7.1 The Committee considered a report by the Director of CET which provided a twelve month update on the implementation of the recommendations from the Scrutiny Review of alternative funding for school crossing patrols.
7.2 Brian Banks, Road Safety Team Manager, introduced the report and outlined the latest update to the recommendations, including the updated information for schools and funding sources in appendix 3 of the report.
7.3 The number of school crossing patrol sites that ESCC funds is relatively static and there is little growth in the number of patrols. At present there are 29 sites funded by ESCC, 21 sites funded by sponsorship, and 5 operated by volunteers. The Road Safety Team Manager tabled an up to date list of all school crossing patrol sites.
7.4 In regard to the 13 sites that ESCC consulted on ceasing the funding for the school crossing patrol:
7.5 The Committee asked under what circumstances school crossing patrols are re-assessed to see if they meet ESCC’s criteria for funding. Officers responded that sites will be re-assessed if there is no patrol officer in post (e.g. due to retirement or a patrol office leaving). In addition, all sites are re-assessed every year (but not if they have been closed) by the School Crossing Patrol Supervisor and a site will be re-assessed if the Road Safety Team receives a request to do so.
7.6 The Committee commented that the possible sources of grant funding listed in “Funding News for Children and Young People” (appendix 3) was a general list that may give a false impression that there was a lot of funding sources available. It may be better to have a specific list of the funding sources that are prepared to fund school crossing patrols.
7.7 Officers responded that the Road Safety Team had taken advice from the ESCC funding advisor. There are no specific funding schemes that will fund a school crossing patrol, but there may be geographic or new funding streams that become available. The Assistant Director, Communities commented that he believes there is sufficient support for schools to find funding if they want to follow that option.
7.8 The ESCC Funding Team will provide advice to schools individually on the sources of funding that might be available for school crossing patrols. There is also support to seek funding for other schemes the school may want to fund and thereby release funding for crossing patrols if necessary. In addition, Academies can legitimately spend funds on school crossing patrols.
7.9 The Committee asked if crossings that have had their ESCC funding removed are re-assessed again. The Road Safety Team will re-assess any site if requested to do so, but does not have the resources to routinely assess all 130 primary school sites. Of the 6 sites that were sponsored following the removal of funding, it is not known whether the school is funding the crossing or the crossing is funded by external sponsorship. The Road Safety Team Manager said that he could find out and inform the Committee in due course.
7.10 The Committee sought further information on the number of light controlled crossings that are in use at school sites. The Road Safety Team Manager informed the Committee that since the Scrutiny Review report, three crossings have been installed (two zebra crossings and one Puffin light controlled crossing). In assessing a site for a Puffin crossing, the presence of a school crossing patrol would be taken into account as part of the site usage assessment.
7.11 The Committee RESOLVED to note the report and the progress made on implementing the recommendations of the Scrutiny Review.
5.1 The Assistant Director, Communities introduced the report. The report provides an update on the implementation of the recommendations of the Scrutiny Review contained in appendix 2 of the report. There are twenty eight school crossing patrol sites funded by East Sussex County Council (ESCC), which meet the Council’s funding policy criteria.
5.2 In response to recommendation 6 of the Scrutiny Review, a questionnaire has been sent out to the ESCC funded sites to seek views about a change to funding whereby academies would pay for the school crossing patrol. The Road Safety Team has received fifteen responses to the questionnaire. Of the ten responses from ESCC maintained schools, eight were in favour of academies funding school crossing patrols themselves. Of the five responses from academies, none were in favour of a change in funding.
5.3 The Committee discussed the progress in implementing the recommendations of the Scrutiny Review. A summary of the main points that were raised is outlined below.
Budget Implications
5.4 The net budget for school crossing patrols is £82,000 per year. This represents £122,000 in costs and £40,000 in income from sponsorship (mainly from Parish Councils) and schools. The removal of funding from school crossing patrol sites that did not meet the policy criteria has resulted in a £22,000 a year saving, which falls short of the anticipated £50,000 a year savings. This shortfall will be made up from elsewhere within the departmental budget. The department has not held discussions with the Children’s Services Department about the funding school crossing patrols as it is not corporate policy to shunt costs from one department to another under the One Council approach.
Use of Volunteers
5.5 There are twenty one school crossing patrol sites that do not meet the policy criteria for ESCC funding which the Road Safety Team supervises and monitors. Eight of these sites are staffed by volunteers where the Road Safety Team provides training, uniform, police checks and risk assessments as well as supervision. The use of volunteers is challenging in terms of supervision. There are 23 volunteers involved with these eight sites and the Road Safety Team aims to check the operation of each crossing patrol at least once a term. There is no evidence to suggest that there are any problems that arise from the use of volunteers.
5.6 There is no statutory obligation on ESCC to provide school crossing patrols. However, ESCC is the only body who can approve school crossing patrols in its role as Highways Authority. Consequently ESCC has a responsibility to ensure that school crossings are operated safely, and providing supervision is a way of meeting this requirement.
5.7 The Road Safety Team has a pool of relief crossing patrol officers to cover staff absences and when patrol officers leave. It is not easy to recruit new crossing patrol officers as the hours are short and they need to be local to the site. Most crossing patrol officers do not take up the role for the money that is paid.
Light Controlled Crossings
5.8 Recommendation1 of the Scrutiny Review refers to light controlled crossings. The capital cost of a light controlled crossing is between £50,000 and £80,000 depending on the location. This means that the payback period for a typical light controlled crossing (under an invest to save proposal) would be twelve to fifteen years (excluding maintenance costs). Therefore it is unlikely that the replacement of school crossing patrols with light controlled crossing can be cost justified.
5.9 The Committee asked if it would be possible to include information on the factors that determine the costs of a light controlled crossing in the sponsorship pack. The Road Safety Manager said he would try and develop a range of indicative costs that could be included in the pack and the Community Match Fund information to assist those wishing to fund a light controlled crossing.
Sponsorship
5.10 Since the Scrutiny Review there have been no enquiries from schools regarding sponsorship. The Road Safety Team is working with the Marketing and Communications department to update the sponsorship pack for schools (recommendation 2). Making sponsorship more attractive to sponsors is difficult as there is limited opportunity to display branding and logos on the crossing patrol uniform. When working on the highway safety standards require a high percentage of reflective material on the uniform to be visible to drivers. Information will be included in the pack on the use of signs and road signs for sponsorship.
Future School Crossing Patrol Provision
5.11 The impact of the Scrutiny Review has been to provide a more robust process for funding school crossing patrols that do not meet the ESCC policy criteria for funding. The current school crossing patrol policy position is defendable and in line with national guidelines. Any change in the policy criteria would need a strong evidence base to be developed to support the change, and may expose ESCC to legal challenge.
5.12 RESOLVED: It was resolved to agree the recommendations of the report to:
Note the progress made on the implementation of the recommendations of the Scrutiny Review.