Introduction

Background

In 2020, the Scottish Government announced plans to introduce free bus travel for children and young people up to the age of 19 resident in Scotland. This was later expanded in 2021 to cover all those aged 5 to 21.

The scheme aims to encourage more sustainable travel behaviours and tackle issues related to transport poverty and access to services by:

embedding positive sustainable travel behaviours;
opening up social, education, employment and leisure opportunities; and
reducing household outgoings to aid children, particularly those living in poverty.

All children and young people resident in Scotland (including asylum seekers and refugees) are eligible to apply for a National Entitlement Card (NEC) or Young Scot National Entitlement Card (Young Scot NEC), which provide access to free bus travel. Around 930,000 children and young people were estimated to be eligible. The scheme provides free travel on any bus in any part of Scotland, with young people able to travel on buses both locally, and outside the area they live - although a few services, such as premium-fare night buses and City Sightseeing buses, are not included within the free travel scheme.

The Young Persons’ Free Bus Travel Scheme (also known as the Under 22s scheme) commenced on 31 January 2022, although applications for the card could be made from 10 January 2022 onwards. The scheme is being delivered in partnership with the Improvement Service, the National Entitlement Card Programme Office (NECPO) and Young Scot.

Evaluation of the Young Persons’ Free Bus Travel Scheme

Since the outset, Transport Scotland has been committed to monitoring and evaluating the scheme as it rolls out and becomes embedded. Transport Scotland aims to assess the short, medium and long term impacts of the scheme by comparing conditions at different stages, as follows:

Baseline Study: Ahead of its implementation, Transport Scotland conducted baseline research to establish the travel patterns and perceptions of bus use among eligible children and young people, as well as their awareness of the forthcoming scheme and expected use. This included a national online survey with those aged between 5-21 and their parents/carers, as well as analysis of a wide range of secondary data sources.
Stage 1 Evaluation: This considers the short to medium term impacts and outcomes of the scheme after it has been operational for one year, and provides insights into how the policy is working in practice. This report presents the findings from this particular evaluative stage.
Stage 2 Evaluation: Future evaluative work will take place up to five years post-implementation. This will focus on longer-term impacts and outcomes.

Scheme Aims and Expected Outcomes

While the main aims of the scheme are to encourage more sustainable travel behaviours and tackle issues related to transport poverty and access to services, a series of expected outcomes were also developed in order to monitor and measure success. These were split into short, medium and long term outcomes, as follows:

Short Term Outcomes:

Increased numbers of young people registering for a card/aware of the scheme
Fewer young people learning to drive
Increased awareness of bus as a viable travel option
Increased awareness of bus as a viable travel option amongst young women
Reduction in travel costs for young people and their families

Medium Term Outcomes:

Increased numbers of young people using the scheme for journeys otherwise paid for
Journeys which would have been made by car (driving/lift from parents etc.) are made by bus
Young people have increased access to services

Long Term Outcomes:

Reduction in poverty rates amongst young people
Improved access to education and employment opportunities
Improved access to social and leisure opportunities/activities
Reduction in private car kilometres

Methodology and Sample Profile

Wellside Research Ltd. (an independent social research consultancy), supported by Stantec (a transport planning consultancy), were appointed to undertake the Year One Evaluation exercise. Work was conducted between April and August 2023.

Both primary data collection and analysis of secondary data sources was required, with a mixed methods approach adopted, as follows:

A repeat of the baseline survey (or follow-up survey) with young people and parents/carers;
A series of focus groups with young people, parents/carers and other bus users;
A consultation-based survey with professional stakeholders and interested professional organisations; and
Analysis of secondary data sources.

This report presents the findings from the follow-up survey, the focus groups and the secondary data analysis, and largely focuses on the impact of the scheme on young people and their families. Feedback from the stakeholder consultation survey is presented in a separate report and includes both a process and impact assessment. In addition, a summary report draws together the findings across all elements of the evaluation.

Follow-Up Survey with Young People and their Families

Consistent with the baseline survey, the online questionnaire was developed for completion by parents/carers of young people (aged 5-23) and by young people themselves (aged 12-23). Although young people are only eligible for the scheme until the age of 21, those up to the age of 23 were invited to participate in the survey as they would have been eligible for the scheme at some point since its introduction (and therefore be able to reflect on and share experiences of the scheme).

Many of the survey questions remained consistent with the baseline survey in order to facilitate before and after implementation comparisons, while other questions were amended and updated to consider usage of the (now operational) scheme. The questionnaire sought feedback around:

Current travel patterns for different journey purposes;
Current spend on transport and travel;
Perceptions of bus use;
Safety concerns on public transport; and
Uptake, use and impact of the Young Persons’ Free Bus Travel Scheme.

The survey was advertised nationally via a number of channels. This included seeking the support of Directors of Education and schools across all 32 local authorities to email survey invitations to their parent/carer forum (or, where relevant, their pupil network). Adverts were posted on the Higher Education Institution (HEI) Trickle page (an internal platform for communicating with colleges and universities across Scotland) to invite college and university students to participate. Transport Scotland and a range of other stakeholder organisations also advertised the survey via their networks and social media channels. The survey ran for six weeks, from 29 May to 9 July 2023.

In total, 10,875 people submitted a valid response to the follow-up survey. While most responses were provided by parents/carers (81% of responses came from parents/carers compared to 19% from young people themselves), responses represented a range in the age and life stages of the children/young people who were the subjects of the survey:

39% (n=4,228) of all responses related to children aged 5-11;
43% (n=4,743) related to young people aged 12-15;
17% (n=1,816) related to young people aged 16-21; and
1% (n=88) related to young people aged 22-23 (A small sample size was achieved for this age group due to the scheme being relatively new and it is expected that few were likely to have signed up to the scheme for the short time they may have been eligible)

Responses were received from across all local authority areas, although the numbers achieved in each area varied - ranging from 17 responses from Falkirk Council area to 2,315 responses from Glasgow City Council area (a full breakdown by local authority area is provided at Appendix A). A good mix of urban, rural and island also responded, as follows:

43% (n=4,613) of respondents lived in a city;
33% (n=3,559) lived in a town;
20% (n=2,084) lived in a village or the countryside; and
4% (n=390) lived on an island (Note: the remaining 229 respondents did not disclose this information).

Where surveys related to young people aged 16+, respondents were asked to identify whether they/their child was in school, college or university, an apprenticeship or other training programme, in work (part-time, full-time or voluntary), or none of these (with multiple responses being permissible at this question). Those aged under 16 were assumed to be in school and not working, etc. Respondents were also allocated to their ‘main’ sector - e.g., where a young person was at school and working part-time their main sector was ‘at school’, similarly, where a young person was at college/university and working, they were allocated to ‘at college/university’ for their main sector. Table 1 and 2 provide the breakdown of responses and show that the participants largely represented the views and experiences of school pupils. Multiple responses were possible at the question for 16-23 year olds (Table 1).

Table 1 Education/Training/Work Status Age 16-23
Status	Number	Percent of Cases
At School	1,297	68%
At College/University (full or part-time)	509	27%
Doing an apprenticeship or other training	64	3%
Working (full-time, part-time or voluntary)	507	27%
Not in Education, Training or Work	51	3%
Base	1,904	-

Table 2 Education/Training/Work Status Main Sector Age 5-23
Status	Number	Percent
At School	10,268	94%
At College/University (full or part-time)	392	4%
Doing an apprenticeship or other training	44	<1%
Working (full-time, part-time or voluntary)	121	1%
Not in Education, Training or Work	50	<1%
Base	10,875	100%

Demographic information was also gathered in order to facilitate comparisons of results between different groups and to identify any issues which may be more significant/relevant to particular cohorts. The demographic breakdown of the survey sample is provided in Appendix A, although a brief summary is provided below:

Slightly more females (50%) than males (46%) were represented in the sample, along with 1% who identified as transgender, non-binary or other;
5% of the sample were young carers;
3% were care experienced;
Most respondents were from a white ethnic background (83%) while 13% were from minority ethnic backgrounds;
Around three quarters (73%) of those aged 16+ were straight/heterosexual while 13% were gay, lesbian, bisexual or identified in a different way;
11% indicated that their own/their child’s day-to-day activities were limited (either a little or a lot) because of a health problem or disability;
A good mix of household incomes were represented, ranging from 5% with an income of £100,000 and over to 14% with an income of £50,000-£74,999; and
18% did not own/have access to a car/van, 39% owned/had access to one car/van, and 37% owned/had access to two or more.

As this was a self-completion survey, all respondents were self-selecting, and no quotas for particular respondent typologies were applied. However, data were weighted for analysis purposes by education/training/work (ETW) status to ensure the results were representative in this respect. This assigned and weighted respondents based on their main ETW Status (as outlined in Table 1 & 2). Where gender based analysis was conducted, data were weighted to the relevant gender split across the Scottish population to again ensure results were representative. The only exceptions to using weighted data were where questions were asked of only the 16+ age groups and for open ended questions. In these cases, the raw data were used for the analysis. Frequencies and crosstabulations within the follow-up data were conducted, and the results outlined below highlight any differences which were identified at the 95% confidence level. Comparisons between the baseline survey and follow-up survey results were not, however, tested for statistical significance. Qualitative data was read to identify the dominant themes and issues.

Focus Groups with Young People and Parents/Carers

Qualitative research was carried out in order to gain a more detailed understanding of people’s views and experiences of the Young Persons’ Free Bus Travel Scheme. The purpose of the qualitative research, through focus groups, was to provide an in-depth understanding into particular issues, by exploring experiences and behaviours relating to the scheme.

As is typical, sample sizes were smaller than those used for quantitative surveys, and it was not the intention to obtain a statistically representative sample through the qualitative research, but to understand matters in more depth. Reporting of the qualitative data was done through analysis and description of opinion, rather than counts or measures. The following descriptions have been used below when reporting qualitative findings:

all - everyone participating in the interviews made this point
most/many - more than half of participants
some - more than several but less than most/many
several - less than half but more than three participants
a few - two or three participants
one/an individual - just one person

Focus groups sought to understand travel behaviour and decisions; gather feedback on awareness and use of the scheme or reasons for not using it; to explore impacts of the scheme; understand challenges, barriers and concerns about the scheme; and explore ways in which the scheme could be improved.

In total, 42 people participated across seven focus groups, which is a very good sample size for this type of research. The group cohorts included:

Parents/carers of children aged 5-11 who used the scheme;
Parents/carers of children aged 12-18 who used the scheme;
Young people aged 12-18 who used the scheme;
Young people aged 16-21 who used the scheme;
Parents/carers of those aged 5-18 who did not use the scheme;
Young people aged 16-21 who did not use the scheme; and
Other bus users not eligible for the scheme - aged 22+.

Topic guides were designed to be appropriate for each cohort. The groups were held over a four week period between 6-26 July.

Qualitative analysis was undertaken on focus group data, with recurring issues and key themes identified both within and between groups. Differences in views and experiences were also identified between different demographic characteristics and between focus groups. Given the nature of focus group discussions, topics and areas of importance for participants emerged which were not always directed by the topic guide adding additional and important insight to the findings. Verbatim quotes have been used to illustrate key points and may be drawn from different types of participants. The use of quotes does not infer any weight of response by that type of participant, rather they serve to illustrate a point.

Secondary Data Analysis

All secondary data analysed in the Baseline Study were revisited, however, in most instances there were either no new updates available, or updates did not cover the post-implementation phase being considered by the current work (i.e. February 2022 onwards). In such cases, no new analysis was undertaken. The only exception was the Hands Up Survey Scotland (HUSS), where data for 2021 and 2022 was available. This was included in the analysis for the Year One Evaluation.

In addition, data related to the uptake and usage of the Young Persons’ Free Bus Travel Scheme across its first year of operation was made available for analysis, with data provided from January 2022 to April 2023. Analysis of ScotRail ticketing data was also made available to facilitate consideration of any impacts on rail patronage since the introduction of the Young Persons’ Free Bus Travel Scheme.

Other data sources which were considered by the Year One Evaluation included:

Crime data to assess the impact on Anti-Social Behaviour - this included Scottish Government data on Recorded Crime in Scotland 2022-23 and Police Scotland Management Information Reports 2021-22 and 2022-23; and
Driving tests taken and licenses issued from the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA).

Research Caveats and Report Presentation

Data collection for the Year One Evaluation was undertaken in the spring and early summer of 2023 (i.e. May to July). This differed from the baseline study, which was conducted in the winter (i.e. December 2021 to January 2022). The timing of the fieldwork likely contributed to the lower sample size achieved in the follow-up survey and issues with recruiting respondents to take part in focus groups. The period approaching the summer holidays is particularly busy for schools and students are on exam leave with many S6 pupils and those at university not returning to their place of education after their exams, making them difficult to access via their representative institutions. Further, the focus groups were largely arranged for the first two weeks in July, which is a particularly busy holiday period for families, meaning that many eligible families were unavailable to participate. The seasonal differences in fieldwork periods should also be borne in mind when interpreting any differences in results between the Year One Evaluation and the baseline study as travel patterns may vary at different times of the year.

The total sample size achieved in the follow-up survey, however, still provides good statistical reliability. It provides tight confidence intervals (+/- 1%) for disaggregation - for example, at the 95% confidence level where 50% of those surveyed gave a particular response, the true figure would be in the region of 49%-51%.

Despite this statistical reliability, however, it should be noted that not all local authority areas or demographic groups were equally represented in the survey sample - people in some areas/groups took part in greater numbers while others participated in only very small numbers. As such, more locally unique impacts or challenges, or specific issues faced by some minority groups may not have been fully identified or explored by the research.

Further, the follow-up survey sample was dominated by the views and experiences of those attending school, with those in apprenticeships/training programmes, at college/university, and those in work taking part in smaller proportions (partly due to the absence/access reasons highlighted above). While the data were weighted to address this disparity, it should be borne in mind when interpreting the results.

As the follow-up survey was only available online, and it was relatively lengthy/time consuming to complete, there is a risk that it was not accessible to all young people and their families. Although the strong response rate overall suggests that accessibility was not a significant factor, some limited feedback was received in relation to the survey length and complexity which was noted to put some respondents off completing the questionnaire.

The sample sizes achieved in the survey and focus groups reflect the different methodologies used, and both provided robust datasets for the different analysis processes and development of the findings. Qualitative and quantitative research aim to achieve different aims. In this case, the follow-up survey provides statistically robust measure for ongoing monitoring and evaluation of the scheme, identifying areas that have the biggest statistical impact/change, while the focus groups provide greater depth and insight into people’s experiences of the scheme, and ensure the ‘user voice’ is included within the findings.

Analysis of uptake data suggested this had been greater than 100% for certain cohorts within a few local authorities. This was discussed with the data provider (Transport Scotland) who noted this was likely to be due to students being included within population data under their ‘home’ address/local authority while registering for Young Persons’ Free Bus Travel Scheme at their ‘term-time’ address/local authority, thus causing discrepancies between the data sources.

Limits of the Research

The limits of the research also need to be noted. The scope of the work focused largely on identifying the impact of the Young Persons’ Free Bus Travel Scheme on eligible young people. While impacts were identified and explored for other bus users the findings were based on small samples and therefore were not statistically robust, and were often based on perception and anecdotal evidence. Some of these issues may benefit from more detailed research/consideration.

In addition, it was not possible to access formally recorded data in several instances. This included patronage and/or ticketing data (either for bus operators or other public transport modes) as this is considered commercially sensitive, and recorded instances of anti-social behaviour on buses before and after the scheme was introduced. This meant that changes to recorded patronage or any displacement of passengers from one mode/service to another could not be identified. Ticketing data was further complicated by it often not being comparable with the Young Persons’ Free Bus Travel Scheme, with tickets often categorised as some form of ‘child’ or ‘adult’ ticket (i.e. for those under or over 16 years of age). While child tickets were fully reflected within the scheme, it was not possible to identify those aged 16-21 within adult ticket sales, again making ticketing comparisons difficult. As such, travel pattern changes reported here rely solely on feedback provided in the baseline and follow-up surveys, but this did not allow any analysis of the impact the scheme may have on the travel behaviour of other bus/public transport users. Similarly, issues related to anti-social behaviour rely on perception and anecdotal evidence from the follow-up survey and focus groups.

Report Presentation

The remainder of this report presents the findings from the work. Quantitative data (from the follow-up survey and secondary data sources) are included alongside qualitative feedback from survey questions and focus group results. The report is structured around the emerging key findings rather than considering each data collection method in turn.

< Previous | Contents | Next >