Agenda item

Purpose of report:  To provide an update to the Select Committee on the progress of the Surrey Connect Digital Demand Responsive Transport service (DDRT).

Witnesses:

Matt Furniss, Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth

Katie Stewart, Executive Director for Environment, Growth, Land, Property and Infrastructure

Lucy Monie, Director for Highways and Transport

Paul Millin, Assistant Director for Strategic Transport

Key points raised during the discussion:

1. The Chairman asked what could be done to increase the number of registered users of the Digital Demand Responsive Travel (DDRT) Service. The Assistant Director for Strategic Transport explained that the number of people using the service varied across the different DDRT zones, primarily due to population differences. Every household and business received publicity about the DDRT service before it started. Ongoing promotion and publicity were needed, which was part of the communication plan being developed. Local initiatives were being looked at to try to encourage greater ridership, such as through discounts and group travel offers.

2. A Member asked how successful the DDRT’s communication plan had been. The Assistant Director for Strategic Transport explained that numbers were rising in terms of people subscribing and using the scheme. Work was being done with the communications team, and the University of Surrey to see how to increase DDRT usage.

3. A Member raised that Mole valley’s DDRT service was set up as a door-to-door service, rather than a stop-to-stop service, and asked if this remained. The Assistant Director for Strategic Transport explained that this was part of the learning. DDRT was offering essential door-to-door trips but was now only offering a stop-to-stop service. If a new ‘stop’ was desired, it could be assessed and made available to residents. The Stop-to-stop service made services more available for residents.

4. A Member raised that between 10-15% of the cost of running DDRT services was recovered. The Member asked what the realistic cost recovery ambition was once the services were established, and if there was an indication of how much, per journey, the Council was subsidizing for the Mole Valley District.  The Assistant Director for Strategic Transport noted that DDRT was not introduced to become a commercial offer. DDRT was successful in areas with relatively low levels of public transport. As DDRT became more established and optimised, it was reasonable to achieve between 20-25% of cost recovery in running the service.

5. A Member asked what proportion of the £4.85 million (m) budget for DDRT was being funded through government funds, and if there was any further Government Rural Mobility Funding available. The Assistant Director for Strategic Transport explained that the Rural Mobility Fund grant, allocated to Mole Valley’s DDRT service, was a 2-year grant finishing in May 2024, and would be fully utilised. Bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP) Phase 2 funding was the other source of funding, where around £2.4m would be applied for DDRT for the current and next financial year of 2025/26.

6. The Member asked if the DDRT funding was sustainable, and if the Council could continue the service if there was no further government funding. The Assistant Director for Strategic Transport explained that there had been transparency over what the current costs of DDRT were, and the future ambitions for more DDRT across Surrey, which was fed into the medium-term financial plan.

7. The Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth explained the Cabinet was committed to DDRT, and funding was put aside for it in the budget. The Council was not aiming for DDRT to break even. The Council was providing public transport services in non-commercial areas to ensure no one was left behind and was meeting the transport, climate change and emissions targets. DDRT was not cheaper than subsidizing a fixed bus route, but it was more flexible and targeted to residents. DDRT’s budget was less than the subsidised fixed bus network, which currently stood at £11 million, which conveyed DDRT’s value for money. The Mole Valley programme was the best performing government subsidized programme in the country and with time other DDRT areas would grow to this level.

8. The Member asked what happened before the DDRT schemes were introduced in September 2023, and referred to the West Guildford scheme, where there had been an approximately 45% increase in the number of passengers journeys every week, compared to before DDRT was introduced. The Assistant Director for Strategic Transport explained that following the public and stakeholder consultation, there were several socially necessary services that were subsumed into DDRT. Data could be retrieved on those services in terms of passenger numbers and provide a comparison in the DDRT zones. In terms of engagement, the strategic transport team would be surveying users to understand journeys were made before DDRT.

9. In relation to the Council funding and operating many bus services in Surrey, a Member asked if thought was being given to establishing the Council’s own Bus franchise. The Assistant Director for Strategic Transport explained that through the national bus strategy, ‘Bus back better’, published in March 2021, all local transport authorities in England were asked to assess, as part of the BSIP, if there was a want to explore franchising or an enhanced partnership model for bus operation. The Council chose to establish the enhanced partnership model. The county deal framework conveyed an opportunity that local authorities, including Surrey, could consider bus franchising. The Initial step for bus franchising would be securing approval from the Secretary of State. The cost the franchising model was significant, and no County Council to date had implemented one. Around 70% of bus journeys in Surrey were made on commercial services, without Council involvement.

10. A Member asked what the target number of passengers per day that DDRT was aiming for to achieve value for money. The Member also asked what the other measures of success were. The Assistant Director for Strategic Transport explained that the measures of success for DDRT were being developed, which would include things such as passenger satisfaction ratings. It was also about understanding the improved geographical accessibility for residents. Currently, the average number of passengers per operating hour across all the DDRT services was 1.55. A target had been set for 2.5 and 3 passengers per operating hour. The current rate for customer satisfaction was 95%. The completed performance targets would return to the committee.

11. A Member asked If there were opportunities to transport children to a place where they could get a commercial bus or a safe walking route to school. The Assistant Director for Strategic Transport explained that DDRT was not a school transport service. DDRT could be used to get to other modes of transport, such as a train station to help with school travel. Most children in mainstream education who were entitled to travel assistance were travelling on buses and coaches, which was the most cost effective. Most taxis procured by the Council for travel assistance were for children being educated in a special education needs (SEND) setting. It was not simple to use DDRT vehicles for SEND children due to the safeguarding and support measures required. If DDRT was used for home-to-school transport, it would take it out of service for a period in the morning and afternoon, preventing other residents form using DDRT, defeating the rational of DDRT.

12. A Member reference the service Chatterbus which offered school transport services. The Assistant Director for Strategic Transport explained that Chatterbus had a different operating model, choosing to provide a transport to a local school for a period in the morning. This was working well, but Chatterbus was not a DDRT service.

13. Regarding safe routes to school, the Assistant Director for Strategic Transport explained a review of safe routes to schools was underway, which was looking at individual schools across the county in terms of entitlement of children and routes to see if there was an opportunity to make some of the routes safer by interventions which were not necessarily high cost, such as rights of way that could be opened up for children travelling to school.

14. The Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth added there was a piece of work being done with operators to see if the use of DDRT could be maximised. There was a distinct pattern in Mole Valley of people using the DDRT service for medical appointments, rather than a taxi or a fixed bus route.

15. A Member asked about the publicity and communications plan behind the DDRT service. The Assistant Director for Strategic Transport explained a more detailed communications plan could be brought back to the committee for scrutiny. All the contact detail for Surrey Connect were on the public website, and the e-mail address where people could request an additional pick-up point in the locality was surreyconnect@surreycc.gov.uk.

16. A Member raised an issue in Chobham with accessing appointments at the Chobham and West End Medical Practice. The Assistant Director for Strategic Transport explained that this was a known problem and the Strategic Transport team had been discussing how this could be improved. 

17. A Member asked if there was an analysis showing the catchment areas for specific geographical locations not using the DDRT service. The Assistant Director for Strategic Transport explained that these areas would be identified in the communications plan, to increase DDRT usage. If Members felt there was a cohort of residents that needed to receive more publicity, this could be reviewed. Opportunities to slightly extend the operating area of DDRT, to bring in a new community that would not adversely impact how the service operated in terms of efficiency, could be reviewed.

18. A Member asked what options existed for extending more regular services during the afternoon. The Assistant Director for Strategic Transport explained that there was the same number of vehicles in all DDRT areas operating throughout the day. All Surrey Connect services were currently operating from 7.00am to 7.00pm Monday to Friday and 8.00am to 6.00pm on a Saturday. Therefore, the afternoon period was still well-served. In some areas more vehicles were being introduced, increasing the ability of users using DDRT.

19. The Member suggested the team could look at doing more regular routes or frequent services during the afternoon when there were rail strikes. The Assistant Director for Strategic Transport explained this was difficult as resource needed to be available to provide the replacement service, with often little notice of a rail strike timetable. It was more complicated with an overtime ban. Work was done with operators to see what could be done in these situations, but it was difficult to respond.

20. A Member asked what the timeframe was for the roll out of DDRT in the areas of Elmbridge, Reigate and Banstead and Spelthorne. The Assistant Director for Strategic Transport explained that the areas in the report had already started to be looked at to see what the opportunities for DDRT were. The expanded DDRT services, the areas of which could not yet be shared, would start in 2025, likely in September.

21. A Member raised that the Padam (booking and scheduling software), feedback option did not allow users to feedback when they could not book a DDRT bus. The Member asked what the capacity of the DDRT service was and how the capacity could be increased without that feedback option. The Assistant Director for Strategic Transport noted that a learning point was around when a resident was unable to book a trip on DDRT, how would this be known and how could it be learnt from. This was currently being worked on with Padam. Another learning point was around short-term cancellations, which the team needed to work out how to deal with these. Part of this was about improving understanding among residents around providing more notice of cancellations. Once these learning points were resolved, the availability and utilisation of the DDRT service would improve.

Actions:

1. To bring back the communications plan to the committee for scrutiny, once completed.

2. Assistant Director of Strategic Transport to provide figures on the cost of DDRT’s per passenger trip in Mole Valley.

3. Assistant Director of Strategic Transport to share comparative data on the passenger numbers from the socially necessary services that were subsumed by DDRT, before and after DDRT was in place.

4. Assistant Director of Strategic Transport to share the results of a future survey on how DDRT passengers were making journeys before DDRT was in place.

5. Performance targets for DDRT, once completed, to be presented to the Select Committee for scrutiny.

Resolved:

The Committee agreed the following recommendations:

1. Recommends and supports the development of a clear set of performance measures, targets and metrics around take up of the service to provide Cllrs and residents clarity over the success of service take-up and on where to focus communications or other efforts to encourage take-up; as well as clarity over where targets are not being met so that decisions around value for money can be made.

2. Supports the development and implementation of a communications plan to support the introduction of the new Surrey Connect DDRT services which will be vital to growing patronage on existing and new services and agrees the recommendation that this be bought back to the Committee for scrutiny at a date to be agreed with officers.

3. Notes that this is an expensive service benefiting a relatively small number of people and that ongoing monitoring of the success and take up of the service is therefore critical and requests that the Committee is kept up to date on progress and that a report is submitted in 6 months’ time (by end October 2024).

4. Encourages further exploration of opportunities to expand and maximise use of the service to address resident needs for example to access medical appointments.