Home to School Transport Review - Equality impact assessment (EIA) 2022-23

Equality Impact Assessments (EIAs) are public documents. EIAs accompanying reports going to County Councillors for decisions are published with the committee papers on our website and are available in hard copy at the relevant meeting. To help people to find completed EIAs we also publish them in the Equality and Diversity section of our website. This will help people to see for themselves how we have paid due regard in order to meet statutory requirements.

Name of Directorate and Service Area	Inclusion - CYPS Admissions – CYPS
Lead Officer and contact details	Jane Le Sage, AD Inclusion Judith Kirk - CYPS
Names and roles of other people involved in carrying out the EIA	Gail Chester - SEND Transport Manager William Burchill - Admissions Manager
How will you pay due regard? e.g. working group, individual officer	All proposed changes were subject to a formal public consultation of no shorter than 28 Days and the recommendations if approved will influence changes to be made to the Home to School Policy. This will be signed off at Full Council on 24th July 2019 and the EIA will be Page 2 reviewed and finalised depending on the outcome of the updated Policy.
When did the due regard process start?	The original project initially started in February 2016. With the first phase to realign mainstream and SEND transport into a single policy direction Updated January 2020

Section 1. Please describe briefly what this EIA is about. (for example, are you starting a new service, changing how you do something, stopping doing something?)

This EIA is about the proposed changes to the Home to School Transport Policy following the public consultation and consideration of its impact on key groups with protected characteristics.

The Council is under statutory duties to provide Home to school transport for eligible children and it is a demands led service. Whilst mainstream growth has been minimal, SEND provision has continued to grow dramatically since the introduction of the Children & Families Act 2014 and SEND Code of Practice 2014.

The aim of the changes is to create efficiencies and where possible improve the delivery of services for existing and future individuals who access them. Proposal 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 will impact on some families from September 2019. Proposal 1 policy will not be effective in full until the September of 2020, as families have already based the school selection on the existing policy. Proposal 7 is hoped to be introduced in September 2021.

These proposals are submitted to continue to meet the requirement of providing transport provision as a statutory requirement, as governed by the Education Act 1996. However these proposals are to reduce the provision the Local Authority currently provides in excess of statutory duties, for instance, its discretionary powers.

The proposal requested for consultation are all additional discretionary arrangements which the Local Authority have historically and currently continue to provide.

Section 2. Why is this being proposed? What are the aims? What does the authority hope to achieve by it? (for example, to save money, meet increased demand, do things in a better way.)

The proposed changes are due to an increased pressure on the Transport budget and the current transport model not being sustainable going forward. These proposals were raised during the Home to School Transport changes to policy in 2018, however as the 2015 policy was not coherent between Mainstream and SEND, before any review of discretionary arrangements could commence, this discrepancy between the 2 areas needed rectification. This was achieved in May 2018.

The Local Authority intends to honour agreements made on previous policy as the statutory guidance is clear when eligibility should be assessed, and that any transport granted is based on the policy at the time of assessment. Therefore existing arrangement shall be honoured until the next assessment point, this would be primary to secondary, or secondary to post 16. The revised model is intended to remove any area of inconsistency and provide more clarity on the responsibility of the Authority to meet its statutory duty. This will also provide better outcomes for the Local Authority through effective and efficient use of resources.

The Local Authority must ensure its Home to School Transport policy is fit for purpose and is compliant with the legal requirements and code of practice, this will be reviewed on an annual basis going forward following implementation to ensure the policy is up to date and remains fit for purpose.

Section 3. What will change? What will be different for customers and/or staff?

Census data from May 2017 shows that in North Yorkshire there are 67,966 school aged (reception to year 11) children, and a further 5,433 of post 16 (years 12,13 and 14). Of these 73,399 pupils, 11,500 are currently accessing transport.

The Home to School Transport Statutory Guidance 2014 places a duty on the local authority to provide transport assistance for eligible children of statutory school age (5-16). Therefore, transport provision for pupils over 16 years old is a non-statutory duty, for instance, discretionary. However, the Local Authority still wants to offer support to ensure students can access their education provision and recognise the rural nature of North Yorkshire and the lack of public transport available.

The Local Authority rejected in 2018 to remove all discretionary transport as elected members recognised the negative impact this would have on young people and families living in North Yorkshire.

Proposal 1: Mainstream transport will only be provided for eligible children and young people attending the catchment school or the nearest school to their permanent home address.

• this proposal will reduce the number of schools a parent may request transport to, in line with statutory guidance of nearest school only. However, the proposal will still allow for Catchment schools to be included.
• this proposal will not impact on SEND, as Special schools do not carry a catchment zone, so already operate on the nearest school to meet the age, ability and aptitude of the child
• this proposal will not be effective until the start of the 2020 academic year

Proposal 2: Remove free arrangement for second home address or introduce full cost recovery of a second transport assistance

• this proposal will remove any future second address from September 2019.
• this proposal may impact families with shared parental responsibilities, the Council will recognise the home address used for the purpose of an application for a school place.

Proposal 3: Collection from pick-up points, unless medical, mobility or special educational needs require door-to-door collection.

• this proposal is to reinforce our duty in relation to the environmental impact and sustainability of transport provision.
• this will require some adjustment from families who live some distance from the main road.
• this proposal will be implemented throughout the 4-year cycle of Local Area Reviews

Proposal 4: Providing free transport for all eligible children in the county when they start school in the reception year.

• this proposal will enhance the current offer and provide assistance to families who child is born between January and August.
• this proposal is designed to reduce officers time and yearly complaints/appeals regarding the eligibility criteria
• this will allow all reception children access to education from the start of the academic year

Proposal 5: To adopt a single charge for all Discretionary Transport

• the proposal will have some impact on families who currently purchase a spare seat provision as this will be an increase on the family expenditure – however is should be noted that spare seats are not a guaranteed year on year provision, and require reapplication each academic year.
• this proposal will introduce a low income reduction for statutory aged pupils
• the current charge for spare seats is £390, and for post 16 £490. Following a decision by Executive Members and Corporate Director on 21 May 2019. The fee will increase to £600 from September 2020, with a 50 per cent low income reduction.

Proposal 6: Introduce a fee for replacement school bus passes.

• this proposal is to place value on the provision, the first pass is free, and in line with statutory guidance however the authority will be occurring administration costs when processing additional passes outside the normal distribution time.
• consideration will be given when replacements are required for reasons beyond the bearers control.

Proposal 7: Introduction of an application process for Home to School Transport

• the view is to adopt an application process to ensure that the authority is not over commissioning above and beyond requirements
• the process will need developing in partnership with families to ensure ease of use

Update 2020

All proposals are currently on track, however due to a legal challenge submitted and following the executive decision on 3rd September 2019, proposal 5 and 6 are currently suspended until further notice.

Update 2021

Following the Department for Transport guidance on the Public Service Vehicle Access Regulations (PSVAR), plans had begun to implement the proposals, but with reduced paid travel permit availability.

Proposal 4 has been implemented with positive impact.

Proposal 1 is ongoing, with some resistance.

However, the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic has changed the ability and opportunity to implement the remaining proposals at this stage.

Update 2022

The Department for Transport has still not given final instructions on the use of paid travel permits, this information is expected in early 2022.

Proposal 1 is still ongoing and will not reach full potential until 2026.

Proposal 2, 3, and 4 are now embedded practice.

Proposal 5 has been delayed due to the PSVAR situation in which the planned increase may not match post 16 until September 2022, subject to the final DfT decision.

Proposal 6 is again impacted by the PSVAR and is currently paused.

Proposal 7 is expected to be online for September 2022, with benefits starting to be achieved in September 2023.

Section 4. Involvement and consultation (What involvement and consultation has been done regarding the proposal and what are the results? What consultation will be needed and how will it be done?)

Details of the different proposals were available on our public website on our consultations page we invited you to provide your views by completing an online survey. This information was also available in easy read, alternative language or formats on request. In addition to the survey we have considered any feedback received by email, and from meetings during the consultation period (25th March – 16th June 2019).

Throughout the consultation a weekly breakdown has been provided for the policy owners to review and reflect any issues arising.

A number of public events have been arranged and the same presentation was delivered at all events to ensure the messages were consistent. The presentation has been positively received by audiences, people felt they had a better understanding of transport provision, why we have developed the proposals for change and the rationale behind this.
These events were held in:

• Scarborough
• Skipton
• Whitby
• Harrogate
• Selby
• Pickering
• Richmond
• Northallerton

The public events were held at 12-2 and 5-7 to allow those with childcare and working arrangements to opportunity to attend and engage at times which are more convenient. These event were widely published on social media and within local media and community groups.

The consultation has been promoted via the Schools E-red bag, our website, corporate Facebook and Twitter accounts. The consultation has been promoted through our parent and community group networks. In addition to the above channels we have received interest from local radio stations.

We held engagement sessions with our young people regarding the home to school transport policy and arrangement, and our gratitude to the following schools for this engagement.

• Scalby school
• Brooklands school
• Springwater school
• Tadcaster Grammar school

Section 5. What impact will this proposal have on council budgets? Will it be cost neutral, have increased cost or reduce costs?

The current financial projection for Home to School Transport is demonstrating a continuous growth which is applying budgetary pressures on ourselves to meet statutory duties.

Whilst we must discharge its responsibilities appropriately, it must also ensure that areas were we have been able to provide additional support this cannot be maintained in light of the current expenditure and growth within the transport sphere. The proposals are being put forward as areas where additional support has been given.

These proposals are expected to address the long term management of growth and budget expenditure. These proposals will not impact on the current expenditure as the local authority’s offer is based on the policy in place at the time of allocation. Therefore we are unable to remove the provision for existing users until they reach the next eligibility check point.

This would be at primary to secondary or secondary to post 16 education. If the proposals are implemented it will assist with controlling expenditure in line with our statutory responsibility, however, it is also anticipated that within proposal 7 this could be realise the potential for reducing the current automatic allocation of transport to one which is based on applications only.

These proposals will bring us closer in line with the statutory minimum requirements whilst also reflecting on the rural nature of the authority. Update 2020 Proposal 5 and 6 currently in suspension will have a negative impact on the council’s budget until a resolution is agreed and implemented.

Update 2021 

Home to school transportation requirement during the Covid-19 pandemic has prevented the impact of any changes been achieved.

Update 2022 

Ongoing pandemic situation continues to impact on the home to school transport budget. However the implementation of the proposal has brought the authority in-line with statutory responsibility to mitigate some of the growth.

Section 6. How will this proposal affect people with protected characteristics?

Section 6. How will this proposal affect people with protected characteristics?	No impact	Make things better	Make things worse	Why will it have this effect? Provide evidence from engagement, consultation and/or service user data or demographic information etc.
Age	X	X		These proposals are not based on the age of a pupil, with the exception of proposal 4, which increases the offer for children born between January and August, eliminating any discrimination based on age.
Disability		X		The legal challenge which has resulted in the suspension of proposal 5 and 6 will improve transport for person with a disability on a national level.
Sex	X			It is anticipated there would be no identifiable impact on Mainstream or SEND pupils as a result of their sex.
Race	X			It is anticipated there would be no identifiable impact on specific ethnic groups as a result of the proposals.
Gender reassignment	X			It is anticipated there would be no identifiable impact on specific groups in relation to gender reassignment as a result of the proposals
Sexual orientation	X			It is anticipated there would be no identifiable impact on specific groups in relation to sexual orientation as a result of the proposals.
Religion or belief	X			It is anticipated there would be no identifiable impact on specific groups in relation to religion or belief as a result of the proposals.
Pregnancy or maternity	X			It is anticipated there would be no identifiable impact on specific groups in relation to religion or belief as a result of the proposals.
Marriage or civil partnership	X			It is anticipated there would be no identifiable impact on specific groups in relation to religion or belief as a result of the proposals.

Section 7. How will this proposal affect people

Section 7. How will this proposal affect people who…	No impact	Make things better	Make things worse	Why will it have this effect? Provide evidence from engagement, consultation and/or service user data or demographic information etc.
Live in a rural area?	X	X	X	In respect of proposal 3 there will be an expectation that families bring their child to the safe pick up point. This could put additional responsibility onto the family. Page 7 However, consideration on the safety of the route to the collection point will be made in determining the offer. In respect of proposal 4 this may assist parent with parents whose child is not statutory school age to access education at the earliest point.
…have a low income?		X	X	Proposal 5 will increase the charge for discretionary transport. However, in aligning transport across all areas it will introduce a reduction of that charge for low income families in line with the current post 16 policy statement. Update 2020 – make things better as the proposal is currently in suspension

Section 8. Will the proposal affect anyone more because of a combination of protected characteristics? (for example, older women or young gay men) State what you think the effect may be and why, providing evidence from engagement, consultation and/or service user data or demographic information etc.

No, no combination identified at this stage.

Section 9. Next steps to address the anticipated impact. Select one of the following options and explain why this has been chosen. (Remember: we have an anticipatory duty to make reasonable adjustments so that disabled people can access services and work for us)

Section 9. Next steps to address the anticipated impact. Select one of the following options and explain why this has been chosen. (Remember: we have an anticipatory duty to make reasonable adjustments so that disabled people can access services and work for us)	Tick chosen option
1. No adverse impact - no major change needed to the proposal. There is no potential for discrimination or adverse impact identified.
2. Adverse impact - adjust the proposal - The EIA identifies potential problems or missed opportunities. We will change our proposal to reduce or remove these adverse impacts, or we will achieve our aim in another way which will not make things worse for people.
3. Adverse impact - continue the proposal - The EIA identifies potential problems or missed opportunities. We cannot change our proposal to reduce or remove these adverse impacts, nor can we achieve our aim in another way which will not make things worse for people. (There must be compelling reasons for continuing with proposals which will have the most adverse impacts. Get advice from Legal Services)
4. Actual or potential unlawful discrimination - stop and remove the proposal – The EIA identifies actual or potential unlawful discrimination. It must be stopped.
Explanation of why option has been chosen. (Include any advice given by Legal Services.) The reason why ‘Adverse impact - adjust the proposal has been selected on the proposed changes to the Home to School Transport Policy: The 2018 consultation outlined a number of areas which are above and beyond the statutory duty, these proposals have been submitted to protect the remaining areas in which we are aware that removal with have significant impact to families across the Council. The adverse impact will be mitigated with the introduction of a low income element added within proposal 5. The following reasons for choosing to proceed with the recommendations for consulting remain the same: To protect the provision of discretionary transport to still enable children and young people to access their education. To take corrective action to address overspend whilst maintaining a sustainable transport offer. To ensure we are legally compliant. Update 2020 All proposals are currently on track, however due to a legal challenge being submitted and following the Executive decision on 3 September 2019, proposal 5 and 6 are currently suspended until further notice. Update 2021 Proposal 1, 2 and 3 are on track within expectation. Proposal 4 is complete with a positive outcome for reception aged pupils and their families. Proposal 5 and 6 are now 1 year behind, with the impact from the covid 19 pandemic influencing the pace. The outcome of the legal challenge has reduced the number of paid travel permits available. Proposal 7 is in development and will adopt an individual Equality Impact Assessment during 2021/2022. Update 2022 Proposal 1-4 are now embedded practice. Proposal 5 is 2 years behind due to PSVAR and the 2 national lockdowns. Proposal 6 is current on hold due to PSVAR. Proposal 7 is at the project stage and will have a separate EIA in April 2022.

Section 10. If the proposal is to be implemented how will you find out how it is really affecting people? (How will you monitor and review the changes?)

Subject to decision being made to implement the proposals the effect of the changes will be phased through the next 6 years as we have a legal requirement to protect those who transport arrangements were awarded on the previous policies. The implementation will be realised when comparing like for like moving forward and review anticipated growth.

Following implementation there will be a 6 and 12-month Post Implementation Review. With further yearly reflections throughout the 6-year implementation period.

Section 11. Action plan. List any actions you need to take which have been identified in this EIA, including post implementation review to find out how the outcomes have been achieved in practice and what impacts there have actually been on people with protected characteristics.

Action	Lead	By when	Progress	Monitoring arrangements
60-day public consultation to commence	Jane Le Sage / Judith Kirk	25th March 2019	Completed
Public events to be held across localities	William Burchill / Gail Chester	Throughout April and May 2019	Completed	Public events and feedback from these events will be monitored through a working group with representatives from CYPS
60 day public consultation to end	Jane Le Sage / Judith Kirk	16th June 2019.	Completed	Reviewed by lead officers.
Options to be revised (if required), EIA to be revised and Policy to be updated.	Jane Le Sage / Judith kirk / William Burchill / Gail Chester	27th June 2019	Completed	This will be completed by lead officers
Sign-off of revised proposals and updated Home to School Transport Policy	Jane Le Sage / Judith Kirk	16th July 2019	Scheduled
Adoption of Home to School Transport Policy	Jane Le Sage / Judith Kirk	24th July 2019 (Full Council)	Scheduled
Publish updated Home to School Transport policy	Jane Le Sage / Judith Kirk	31st July 2019	Scheduled
Development and sign-off of Implementation and Transition Plan	Jane Le Sage / Judith kirk / William Burchill / Gail Chester	1st August – 31st August 2019.	Scheduled
Commencement of delivery of Implementation and Transition Plans.	Jane Le Sage / Judith kirk / William Burchill / Gail Chester	1st September 2019 onwards for up to six years.	Scheduled

Section 12. Summary (Summarise the findings of your EIA, including impacts, recommendation in relation to addressing impacts, including any legal advice, and next steps. This summary should be used as part of the report to the decision maker.)

The Home to School transport budget is significantly overspent, with a forecast for the rise in demand to continue and therefore the Local Authority has to consider alternative options. 
Home to school transport is a statutory requirement and a demand led service, a significant proportion of the service which we provide is governed by legislation with no options to adjust this. However, the proposals which we have consulted upon are the only areas of provision which have some scope for change, to ensure transport provision remains sustainable and fit for purpose.

Although we have identified the recommended proposals may have a negative impact on some families, the changes are necessary to ensure provision can continue. An early stage proposal to remove all non-statutory provision was rejected in 2018 consultation. This EIA has been reviewed at weekly feedback sessions throughout the consultation and revised based on the responses received to incorporate feedback and this will be reflected in the recommendations for implementation to Full County Council.

Following any implementation, there will be a six and 12-month post implementation review to ensure that any adverse impacts on young people are mitigated.
Update 2020

The negative impact anticipated never developed due the suspension of proposals 5 and 6 A positive reaction was received with the implementation of proposal 4.

Proposal 1,2,3,and 7 are an ongoing process with implementation not effective until September 2020.

Update 2021

The global pandemic has changed the way Home to school transport has been delivered since March 2020. This has resulted in priorities moving to meeting our statutory duty in a covid–safe process. This shift in the delivery model has resulted in opportunities not been implemented in the timeframes expected.  

Update 2022

The ongoing difficulties with the pandemic have continued to impact on home to school transport delivery. This also included the DfT priorities in finalising the PSVAR outcome, which is still ongoing.

Section 13. Sign off section

This revised EIA was completed by: Gail Chester

Name: Gail Chester

Job title: SEND Transport Manager

Directorate: Children and Young People’s Services

Signature: Gail Chester

Completion date: 6 January 2022

Authorised by relevant Assistant Director (signature): Jane le Sage

Date: 6 January 2022