‘Repeated warnings ignored’ over move to new home to school transport system

A report by a team of experts from the Local Government Association lists a catalogue of failures in introducing the new system across Brighton and Hove last September.

Instead of saving money, it led to a £1 million overspend on a £3 million-a-year budget.

The report urged Brighton and Hove City Council to put children and young people “back at the centre” of the home to school transport service.

It made ten key recommendations to improve the service and put the relationship between the council and pupils, parents and carers back on track.

1. Clear, consistent and urgent communication about the stability of the service

2. Rebuilt trust with schools, parents/carers, volunteers, councillors and officers from other departments

3. Update the home to school transport policy

4. Review and streamline the process

5. Home to school transport team to work more closely with the special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) team

6. Consistent training for drivers and vehicle passenger assistants (VPAs)

7. Review the way significant changes are monitored and ensure accountability

8. Ensure a full business case and realistic timelines for council services

9. More oversight from senior managers

10. Strengthen contract management

Children and young people’s voices and needs must be more prominent, the report said, as the service was so important to families.

The report also said: “Some parents stated that they considered the council did not value the provision of home to school transport.

“They considered that the need to reapply each year, the application form and the attitude of some council staff were intended to dissuade them from seeking transport support for their child.”

At the start of the school year, many youngsters were left without transport, in unsuitable vehicles and school time was lost.

Advice from the council’s procurement and legal teams was appeared to have been ignored.

The team found that councillors had “very limited” oversight of the whole process, which was described as “rushed” and “not well executed”.

The council switched from having a framework of conventional contracts with taxi firms to a “dynamic purchasing system”.

But the switch – and the procurement of operators – was a “source of concern” because the whole process was done at “great speed” in three months.

No business case went before councillors, explaining why the changes were needed.

Leading councillors were said to have been briefed about the change to a dynamic purchasing system but no notes of the briefing meetings could be shown to the report’s authors.

The new way of buying in transport used an e-auction system. One interviewee said: “We would use an e-auction for stationery but these are people, not pens.”

The council employed consultancy firm Edge Public Solutions which “repeatedly highlighted” the risks of the tight timetable but also said that it was “confident of delivering”.

The review team said that moving to such a different system within the tight timeframe was “not advisable”.

The independent experts who produced the report said that they had interviewed 113 people in early February to get to the root of the problem.

Many interviewees, including council staff, councillors, parents and providers, had raised concerns about the new system coming into place in such a short time and said that it would cause problems.

One interviewee is quoted as saying: “The crisis was predicted and predictable.”

Families experienced problems for months, resulting in distress to pupils and their families.

The report said: “The impact of this on children and young people and their families/carers should not be underestimated. It was significant.

“Members of PaCC (the Parent Carers’ Council) reported that the pressures in responding to parents’ concerns had brought the organisation to near crisis point.

“The parents and carers the independent review team spoke to were clearly frustrated and distressed by the situation and parents reported that they had lost all confidence in the local authority.”

The review team praised PaCC as “vibrant and expert” as it helped the council to try to rebuild relationships with parents, carers and the voluntary sector.

Lack of communication between the council, parents, carers and transport companies also came under fire.

The report said that the council’s communications team was not given the correct information to respond to inquiries.

The council was warned about the scale of the change and was caught out when it did not go well.

The review team said that it had “conflicting reports” on the number of children affected by the changes.

The report said: “Once the new service started there were clearly very significant problems from the outset, with some children not receiving a service at all, transport arriving late, others experiencing frequent change of operator, some being mixed inappropriately with other children and young people or experiencing very long journeys.

“The independent review team were also very concerned that there were a number of safeguarding incidents.”

Taxi firms told councillors in January that their drivers were working without “pupil information sheets”, detailing vital medical and behavioural details about the young people in their vehicles.

There were also issues at the start of the school year with some escorts not having DBS (Disclosure and Barring Service) check.

Taxi firm boss Andrew Cheesman said that operators had been running on “a wing and a prayer”.

Council officers in several departments were praised for going “above and beyond” their usual duties to resolve problems.

The small team running the home to school transport service was described as “overstretched” as they had to deal with up to 200 calls and emails a day from upset parents and carers.

Conservative councillors Lee Wares and Mary Mears pushed for information about what went wrong with the service, including putting in FoI requests.

Councillor Wares said: “We have been totally vindicated in everything we have done to expose this sheer incompetence.

“Now that the Local Government Association has issued its damning report, we hope that our most vulnerable children and their families will get the support they need and deserve.

“But now we must also start to interrogate how we got into this disgraceful mess.

“People must be held culpable. You cannot cause this much harm and damage, be that incompetent, blow £1 million and be allowed to just say ‘sorry’. That simply isn’t good enough.”

Councillor Mears said: “We made every effort to point out the errors of their ways very early on but they refused to listen.

“Labour now have a colossal problem on their hands and need to solve it very quickly.

“They need to start doing what is best for our vulnerable children rather than pursuing the political ideologies that underpin this disaster.

“Labour have brought this council into disrepute.”

Labour councillor John Allcock, who chairs the council’s Children, Young People and Skills Committee, apologised unreservedly to families, head teachers, school staff and operators for the failed service.

He said: “We fully accept the independent review team’s report about the service and are committed to acting on all the recommendations it has made.

“The report acknowledges that the service has improved significantly since the autumn. However, we know there is still work to do.”