Evaluation findings
Rail travel
In both surveys, respondents were asked questions about their rail travel. The baseline survey asked respondents about the frequency by which they travelled by ScotRail services. As shown in Table 4, the most common response was ‘at least once a month’ (20%, n=63), whilst 16 respondents (7%) said they ‘never’ travelled by rail.
Looking across categories, 154 respondents (72%) travelled by rail at least once a month or more often, including 91 respondents (43%) travelling once a week or more often.
| Frequency of rail travel | Number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Every day | 6 | 3% |
| 4-6 days a week | 15 | 7% |
| 2-3 days a week | 35 | 16% |
| Once a week | 35 | 16% |
| At least once a month | 63 | 29% |
| Less than once a month | 44 | 21% |
| Never | 16 | 7% |
| Total | 214 | 100% |
Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding
For the follow-up survey, respondents were asked if they had travelled by rail since 1 April 2025 (when the pilot was implemented). Almost three-quarters (74%, n=1,096) of respondents said they had travelled by rail since 1 April 2025, with 26% (n=386) answering that they had not.
When looking at responses by demographic factors, a higher proportion of male survey respondents (78%, n=598) indicated they had travelled by rail since the 1 April 2025, than female respondents (70%, n=480). The majority of respondents across all age brackets had also travelled by rail, though this was lowest for those aged 80, as shown in Table 5.
| Age group | Rail travel since 1 April-Yes (N) | Rail travel since 1 April- No (N) | Rail travel since 1 April- Yes (%) | Total (N) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Under 16 (completed by parent or guardian on their behalf) | 10 | 4 | 71% | 14 |
| 16-19 | 15 | 6 | 71% | 21 |
| 20-29 | 69 | 16 | 81% | 85 |
| 30-39 | 93 | 25 | 79% | 118 |
| 40-49 | 87 | 23 | 79% | 110 |
| 50-59 | 206 | 61 | 77% | 267 |
| 60-69 | 276 | 98 | 74% | 374 |
| 70-79 | 218 | 73 | 75% | 291 |
| 80 or older | 109 | 75 | 59% | 184 |
Note: Some percentages are based on small numbers
When looking at rail travel by local authority area, with the exception of the Orkney Islands, the majority of respondents from all local authorities indicated that they had travelled by rail since the pilot was implemented. Although this is based on a small number of responses for some local authorities, including less than 10 responses for two local authorities.
Respondents who had travelled by rail were then asked about their frequency of rail travel since 1 April 2025. Over three-quarters (79%, n=861) indicated that they had travelled by rail at least once a month or more often, whilst 43% (n= 465) travelled by rail once a week or more often. Respondents who travelled less than once a month accounted for 21% of responses (n= 233). The most common response was ‘at least once a month’ with around a third (36%, n=396) respondents selecting this option. The full findings are provided in Table 6.
| Frequency | Number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Everyday | 10 | 1% |
| 2-3 days a week | 175 | 16% |
| 4-6 days a week | 60 | 5% |
| Once a week | 220 | 20% |
| At least once a month | 396 | 36% |
| Less than once a month | 233 | 21% |
| Total | 1,094 | 100% |
When disaggregated by sex, 80% of male respondents (n=478) and 77% of female respondents (n=367) indicated they had travelled by rail at least once a month or more often since 1 April. A higher proportion of male respondents had travelled once week or more often; 45% (n=267), compared to 39% (n=185) of female respondents.
Across age categories, the majority of respondents had travelled by rail at least once a month or more often since 1 April, but for some age groups this is based on small numbers. Those aged 80 and over (68%, n=74) were less likely to have travelled this frequently compared to other groups. The most common single response across age categories was ‘at least once a month’ apart from in the ’80 and older’ category where the same number of respondents had travelled ‘at least once a month’ and ‘less than once a month’ respectively (32%, n=35).
Over half of respondents aged 30-39 (55%, n=51) and 40-49 (52%, n=45) indicated that they had travelled by rail once a week or more often since 1 April. This was also true for 16-19 year olds but this is based on small numbers. These were the only groups where the majority of respondents travelled this frequently.
Reasons for not travelling by rail
Both the baseline and follow-up surveys asked respondents who said they had never travelled by rail (baseline) and who had not travelled since 1 April 2025 (follow-up) about the factors that influenced their decision. Respondents could select multiple options.
For the baseline survey, 16 respondents said they never travelled by rail. Amongst them, the most common factor cited was the ‘cost of rail services’ (n=7), followed by the ‘accessibility of rail stations and/or rail services’(n=5), and ‘requirement for pre-booking Passenger Assistance’ (n=5). No respondents cited the frequency or reliability of rail services as reasons for not using rail services. Some focus group participants also cited costs of rail services as a reason for not travelling by train or for not travelling by train more often, in addition to issues around accessibility.
For the follow-up survey, 26% of respondents (n=386) had not travelled by rail since 1 April 2025. As with the baseline survey, ‘cost of rail services’ was the most common factor for not travelling (29%, n=111), whilst ‘no rail station nearby’ was cited by 14% (n=52) of respondents. Around a quarter of respondents (27%, n=102) said there was ‘no-specified reason’, with a similar proportion (24%, n=90) selecting ‘other’. The full findings are provided in Table 7.
| Factors | Number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Cost of rail services | 111 | 29% |
| Non-specific reason | 102 | 27% |
| Other (please specify in the next question) | 90 | 24% |
| No rail station nearby | 52 | 14% |
| Prefer travelling by private vehicle e.g. car | 50 | 13% |
| Accessibility of rail station and/or rail service | 49 | 13% |
| Prefer travelling by other forms of public transport | 29 | 8% |
| Requirement for pre-booking passenger assistance | 28 | 7% |
| Reliability of rail services | 22 | 6% |
| No rail routes that take me where I need to go | 21 | 6% |
| Availability of connections to onward public transport (including rail services) | 20 | 5% |
| Directness of rail services | 16 | 4% |
| Frequency of rail services | 13 | 3% |
Note: Question base 379. The question total exceed the number of respondents due to this being a multiple choice question.
Respondents who selected ‘other’ were asked to specify their response (n=85). The reasons mentioned were widely spread. Grouping responses by themes, the most common reasons cited concerned health and mobility circumstances. This included people who were suffering from ill health, recovering from operations and who had not been fit to travel. This was followed by a lack of awareness of the pilot scheme and no current need to travel by rail.
I didn’t know about the free travel, for companion. I just received the, letter about it… If I had known sooner, I would have been using the train more often.”
Follow-up survey respondent
A small number of respondents raised issues linked to confidence and personal safety, which was often linked to travelling alone. Less commonly mentioned reasons included practical points such as proximity from rail stations and problems with booking tickets and car parking.
Companion rail travel before the pilot
The evaluation sought to understand the extent of companion rail travel amongst respondents for the baseline survey and, use and awareness of the scheme in the follow-up survey.
The baseline survey asked respondents who said they travelled by rail whether they typically travelled alone or with a companion. Almost three quarters indicated that they typically travelled with a companion (74%, n=140). Across all age groups the majority of respondents travelled with a companion, although the extent varied, with no clear pattern by respondent age.
In two of the baseline focus groups, all participants said that they travelled with a companion. One participant said that their companion “becomes [their] eyes”. Several comments were made that it is too dangerous to travel without a companion. In the other focus group the extent of companion travel was mixed. Participants travelling alone used the Passenger Assistance Service and/or a guide dog.
Awareness and use of free companion rail travel
The follow-up survey asked all respondents if they were aware of the free companion rail travel scheme, irrespective of if they had travelled by rail since 1 April 2025 (n=1,482). Of these, 71% (n=1,053) said they were aware of the scheme and 29% (n=429) were unaware.
Those aged 70-79 were the most likely to be aware (76%, n=220), whilst respondents aged 30-39 (64%, n=75) and 50-59 were least likely (64%, n=172). A higher proportion of male respondents (75%, n=571) were aware of the scheme than female respondents (67%, n=465).
With the exception of two local authority areas, the majority of respondents across local authorities were aware of the scheme. Apart from Aberdeenshire (55%, n=32), over 60% of respondents from their respective local authority areas were aware of the scheme but this does include some small response numbers. Equal numbers of respondents from Shetland Islands and Dundee City areas indicated they were aware or unaware of the scheme. Note: For the Shetland Islands this was based on only 6 responses.
The baseline survey asked respondents about how likely they would be to use the free companion scheme. Of those who answered this question, 83% (n=177) indicated that they were ‘very likely’ to use the scheme with a further 13% (n=28) indicating they were ‘somewhat likely’.
| Likelihood | Number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Very likely | 177 | 83% |
| Somewhat likely | 28 | 13% |
| Neither likely nor unlikely | 5 | 2% |
| Somewhat unlikely | 0 | 0% |
| Very unlikely | 2 | 1% |
| Total | 212 | 100% |
For the follow-up survey, respondents who were aware of the scheme and had travelled by rail since 1 April 2025 (n=942), were asked about their use of free companion rail travel. The vast majority (84%, n=791) had used the scheme whilst 16% (n=151) had not. This is presented in Chart 2. The proportion of respondents who had used the scheme is largely in line with the baseline findings on intended usage cited above.
The majority of people across all age groups indicated that they had used the scheme since 1 April 2025. Respondents aged 80 or over were less likely than other age groups to have used the scheme (55%, n=72). Conversely, 80% of those aged 40-49 (n=64) and 50-59 (n=138) had used the scheme. This was also true for respondents aged under 19 but this is based on a small number of respondents. With regard to sex, a slightly higher proportion of men (86%, n=447) than women (82%, n=331) had used the scheme.
Respondents who had used the scheme were then asked how frequently they had done so. Most respondents (62%, n=488) said they had used the scheme ‘every time’ when travelling, whilst 17% (n=133) had used it ‘more than 50% of the time’. Combined this equates to 79% (n=621) of respondents who used the scheme at least half of the time they had travelled by rail. The full results are presented in Table 9.
| Frequency of use of the scheme | Number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Every time | 488 | 62% |
| More than 50% of the time | 133 | 17% |
| About 50% of the time | 86 | 11% |
| Less than 50% of the time | 84 | 11% |
| Total | 791 | 100% |
With regards to sex, a slightly higher proportion of women (64%, n=212) indicated they had used the scheme ‘every time’ they had travelled than men (60%, n=270), but both are in line with the overall figure.
When looking at responses by age, the proportion of respondents using the scheme ‘every time’ they travelled increased with age for groups aged 40 and over, with respondents aged 80 and over the most likely to have used free companion rail travel ‘every time’ (76%, n=55).
Rail services used
For the follow-up survey, respondents were asked which rail services they had used the scheme on. Nearly all respondents (99%, n=778) had used the scheme on ScotRail services. As shown in Table 10, while some respondents had used the scheme on other rail services, this was much less common.
| Rail service used | Number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| ScotRail | 778 | 99% |
| LNER | 128 | 16% |
| Avanti West Coast | 65 | 8% |
| CrossCountry | 44 | 6% |
| TransPennine Express | 44 | 6% |
| Don't know | 7 | 1% |
| Caledonian Sleeper | 4 | 1% |
Note: Question base 789. The question total exceed the number of respondents due to this being a multiple choice question.
Scheme accessibility
Respondents to the follow-up survey who had used the scheme were asked to rate how easy or difficult they found it to access and use. Of those who answered this question (n=791), almost all (94%, n =740) indicated they had found the scheme either ‘very’ or ‘fairly easy’ to use and access. Table 11 below provides the full breakdown of responses.
| Scheme accessibility | Number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Very easy | 580 | 73% |
| Fairly easy | 160 | 20% |
| Neither easy nor difficult | 32 | 4% |
| Fairly difficult | 11 | 1% |
| Very difficult | 8 | 1% |
| Total | 791 | 100% |
Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% and combined category percentages differ to summing individual values due to rounding
Respondents were then asked to explain their answer to this question. A total of 719 participants shared in what way they found the scheme to be easy or difficult. For those that found it ‘very easy’ (n=532), the most common reason cited was positive interactions with staff, with several respondents highlighting staff as being supportive and assisting when needed. This was followed by how easy it was to use the scheme. These respondents highlighted that they did not experience any challenges or added stress when using the scheme and many reported the process to be “straightforward” by presenting “the card to the gate reader and that's you entering or exiting the station”.
All staff were aware of the scheme and that made it very easy to use. Particularly useful not having to purchase a ticket.”
Follow-up survey respondent- classified scheme as very easy to access
Those that found the scheme ‘fairly easy’ (n=143) and those that found it to be ‘fairly difficult’ or ‘very difficult’ (n=18) to access both cited challenges around their own or rail staff awareness of the scheme.
Initially some staff didn’t know the scheme was active.”
Follow-up survey respondent- classified scheme as fairly easy to access
I was not made aware of it [the pilot] despite making several trips with a companion! There were no signs or communication about it until now.”
Follow-up survey respondent- classified scheme as very difficult to access
Respondents who had travelled by rail since 1 April 2025 but who had not used the scheme were asked why this was, with respondents allowed to select multiple reasons. Of the respondents who answered this question (n=91), almost half (48%, n=44) selected ‘I wasn’t aware of the scheme’. This was followed by ‘I do not travel with a companion’ (21%, n=19). The full results are shown in Table 12.
| Reasons for not using the scheme | Number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| I wasn't aware of the scheme | 44 | 48% |
| I don't travel with a companion | 19 | 21% |
| I haven't needed to use the scheme | 16 | 18% |
| Other | 16 | 18% |
Note: Question base=91. The question total exceed the number of respondents due to this being a multiple choice question.
Respondents who answered ‘I haven’t needed to use the scheme’ or ‘other’ were invited to provide more information in an open follow-up question (n=38). The most commonly raised point concerned people travelling alone and independently. This included some people who noted that they are able to, and choose to travel alone.
I was able to make the journey myself and did not require any assistance from a companion for the journey and destination I was visiting.”
Follow-up survey respondent
A few respondents indicated that they would like or intend to use the scheme in the future, in some instances this was tied to recent eligibility.
I have only just got my card and I fully intend to use it. Will be great to get around with the help of a friend.”
Follow-up survey respondent
Some respondents had experienced barriers to the scheme which included incidences of staff not being aware of the scheme or people not being offered it. A few respondents mentioned eligibility in the context of only recently receiving the required NEC.
I have only recently received the card and have not had the chance to do a rail journey yet.”
Follow-up survey respondent
Impact of the pilot scheme
The evaluation aimed to explore the potential impacts of the scheme and relevant questions were asked as part of both the baseline and follow-up studies.
For the baseline survey, respondents were asked if they thought the scheme would have a positive impact, negative impact or no impact on independence and mobility; confidence while travelling; travel costs; likelihood or frequency of travelling by rail; and safety and accessibility. Almost all respondents felt there would be positive impacts on these areas, as shown in Chart 3.
Note: Due to an error in the online survey, the safety and accessibility impact was only included in the postal survey and therefore has a smaller base number.
These findings were echoed by the baseline focus group participants who anticipated that the scheme would have a positive impact.
I know a young person in particular where this policy is going to absolutely change her life. At the moment she doesn't travel by train because of the financial impact.”
Baseline focus group participant
Survey respondents were asked a follow-up question to include any additional impacts they felt the scheme might have (n=42). Further areas were mentioned including health and wellbeing, social contact and access to services. In addition, a few respondents mentioned the impact on the environment. All respondents felt the scheme would have a positive impact on these aspects. Some respondents mentioned issues relating to ScotRail assistance and staff, and this included positive and negative impacts concerning Passenger Assistance.
For the follow-up survey, respondents who had used the scheme were asked about the impacts of free companion rail travel. Almost all respondents (95% and above) felt the scheme had positive impacts across the areas asked about. Chart 4 provides the full breakdown of responses. The findings are in line with the baseline results on anticipated impacts.
Respondents were asked a follow-up question on if they felt the scheme had any other impacts. A total of 308 responses were received to this question. Responses covered a variety of themes such as wellbeing, economic, social and environmental impacts. Several respondents shared how this scheme allowed them to visit new places and contributed to increased confidence. In addition, some participants also mentioned that the scheme had an overall impact in reducing costs and improved their mental health and wellbeing.
It’s made me more eager to do things and go new places, having someone there and not feeling you’re attaching additional cost to their day gives a sense of freedom and spurs me on to go new places and get out more.”
Follow-up survey respondent
Respondents who used the pilot scheme were asked whether their use of rail services had changed as a result. Almost nine in ten respondents (89%, n=705) said that it had. There was no difference when looking at the results by respondent sex. In terms of age groups, whilst the vast majority of respondents said their use of rail had changed, this ranged from 82% (n=113) of 50-59 year olds to 94% of 40-49 year olds (n=60) and those aged 80 or older (n=68).
These respondents were then asked how their use of rail services had changed. The most common response was ‘making more trips’ (84%, n=591), followed by ‘travelling to new/different destinations’ (69%, n=485) and ‘travelling for different purposes’ (61% n=427). In addition, the findings point to some modal shift from bus and car with people taking trips by rail that they would have previously taken by these modes. These results are included in Table 13.
| Change in use of rail services | Number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Making more trips | 591 | 84% |
| Travelling to new/different destinations | 485 | 69% |
| Travelling for different purposes e.g. shopping, visiting friends, commuting | 427 | 61% |
| Making trips by rail that I would have previously taken by bus | 380 | 54% |
| Making longer journeys | 339 | 48% |
| Making trips by rail that I would have previously taken by car | 298 | 43% |
| Used to access job and educational opportunities | 74 | 11% |
These findings were also reflected in the follow-up focus groups, where respondents spoke positively about the impact of the scheme, especially in relation to personal safety; accessibility; ease of travelling; and costs. Some participants noted that they had been travelling more often and to different destinations as a result.
This scheme has been fantastic, I feel like it has given me wings…Me and my wife are able to travel more now than I ever thought we would.”
Follow-up focus group participant
Respondents to the follow-up survey who had used rail services since 1 April 2025 were asked how likely they will be to continue using rail services once the pilot ends on 31 March 2026. Almost two-thirds of respondents (65%, n=511) indicated that they would be ‘very likely’ or ‘somewhat likely’, including 47% (n=372) who were ‘very likely’. Table 14 provides a full breakdown of the results.
| Likelihood of using rail services once pilot ends | Number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Very likely | 372 | 47% |
| Somewhat likely | 139 | 18% |
| Neither likely nor unlikely | 46 | 6% |
| Somewhat unlikely | 115 | 15% |
| Very unlikely | 65 | 8% |
| Don't know | 51 | 6% |
| Total | 788 | 100% |
Passenger Assistance Service
For the baseline and follow-up surveys, respondents were asked questions about the Passenger Assistance Service. Passenger Assistance is available across all rail services in Great Britain and passengers can book support up to one hour before travelling. The passenger should be met by rail staff on arrival at the agreed time who will assist the passenger onto the train. The passenger will then be met by staff at their destination who will help them alight from the train and station.
For the baseline survey, respondents were asked how often they used the Passenger Assistance Service. As shown in Table 15 most respondents booked Passenger Assistance either ‘always’ (23%, n=45) or ‘sometimes’ (41%, n=79). This did not appear to be affected by age. Forty-one respondents (21%) said that they ‘never’ booked Passenger Assistance, whilst 29 respondents (15%) said that they didn’t know they could book Passenger Assistance.
| Frequency of booking Passenger Assistance | Number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Always | 45 | 23% |
| Sometimes | 79 | 41% |
| Never | 41 | 21% |
| I did not know you could book Passenger Assistance | 29 | 15% |
| Total | 194 | 100% |
For the follow-up survey, respondents who had travelled by rail since 1 April 2025 were asked about their use of Passenger Assistance. Almost half of respondents (49%, n=531) had ‘never’ booked Passenger Assistance whilst the pilot had been live, a higher proportion than the baseline. In contrast, only 12% (n=126) had ‘always’ booked and 21% (n=230) had ‘sometimes’ booked, which were both lower than the baseline. Almost one in five respondents (18%, n=193) did not know they could book Passenger Assistance.
| Frequency of booking Passenger Assistance | Number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Always | 126 | 12% |
| Sometimes | 230 | 21% |
| Never | 531 | 49% |
| I did not know you could book Passenger Assistance | 193 | 18% |
| Total | 1,080 | 100% |
There was no clear pattern when looking at who had used Passenger Assistance since 1 April 2025 by respondent age group. Respondents aged 80 and over were the most likely to have ‘always’ booked Passenger Assistance (18%, n=19), followed by 30-39 year olds (14%, n=13). Those aged 40-49 were the most likely to have ‘sometimes’ booked (27%, n=23), followed by those 80 and older (25%, n=27). Over half of respondents aged 60-69 (53%, n=145) and 70-79 (52%, n=113) had not booked Passenger Assistance since 1 April 2025. Respondents aged under 19 were not included in this analysis due the small number of respondents.
With regards to respondent sex, 13% of female respondents (n=61) had ‘always’ used Passenger Assistance compared to 10% of male respondents (n=62). A similar difference was evident among those who had ‘sometimes’ used Passenger Assistance; 23% (n=110) compared to 19% (n=114). More than half of male respondents (53%, n=314) had not used Passenger Assistance, compared to 44% (n=209) of female respondents.
Respondents who had not booked Passenger Assistance since 1 April 2025 or who didn’t know they could book it were asked if they would use Passenger Assistance in the future. Almost half of respondents (48%, n=345) answered ‘yes’, with 21% (n=153) saying ‘no.’ The remaining 31% (n=221) responded ‘don’t know’.
In the baseline survey, respondents who used Passenger Assistance or intended to do so for future journeys were asked about the likelihood of them using the service if they were able to access free companion rail travel. As shown in Table 17, 75% of respondents (n=132) said they would be less likely to book Passenger Assistance if travelling with a companion for free. The remaining respondents were split equally across ‘no’ and ‘don’t know’ response options.
| If you were able to bring a companion with you for free, would you be less likely to book Passenger Assistance? | Number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 132 | 75% |
| No | 22 | 13% |
| Don't know | 22 | 13% |
| Total | 176 | 100% |
In the follow-up survey, respondents who answered they had booked Passenger Assistance ‘sometimes’ since 1 April 2025 were asked if they are less likely to use Passenger Assistance since the introduction of the pilot. As shown in Table 18, the majority of respondents (60%, n=136) said they were less likely to use Passenger Assistance as a result of the scheme.
| Are you less likely to use Passenger Assistance since the introduction of the free companion scheme? | Number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 136 | 60% |
| No | 59 | 26% |
| Don't know | 32 | 14% |
| Total | 227 | 100% |
Baseline and follow-up focus group participants who used Passenger Assistance were happy with the service.
If you go to any of the staff, they’ve always been very, very helpful.”
Baseline focus group participant
However, it was noted by one baseline focus group that whilst good, the service does not go beyond the train station itself, and this is the additional support a companion can provide.
Opinions on rail accessibility
Both the baseline and follow-up surveys asked all respondents about their views on the accessibility of rail services in general, regardless of whether they travelled by rail.
For the baseline survey, 59% (n=123) rated the accessibility of rail services as ‘excellent’ or ‘good’, with a further 31% (n=64) rating these as ‘fair’. The full results are shown in Table 19.
| Rail service accessibility | Number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Excellent | 38 | 18% |
| Good | 85 | 41% |
| Fair | 64 | 31% |
| Poor | 19 | 9% |
| Very poor | 2 | <1% |
| Total | 208 | 100% |
Respondents were asked to explain their response in a follow-up question. For those who rated services as ‘excellent’ or ‘good’ (n=34), the most commonly raised point related to positive experiences with ScotRail staff both in stations and on trains. Many respondents mentioned the helpfulness and attentiveness of staff. This was followed by Passenger Assistance, where respondents had praise for the service provided and staff.
“Staff are very well trained to know the needs of blind passengers and assistance works as expected.”
Baseline survey respondent- excellent rating of services
For Respondents who rated services as ‘fair’, (n=15), the most prevalent issue concerned less positive and inconsistent experiences with staff. This was followed by unstaffed stations, which was occasionally linked to not being able to access Passenger Assistance.
Issues relating to the accessibility of stations were commonly raised by respondents who rated services as ‘fair’, ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’ (n=76). This included the layout of stations, lack of audio announcements, signage, issues with or lack of station lifts, and gaps at platforms. Some respondents also noted challenges in locating priority and accessible seating on trains.
“For blind people on their own, there is no easy access to information or direction within the rail stations.”
Baseline survey respondent- very poor rating of services
In the baseline survey all respondents were asked if there were any additional services or support that would improve their rail travel experience. Responses (n=113) covered a wide range issues and topics. Grouping responses thematically, the most common theme was train and station accessibility which included areas such as improved, clearer and more frequent audio announcements, in addition to providing accessible toilets and reducing the gap between trains and platforms.
“Working station and train announcements that work and are clear and easy to understand.”
Baseline survey respondent
Staffing was the next most common theme raised. This covered a variety of topics including having staffed ticket offices and whilst some respondents referred to positive interactions with staff, the need for staff training on how to support blind and sight impaired passengers was raised. Several respondents to the baseline survey noted how free companion rail travel would improve their rail experience.
In the follow-up survey, 67% (n=969) of respondents rated the accessibility of rail services as ‘excellent’ or ‘good’, with only 9% (n=125) rating services as ‘poor’ or ‘very poor.’ The full breakdown is provided in Table 20.
| Rail service accessibility | Number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Excellent | 316 | 22% |
| Good | 653 | 45% |
| Fair | 364 | 25% |
| Poor | 95 | 7% |
| Very poor | 30 | 2% |
| Total | 1,458 | 100% |
Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding
Men were more likely to rate the accessibility of services as ‘excellent’ or ‘good’ (70%, n=532) than women (62%, n=420). There was no clear pattern when looking at the age group of respondents nor was there much difference between age groups. Those aged 40-49, 70-79 and 80-89 were the most likely to rate the accessibility services as ‘excellent’ or ‘good’ (68%, n=74, n=194, n=123), with those aged 60-64 the least likely (64%, n=236). Respondents aged 30-39 were the most likely to rate services as ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’ (13%, n=15). Respondents aged under 19 were not included in this analysis due to small numbers.
Respondents were asked to explain their answer in an follow-up question. There was a total of 1,150 responses to this question. The most common reason for those that reported service accessibility as being ‘excellent’ or ‘good’ (n=732) was rail staff support. Overall, participants shared instances of positive interactions with staff where they assisted and supported them in their journeys.
As soon as I’m on the platform and the ticket conductor helps me board the train, he will come and let me know when my stop is and help me off the train. This campaign has brought such awareness to the visually impaired like myself & even better I can take my family & support workers as companions for free, so its win-win!
Follow-up survey respondent
Those who reported service accessibility as ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’ (n=116), highlighted boarding and exiting the train as a challenge. Some respondents referenced accessibility experiences at the station such as wide gaps and distance between platforms creating difficulties for those sight impaired.
I am unable to read notice boards or hear some announcements and I find as the gap varies from station to station getting on and off the train can be a leap into the dark.
Follow-up survey respondent
Further comments on rail services
In the follow-up survey, respondents were also asked for any further comments on support services and rail services more generally. A total of 538 comments were received. Many respondents provided general comments about the scheme and reiterated the benefits that it has brought to their life and highlighted their wishes for this to be extended beyond the pilot stage.
I would like to keep this in place which helps a lot of people like myself [feel] safer with someone you know and understand to guide you.
Please keep this scheme going after March 2026. It has been amazing and helped my confidence immensely with train travel.
Follow-up survey respondents
In terms of non-scheme specific comments, several respondents shared their views about support services and described interactions with rail staff, and instances of using Passenger Assistance, although this was mentioned less frequently. Most of these comments were positive and praised staff for their helpfulness and ability to support as required. In some instances, respondents also highlighted that the addition of the free companion allows a level of flexibility, comfort and independence that, at times when using Passenger Assistance, might not be possible.
Passenger assistance is a great option at larger stations (and I use it regularly). However, at smaller (unstaffed) stations its less available, and that's when I really need a travelling companion with me, and where their fare being free makes a huge difference.
I have had good experiences when travelling with all rail staff, guards meters and passenger assistance cannot be faulted. But I feel safer with my companion with me.
Follow-up survey respondents
Some respondents also shared comments about rail services more generally and raised their preference to travel by rail over other modes of public transport. Despite this preference, a number of respondents highlighted challenges around accessibility. These related to physical challenges and not being able to comfortably move around at the station and on trains; and frustrations about accessible seating often not being available or hard to identify.
Space to manoeuvre wheelchairs is very limited and it can be very difficult if there are other wheelchair users and/or prams/push chairs so more space would be a great improvement.
There are practical challenges, such as trains sometimes being far from platforms, or locating and assessing the cleanliness of toilets, which can be tricky and stressful. Having a companion to help with these aspects has been invaluable.
Often the accessible seats are taken up with passengers who use the extra space for their luggage. It may be an idea to highlight the area better.
Follow-up survey respondents
Finally, echoing issues raised in other parts of the survey, several respondents shared suggestions for improvements around increasing awareness and access to information both relating to the scheme but also at the station and on the train. A few suggestions also focused on service provision and experience of booking tickets.
Make announcements clearer at stations. Have all trains with audio announcements for ‘next station’ if they don’t already have that facility.
Signage is generally too small or not obvious for directions to platforms for example.
The only drawback I have found is that when I book online I can get a seat reservation for my companion but because I get free travel I cannot reserve a seat for myself. l have to visit the booking office and request a seat beside my companion before I get on the train.
Follow up survey respondents
Conclusion
The evaluation found that the majority of baseline and follow-up survey respondents travelled by rail. Prior to the launch of the pilot, the majority of survey respondents travelled with a companion when using rail services and most respondents intended to use the free companion travel scheme when introduced. Almost all respondents anticipated that the scheme would have a positive impact in relation to independence, mobility, confidence while travelling, travel costs and safety and accessibility.
Overall, the evaluation suggests that the pilot has been successful and is highly valued by eligible cardholders who participated in the research. Findings show that there has been high up-take of the scheme amongst survey respondents and most found the scheme easy to use and access. Almost all respondents who had used the scheme noted that it had had a positive impact across a number of areas and topics, including independence, mobility, confidence while travelling, travel costs and safety and accessibility. Most survey respondents indicated that their use of rail services had changed as a result. When looking at how use of rail services had changed, this included making more trips by rail, travel to new/different destinations and some evidence of modal shift from car and bus. Many survey respondents expressed a desire for the pilot to be extended and for free companion rail travel to be permanent.
The evaluation found that survey respondents are less likely to require dedicated staff assistance when travelling with a companion for free. Survey and focus group participants generally spoke positively about their experience of the Passenger Assistance Service and ScotRail staff more generally, in addition to the accessibility of rail services, although some areas of improvement were suggested.
Whilst the majority of survey respondents were aware of the pilot, the evaluation does point to some cardholders being unaware. A lack of awareness was the most common reason why respondents who had travelled by rail since the pilot’s introduction had not used the scheme.
The evaluation explored differences by respondent age, sex and local authority areas, with these noted throughout the report where applicable.