Introduction

The National Concessionary Travel Scheme for Older and Disabled People

The National Concessionary Travel Scheme for Older and Disabled People (the Scheme) was introduced on 1 April 2006. Anyone who lives in Scotland, and is aged 60 and over, or meets certain disability criteria is eligible to apply. Applications can be made online at getyournec.scot, via local councils, or through the Post Office in certain Local Authorities areas for the over 60 card.

The Scheme is accessed via the National Entitlement Card (NEC), which provides cardholders with free travel on registered local and long-distance bus services throughout Scotland, at any time of the day for any number of journeys. Bus operators are reimbursed by Transport Scotland for carrying cardholders. More than 140 bus operators in Scotland participate in the Scheme.

There are a range of NECs, which can be issued as part of the Scheme. These include:

over 60
disabled
disabled plus companion (+1)
sight impaired
sight impaired plus companion (+1)

The key objectives of the Scheme are to:

allow older and disabled people improved access to services, facilities and social networks, promoting social inclusion
improve health by promoting a more active lifestyle
remove the restrictions of the previous local off-peak concessionary fare scheme which was limited in offering access to facilities
promote a modal shift from private cars to public transport
maintain a viable position for bus operators with a standard reimbursement rate
provide opportunities for improvements to public transport, such as assisting development of multi-operator ticketing and the use of electronic ticket machine technology
facilitate a more effective administration of the system by adopting a standard reimbursement rate and shifting operational responsibility from local authorities to Transport Scotland
provide a stimulus to the introduction of smart ticketing

The evaluation

In August 2025, Transport Scotland commissioned an independent evaluation of the Scheme.

The aims of the evaluation were to:

understand how the Scheme works, who is using it, how it is being used and the benefits it brings
identify any differences in usage and experiences between groups of cardholders
undertake a value for money assessment in order to understand the value of benefits delivered through the Scheme

The evaluation was focused largely on the use and impacts of the Scheme, although a small component considered how the Scheme operates in practice.

In order to direct the evaluation and the development of the data collection tools, Transport Scotland’s evaluation aims and logic model for the Scheme were also considered. The logic model identified the expected short, medium and long term outcomes for the Scheme. The key outcomes are clustered by theme and summarised below:

Reduction in carbon emissions, including:

increase in bus usage (new and existing journeys)
modal shift from car to bus and reduction in car kms

Reducing inequalities, including:

reduction in travel costs/reduced household spend on transport
access education/work/volunteering
access to services, including health
access to social and leisure activities
increase in domestic tourism (day trips and holidays)
people feeling safe using the bus

Improved health, mental health and wellbeing, including:

increased activity levels (walking more/more active travel)
improved confidence, freedom and independence
reduction in social isolation

Methodology

The evaluation was supported by an Evaluation Advisory Group (EAG). This included representatives from Transport Scotland, the Wellside Research team, Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland (MACS), Bus Users UK, and the Confederation of Passenger Transport (CPT).

A mixed-methods approach was adopted for the work. This included:

a survey of people who have one of the Scheme NECs
focus groups with people who have one of the Scheme NECs
interviews with bus operators and third sector support organisations
secondary data analysis
a cost/benefit and value for money assessment

Each methodological element is outlined below, while respondent profile information is provided at Appendix A.

The research materials used in the cardholder survey, cardholder focus groups and operator interviews is provided separately and can be accessed on the Transport Scotland’s website.

The design of the evaluation was impacted by two factors: the length of time the Scheme has been in operation (20 years), and the lack of any baseline study or data prior to the introduction of the Scheme in April 2006. Various options to establish a comparator were considered which included comparing the travel behaviour of those not eligible for the Scheme with cardholders; comparing the travel behaviour of those eligible for the Scheme but are non-cardholders with cardholders; or establishing a comparator area where the Scheme is not in operation. The first option would have been unreliable as it would have compared very different population groups which are likely to have different travel needs and behaviours. The second option was discounted as uptake is high for the over 60 card, and the final option was not viable due to the Scheme being available nationally and no suitable comparator outside of Scotland was identified. As a result the evaluation was designed around existing cardholders, and asked participants questions on the impact of the Scheme and about their travel behaviour if the Scheme did not exist.

Survey of cardholders

A survey was designed to gather experiences of, and feedback about, the Scheme. This was primarily designed and implemented as an online survey in order to provide national coverage and to allow as many people to participate as possible. The survey was live for six weeks, between 13^th October and 23^rd November 2025.

As part of the NEC application process, applicants are asked to provide an email address. With permission from the Scheme administrator, the National Entitlement Card Programme Office (NECPO), this data was used by Transport Scotland to select a stratified random sample of over 35,000 cardholders who provided an email address and to issue survey invitation emails. Equal numbers were sampled among holders of the over 60 card and disabled card (which included all four related card types). Within each card type, the sample was designed to be representative of age group and the local authority where the card was registered. Additional sampling was also undertaken at the outset to boost participation among small groups (either by age group or local authority) to try to ensure sufficiently robust sample sizes were achieved. A small number of emails were undeliverable due to incorrect email addresses or addresses that were no longer active.

In addition, the survey was advertised more widely to try and capture the views of cardholders that had not provided an email address as part of the application process. Transport Scotland advertised the survey via their social media channels. A wide range of national and local organisations who provide services and support to older, disabled and sight impaired people also advertised the survey via their networks, newsletters, social media channels, and direct contact with eligible cardholders.

Large print paper-based self-completion questionnaires were also provided to one organisation who distributed these among their service users. An optional prize draw was offered to all those who completed the survey.

In total, 2,502 cardholders responded to the survey. Of these, nearly two thirds (64%, n=1,590) held an over 60 card, while 36% (n=912) held one of the disabled cards. Respondents were asked a number of demographic questions to understand the sample profile, this included socioeconomic background and employment status. For example, the majority of respondents with an over 60 card said they were retired (71%, n=1,117) while 23% (n=364) were in work (full-time, part-time or self-employed). Regarding respondents who held one of the disabled cards, 30% (n=265) said they were in work, this was the most common response. A full breakdown of respondent employment status by card type, and other demographic detail is provided at Appendix A.

Representatives from two support organisations (one focused on disabled people and the other representing both older and disabled people) participated in interviews to provide the views and experiences of their service users and members more generally, as the online survey was not suitable for their accessibility needs.

All quantitative survey data were analysed using descriptive analysis. Frequencies were generated for all closed questions (i.e. where the respondent selected an option from a list) to provide the number and percentage of respondents who had selected each response option. Crosstabulations were also used at key questions to disaggregate the results by different groups (i.e. by cardholder type, or by demographic information) to identify consistencies or differences in experiences. All qualitative survey data (i.e. where respondents provided open text responses) were subject to thematic analysis to identify the common topics and issues raised. It should be noted that the survey findings were not subject to statistical testing and differences between groups of respondents may reflect sample variability.

It is important to note, however, that the survey results are not representative of the total population of cardholders, rather views reflect the feedback of those who took part. As the survey was mostly available online, and the invitations to participate were largely (although not exclusively) sent to those who had provided a valid email address, this may have introduced some bias in the results. Those who did not provide email addresses when they applied for the NEC, or who do not/cannot access online sources would have been less likely to participate.

Focus groups

Eight focus group sessions were held, as well as two interviews (offered where participants could not access a focus group). A total of 65 individuals took part. Participants represented a mix of perspectives and experiences, including older, disabled and sight impaired cardholders; those living in urban and rural areas; as well as frequent and infrequent users of the Scheme.

People were identified and invited to participate in a range of ways. Some were identified and contacted from the online survey which included an opt-in question to express interest in the focus groups. In other instances, support organisations and other groups were approached and agreed to either advertise focus groups to their members/network, or to directly recruit and host groups. Again, this approach means there may be some bias in the results, as participants were likely to be either more IT literate, or more likely to be in contact with support services.

Most focus groups lasted 1.5 hours. However, a few deviated from this in order to fit with the requirements of the organisations who helped to arrange them. In these instances, they ranged between 45 minutes and two hours. Both online and in-person groups were held. Focus group attendees were provided with a shopping gift voucher as a thank you for their time.

Subject to permission from participants, all focus groups and interviews were recorded and transcribed. Data was analysed using thematic analysis, whereby all data was read, and the common themes, topics and issues were identified and extracted. Themes were broken down further to be more nuanced as required. Anonymous quotes were also extracted and are included throughout the report to illustrate key points.

Bus operator interviews

Interviews were conducted with bus operators who accept the NEC on their services. This represented a small component of the overall evaluation, with feedback gathered from six operators.

A sample frame was designed to direct recruitment. This ensured representation from commercial operators and community transport providers, a mix of locations/areas, and different sized operators. Support was sought from the Confederation of Passenger Transport (CPT) and the Community Transport Association (CTA) to identify, contact and recruit appropriate organisations. Transport Scotland also identified suitable operators to be invited to participate.

These interviews focused on the operational processes of the Scheme, any changes that may have been made to services as a result of the Scheme, and any impacts on operators themselves. Interviews were conducted online or by telephone, and lasted between 30 minutes and an hour.

Secondary data analysis

Transport Scotland provided cardholder and journey data. Cardholder data was supplied by NECPO and shared with their permission, while journey data was held by Transport Scotland. All data was anonymised so that individual cardholders could not be identified. The data combined the four disabled card types into a single category. The data included the number of people with an eligible NEC, and journey data based on smart journeys - these are journeys recorded by smart cards, i.e. when the NEC is scanned by the machine on board the bus. The data did not include manually recorded journeys, for example, where the card or ticket machine fails or where an operator does not have equipment (e.g. some community transport operators).

High level data was provided covering the last eight years. This included the total number of cardholders in the Scheme and the total number of journeys that had been made under the Scheme between the financial years 2016-2017 to 2024-2025. In addition, disaggregate data was provided for a five year period. Data on the number of cardholders represented snapshots, based on 31 March each year between 2021 and 2025, as well as for 30 September 2025 (the most recent data available to inform the analysis). This included the type of card, (i.e. the over 60 card and collated data for all four disabled card types), age group, gender, and local authority where the card was registered. In addition, the data zone where the card was registered was also provided, based on a snapshot from 1 August 2025, which allowed Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) decile and urban/rural classification to be assigned. Journey data detailed the total number of journeys made in each financial year between 2020-2021 and 2024-2025. Again, this included card type, age group, gender, and local authority where the card was registered, as well as time of day and month of use.

While all data was considered, data presented in the report focuses on the high level figures between 2017-2025, or the latest available disaggregate data as data from 2020 onwards was impacted by the Covid pandemic.

Cost/benefit and value for money assessment

The Value for Money (VfM) assessment considered the quantifiable elements of the Scheme. The assessment was undertaken based on 2024-25, as this was the latest full financial year for which data was available.

The VfM assessment sought to quantify, at a high level, the benefits the Scheme delivers to users and society as a result of the behavioural change observed through the survey, against the cost to government of funding the Scheme. The analysis was based on approaches and parameters set out in the Department for Transport’s (DfT) Transport Appraisal Guidance (TAG), which aligns with Transport Scotland’s Scottish Transport Appraisal Guidance (STAG).

The VfM assessment has been provided in a separate report. This can be accessed on Transport Scotland’s website.

Challenges and Limitations

A number of points should be borne in mind when interpreting the findings set out in this report. Differences were identified in relation to the cardholder data compared with the estimated eligible population data. Two local authorities and many data zones in other local authorities were shown to have over 100% uptake, meaning the data suggested that more cards were registered than there were estimated eligible people living within the area. The cause of the anomalies is not clear, and could be a result of a range of different reasons, including limitations with the population data (such as people moving house after the population was recorded, or estimation techniques used to establish the full populations), and/or limitations with the cardholder data (such as people moving house after receiving their NEC, as data is based on where the card was registered, or people who had died not being removed from the database).

It should also be noted that local authority data collected in the survey was based on where cardholders lived. However, official cardholder and journey data is recorded based on where the card was registered. As such, references to local authority vary depending on the source of the data. This has been explained in the text as required.

There were also barriers to participation in the primary data collection. The survey was administered largely via online methods meaning participation was difficult for those with unreliable or no online access and those who may have poor IT literacy. While alternative methods and focus groups were offered/conducted in some instances to address these gaps, these were not always suitable or possible within the timescale. In addition, no British Sign Language (BSL) version of the survey was provided, which most likely presented a barrier for deaf people and BSL users. An interview was conducted with staff from a third sector organisation who provided generalised feedback based on their experiences of supporting deaf people/the deaf community. However, feedback may not represent the direct experiences of the deaf community, with this presenting a gap in the research.

Differences in the survey sample structure must also be borne in mind when interpreting the results. Importantly, disabled cardholders were over represented in the achieved sample compared to their representation within the total cardholder population (see Table 1). However, it was considered important to ensure that the experiences and issues of disabled cardholders were taken into account. It was agreed with Transport Scotland that the data would not be weighted to reflect the population structure as this would reduce the voices of disabled cardholders.

Table 1 Survey sample compared to all cardholders

Type of Card	Survey (n)	Survey (%)	All cardholders¹ (n)	All cardholders (%)
Over 60	1,590	64%	1,412,054	89%
Disabled	912	36%	182,138	11%
Total	2,502	100%	1,594,192	100%

¹ Based on the total number of cardholders as at 30 September 2025.

In addition, the age distribution of over 60 cardholders differed between the survey sample and the total population (see Table 2). Again, it was agreed with Transport Scotland that weighting would not be used to correct this. It was felt that this would be inappropriate due to the issues noted above around potential inaccuracies in the population database, and the need for high weighting factors to be applied to the 80+ age group.

Table 2 Age group of over 60 cardholders - survey sample versus all cardholders

Age group of over 60 cardholders	Survey (n)	Survey (%)	All cardholders (n)	All cardholders (%)
60-64	558	35%	282,113	20%
65-69	449	28%	301,148	21%
70-74	295	19%	265,673	19%
75-79	158	10%	246,352	17%
80+	88	6%	316,768	22%
Not disclosed	42	3%	Not applicable	Not applicable
Total	1,590	100%	1,412,054	100%

It should be stressed that the findings reported throughout this report represent the views of those who took part in the research, either via the survey, the focus groups or in interviews. The findings should not be considered to be more widely applicable and are not representative of all cardholders or bus operators.

Reporting conventions

Throughout this report, references to older cardholders and disabled cardholders relate to the type of card held rather than descriptions of personal characteristics. There was overlap between card type and demographic characteristics, with some of those who held an over 60 card also having a disability, and some of those who held a disabled card also being over the age of 60. For clarity, however, the report focuses on, and intends to refer to the type of card held.

Unless otherwise specified, references throughout the report to disabled cardholders/cards incorporates all of the following NEC types: disabled; disabled plus companion (+1); sight impaired; sight impaired plus companion (+1).

To ensure the research materials (e.g. survey questionnaire) were accessible to participants, the term “free bus pass/bus pass” was used, as this is more readily and easily understood, and reflects what the NEC and the Scheme is referred to colloquially. When reporting directly on the survey findings, quoting the survey question and response options, and providing quotes from the focus groups and interviews, “free bus pass/bus pass” is used throughout the report to ensure consistency with what participants were asked about and their responses. Elsewhere in the report, NEC, card or Scheme is used depending on the context to align with Transport Scotland and other stakeholder terminology.

The following descriptions have been used throughout when presenting qualitative findings:

all - everyone who answered the question made this point
most/many/the majority - more than half of participants
some - more than several but less than most/many/the majority
several - less than some but more than a few participants
a few - two to around ten survey respondents, or two or three focus group participants
one/an individual - just one person

While many tables are included below, and in the Appendices, a separate Annex document is also available which includes additional tabular results from the cardholder survey. Where tables from this Annex support findings outlined below, this has been referenced in the text.

Finally, percentages reported throughout represent the valid percentage, i.e. the proportion of those who answered the question and gave a specific answer. Percentages have also been rounded to ensure totals add to 100% by rounding up or down the figure closest to .5% as appropriate.

< Previous | Contents | Next >