/congestion near the school’ (68.3%) and ‘traffic congestion on nearby roads’ (65.2%).

These responses are also reflected in some of the additional comments provided. Lisa Sarikaya, Belgrave St Bartholomew's Academy, Stoke on Trent said, ‘Major problem with parents parking in dangerous places to drop children off’. Others identify barriers to walking in the local environment. Mark Pratt from Holbrook Primary School, Horsham, West Sussex said ‘Confusion on crossing points as we have two places where crossing can happen but only one has crossing patrol’.

Some respondents identified the need for additional support to effect behaviour change. Monica Connor, from St. Joseph's RCVA Primary School, Bishop Auckland said, ‘At the moment we are not part of any of the incentives to promote walking/cycling to school etc but with support and advice perhaps something could be organised and put into place.’

We also asked respondents, ‘Please tell us about what support would be most valuable to encourage people to walk to your school’. The most popular responses were ‘direct support, to work with parents’ (68.2%), ‘resources to promote walking’ (62.3%) and ‘direct support to work with the school community’ (50%).

The proposed package of measures has been set up to meet these identified needs directly, while also having a direct positive impact on wider economic and congestion issues, in the areas around our target schools.

School travel plans Almost all target schools have School Travel Plans, offering an excellent starting point for understanding local needs. For example, in Wirral the following broad themes have been identified: – Free promotional projects/resources which are easy to roll out, meet the needs of the school community and link to their curriculum. – Physical measures that help address safety concerns or potential barriers to sustainable travel.

15 – Access to education programmes, such as road safety education, providing the school community with the tools to change their travel habits safely.

These reflect core support package elements in this programme.

Community interests At the heart of Living Streets’ methodology and values are the importance of understanding, communicating and taking action on community interests. Living Streets’ Hertfordshire pilot project demonstrates the significant impact that can be achieved through a coherent, locally responsive package of support measures.

The attached example letters of support (Appendix 3 – all letters available on request) demonstrate the breadth of support and potential involvement in our activities. They include economic interests (e.g. Coast to Capital Local Enterprise Partnership, who wish to reduce congestion on behalf of the employers they represent), Health (e.g. NHS Sussex, where the West Sussex Public Health Plan links with our objectives), and local community involvement (e.g. Bishop Auckland and Shildon Area Action Partnership, who are keen to help tackle local problems). A number of schools have also provided letters, some of whom have also been involved in developing our programme through the schools survey.

SECTION D – Value for money

D1. Outcomes and value for money

Evidence of benefit cost ratios for walking and cycling interventions demonstrates their value for money. For example, ‘Value for Money: An Economic Assessment of Investment in Walking and Cycling’16 reviewed the evidence base from both peer reviewed and grey literature and found that, ‘The median result for all data identified is 13:1 and for UK data alone the median figure is higher, at 19:1’.

Targets The following targets will be achieved by the end of the project (for annual milestones see E2) and will be measured and monitored through the programme: – 98 areas identified and targeted, where we know that economic benefits can be achieved through making the school journey more sustainable (we may work in some areas for more than one year, where issues are particularly entrenched). – An average 15 percentage point increase in regular (3 days or more) school journeys made on foot in 854 target primary schools. – An average 5 percentage point increase in regular (3 days or more) school journeys made on foot in 182 target secondary schools. – 364 school communities supported to identify potential improvements to their walking environment, with improvements implemented in 90 locations. – Annual sharing of learning across the partnership, and national dissemination of best practice in the final year of the programme.

Outcomes Our target outcomes will be: – Improved economic performance in our target areas: new investment/developments, current/projected business startups in our target areas. – 3.59 thousand tonnes of CO2 saved as a result of increased walking to school17.

16 Dr Adrian Davis, March 2010, for Government Office for the South West and the Department of Health 17 Assumptions for outcomes: target increases in walking reached on an average of 3 days per week. Primary schools: average 234 pupils, 5km distance travelled (3.4km park and stride). Secondary schools: average 1006 pupils, 8.4km travelled (6.8km park and stride); park and stride reducing car travel by an average of 1.6km per journey.

16 – 4.2m journeys to school converted from car to walking and 2.8m converted to park and stride, contributing to reduced congestion and reduced journey times on key target routes in each local authority area, particularly during the morning peak. – A safer environment and reduced congestion around the school – benefitting the school community and other local stakeholders. – Improved health for participating children and their families, as well as a contribution to reduced childhood obesity, resulting from increased active travel. – Improved local air quality. The targets and outcomes are based on the findings from the successful Hertfordshire pilot, the independent 2009 evaluation of WoW, evaluation of Living Streets’ Free your Feet and Campaign in a Box interventions, and Living Streets’ report ‘Making the Case for Investment in the Walking Environment (researched by a multi-disciplinary team of experts from the University of the West of England and Cavill Associates).

Additional Local Sustainable Transport Funding will enable us to deliver national and global benefits over and above those already planned in Local Transport Plans and/or funded from alternative sources.

D2. Financial sustainability

Sustaining behaviour change A key project objective will be to support sustained behaviour change, offering benefits well beyond the life of this funding. Our interventions are based on evidence from DfT’s Behavioural Insights Toolkit and will be achieved in a number of ways: – Walking challenges such as WoW and Free your Feet have a demonstrable track record of effecting long term changes in travel behaviour and tackling barriers such as overestimating the time taken to walk to school. – The school community will be upskilled to run their own Walk to School promotions and schools will be encouraged to support each other via networks. – Physical improvements to the walking environment will continue to make walking to school easier and/or safer, in the locations where improvements are implemented. Living Streets has a track record of success in achieving this. The evaluation of Living Streets’ Fitter for Walking project, which sought to support communities to improve their local environment and increase walking18, found evidence of increased walking beyond the interventions.

Sustaining financial support Financial support will come from a variety of sources. Sharing of knowledge and learning on sustainability issues will form part of this project. For example: – Some local authority strategic plans mean there will be a continued commitment to public realm improvement, such as Local Transport Plan budgets (e.g. in Hartlepool). – Other local authorities expect continued investment in support for schools, such as officer time (e.g. School Travel Plan Officer post in Stoke City and School Travel Planning in Wirral) and Safe Routes to School Initiatives (e.g. Hertfordshire). – Other models of support have also been explored by some partners. For example Hampshire has surveyed schools and found that 30% would be willing to pay a small annual fee for school travel services through the council, and many more would be interested if it weren’t for their financial circumstances. – Partnership working may also be explored, for example with public health once it has fully moved to the local authority. In Blackpool, the Primary Care Trust has already supported the Cycling Towns Programme, and is a likely partner for this work.

Living Streets also provides direct support for schools to fund their continued involvement in our initiatives, once it is embedded. For example, they have recently launched a guide

18 by the British Heart Foundation National Centre for Physical Activity and Health (School of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences), Loughborough University

17 for schools to raise the funds for covering the cost of involvement in WoW, through events, local private sector sponsorship and the like.

SECTION E – Deliverability

E1. Implementation

How implementation will be managed A robust governance structure has been agreed between all partners, to manage the work and ensure effective delivery. Durham CC national programme (accountable body) steering group

Living Streets – programme manager

partner local authority Local stakeholders

Project Coordinator

Roles and Responsibilities The national programme steering group will be a smaller group than the full partnership, to ensure effective programme oversight. It will consist of Durham County Council (as the accountable body), Living Streets (as the programme manager, and employer of all project coordinators) and representatives of four partner local authorities (Blackpool, Hartlepool, Hertfordshire and Stoke on Trent). It will ensure: i. Oversight of the national programme, through six-monthly meetings. ii. Appropriate input from local stakeholders at national level, where this may inform more effective national delivery. iii. Effective sharing of learning and information across the whole partnership.

The partner local authorities will provide a link officer to act as the main point of contact for their local Walk to School Coordinator, as described above. Nationally, all partners will participate in an annual partnership meeting, building on the partnership meeting that has already taken place, to aid information sharing. A memorandum of understanding (MoU) between all partner local authorities (with the exception of Durham) and Living Streets is being put in place (see Appendix 4 for an example MoU).

Durham County Council will be the responsible body for the programme, acting as the direct liaison with DfT, with support from all partners as described above. An agreement is being put in place between Durham and Living Streets, to manage this relationship.

Living Streets will lead on interventions in each target local authority area. This role will include: i. Recruitment (in the first 3 months) and line management of programme team, including day to day support, monthly supervision meetings, annual appraisals, training and development. ii. The Head of School Projects will provide overall strategic management of the programme delivery (including ensuring consistent delivery) including team meetings and line management for team managers. They will be the key relationship manager for Durham County Council, to ensure we are able to respond fully to queries and requirements from DfT, including reports, meetings and informal updates.

18 iii. Walk to School Coordinators will provide liaison with each partner authority, including reports and informal updates and event support. They will recruit and provide hands- on, intensive support to participating schools including resource distribution. Responsibilities are identified against specific outputs in section E2, below.

E2. Output milestones

Output 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Target (by 2014-15, unless otherwise stated) 1. Programme Management Recruit project staff First 3 Living Streets (LS): 19 staff recruited months in first 3 months. Termly LS team meetings, for 2 3 3 LS: 8 team meetings information sharing/knowledge update. 2 national project steering group and 1 3 3 3 LS/LA partners: 9 in total – steering full partnership meeting per annum. group every 6 months, full partnership annual. Agree target areas annually (may work in c.14 c. 42 c. 42 LS/LA partners: 98 target areas. some areas over more than 1 year) areas areas areas Quarterly programme reports/meetings 3 4 4 LS (Head of Walk to School): 11 to Durham CC reports/meetings, for Durham CC Termly reports by Coordinators to local 28 42 42 LS (All Coordinators): 112 reports by authority partners LS Coordinators Monitoring/Evaluation of intervention 1 1 1 LS Nationally: annual evaluation reports. 2. Infrastructure improvements Potential improvements identified with all 84 140 140 LS/local authorities: 364 locations. schools where intensive support is Identification through formal/informal provided. stakeholder feedback. Improvements to walking environment 10 40 40 Local authorities: 90 improvements implemented in target areas. implemented (some may also be community led); match funding secured where appropriate. Walking interventions: 3. WoW; 4. Campaign in a Box and Free Your Feet Provide school contact details/data; - - - Local authorities: April to Jul each assist identifying schools for intensive year. support. Recruit primary and secondary schools LS: Target 1,036 schools in total. in target areas and implement 252 644 1,036 Recruited Sept – Nov yr 1, Apr to Jul interventions including resource yrs 2 and 3. Implement Sept to Jul distribution and telephone/email support each year (to March 2015 in final year) 5. Marketing and promotion Email newsletter for participating schools 2 3 3 LS: 8 newsletters distributed. Web presence on national Walk to Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing LS: Ongoing – set up in year 1 School website Coordination of WTS regional events in 14 14 14 LS Coordinators: 42 events each local authority area Coordinate communications/press for 14 14 14 LS: 42 events (local authority support Walk to School events; liaise with LA to identify relevant local communications/press departments. communications channels) Best practice guidelines document - - 1 1 document produced, by end of the produced and disseminated. project Dissemination event - - 1 1 event for practitioners

E3. Summary of key risks

Risk Owner Impact Risk Status Mitigation Initiatives Living HIGH LOW - Ensure close working with schools to don’t work Streets Significant impact All initiatives have identify any problems early. or meet on ability to been evaluated, or - Ensure stakeholder involvement from the objectives achieve objectives. based on start, so interventions are appropriate. successful pilot. Schools in Local MEDIUM MEDIUM - Schools sign short Memorandum of target authority Targeted approach - Living Streets has Understanding explaining their role and areas do partners means it will be extensive committing to the programme. not want to important to work experience of - It will be made as easy as possible for participate with key schools, recruiting schools. schools to participate (particularly in terms

19 that will support - Local authorities of school staff time required). delivery of our will support outcomes. recruitment. Resources Living MEDIUM LOW - Project Coordinator will maintain contact aren’t used Streets The resources Resources have with schools to check on use of resources. as must be used as been used and - Any changes by school need to be agreed intended intended for this evaluated, and with project coordinator or project manager project to work. risks of incorrect first use are well - In the case of incorrect use, Coordinator understood. will meet with Head Teacher or main contact to deal with any issues. Loss of Living MEDIUM MEDIUM - Knowledge management, e.g. library, key staff Streets The impact would Staff changes in filing, information technology, ensuring (including depend on the time any partner information is put in writing. sick of year. organisation should - Living Streets: team managers will be used leave). be covered by to ensure continued delivery, with support Loss of other colleagues. from other Coordinators if required. knowledge - Local authority partners to ensure that / expertise/ other officers are informed about project, in reputation. case key contact is not available. Failure to Living HIGH LOW - Milestones will ensure regular monitoring achieve Streets/ Would mean failure All initiatives have and feedback, so any potential failures can outcomes Local to successfully been evaluated, or be addressed. authority deliver project based on - Programme steering group will provide partners successful pilot. national monitoring mechanism. Failure to Local LOW MEDIUM - Local authority partners have considered secure authority Given the nature of All match funding available match funding as part of project match partners/ the project, our identified directly development. funding Living match funding will by local authorities. - Memoranda of understanding ensure Streets only be secured commitment to providing match. once we have - Progress against our match funding targets established local will be monitored, as part of project community needs. monitoring. - We will also consider what communities can do themselves to improve their environment, beyond local authority spend.

E4. Project evaluation

Monitoring and evaluation will measure progress against our objectives, at the local and national level. Quarterly reports by Living Streets Coordinators to their local authority partners will be produced, as well as a quarterly report from Living Streets nationally, to Durham County Council. Annual evaluation reports will be produced and provided to DfT.

Progress monitoring against our targets and milestones will be integral to the project – for example, the resources we provide to our target schools will include monitoring tools, such as our innovative whiteboard technology and support to use ‘hands up’ surveys.

Qualitative evaluation with a sample of key stakeholders (pupils, parents and the school community and businesses located in our target areas in particular) will exemplify the outcomes achieved by the end of the programme’s delivery. For example: – Automatic data counters will be used to monitor changes in congestion and vehicle speed, and in particular changes in peak morning flows during school holiday times. – Survey data will be collected in a sample of target locations, including the school community and the wider business community nearby, to establish the perceived effects on congestion, walking environment and perceptions of the interventions. – Qualitative data will be collected in target schools and businesses in a sample of locations.

Evaluation reports will be presented at national steering group meetings, ensuring that learning is fed back into project delivery. A final evaluation report will be produced at the end of the project and provided to DfT.

In addition, all partners confirm their willingness to co-operate with the Department in evaluating the Fund programme’s benefits.