Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation 13
13
Accepted in Part
DfT knows too little about active travel investment outcomes due to evaluation thresholds
Conclusion
Active travel infrastructure is highly varied and can include, for example, cycle lanes, pedestrian crossings, pedestrianised zones, cycle parking, and school streets. The NAO reported that between 2016 and 2021, DfT spent £2.3 billion on active travel infrastructure. The NAO found that DfT has known too little about what has been achieved from active travel investment to date.25 We asked DfT why it knew so little about how this money has been spent and the quality and value that had been delivered as a result. DfT said it felt this was an unfairly critical remark and it asserted that it asked local authorities to return information on what had been delivered with funds provided to them for active travel, and that it commissioned evaluations of active travel interventions.26 DfT confirmed that it followed up on incomplete information from local authorities on what they have delivered.27 However, we note that local authorities are only required to evaluate the impact of schemes that cost more than £2 million, and there is no requirement to undertake any evaluation of schemes that cost less than £2 million.28 We asked DfT to tell us the average value of active travel grants that it provides to local authorities. In a letter to us after our evidence session, DfT told us that the average grant per project delivered in the most recent Active Travel Fund tranches was £750,000.29
Government Response Summary
The government agreed, noting that schemes between £1m and £2m are now strongly encouraged to undertake evaluation, and those above £750,000 require an economic appraisal. They will also conduct a broader portfolio evaluation for lower-value schemes, and ATE is developing a revised evaluation approach.
Government Response
Accepted in Part
HM Government
Accepted in Part
3.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Recommendation implemented 3.2 The department should clarify that all grant funding it provides is monitored, for example, to ensure that expected outputs are delivered. Evaluation of schemes, including, for example, the impact a scheme has had on rates of cycling and walking, is longer-term and more resource intensive. The department has previously set a £2 million threshold for evaluation on individual schemes. However, in the most recent round of active travel grant funding, ‘Active Travel Fund 4’, local authorities with schemes costing between £1 million and £2 million were strongly encouraged to undertake evaluation. Schemes above £750,000 are also required to submit a full economic appraisal using the Active Mode Appraisal Toolkit. 3.3 The department accepts this means it does not have a complete understanding of the effectiveness of all active travel schemes and, as noted in the Committee’s report, the average value of schemes from recent funding rounds was £750,000. However, as noted at paragraph 2.9, a broader ‘portfolio evaluation’ of active travel investment will consider a sample of schemes with lower values. The department considers this to be a proportionate use of resources and in line with HM Treasury’s Green Book on evaluation. 3.4 In addition, and as per the department’s response to recommendation 2b, ATE is developing a revised approach to scheme evaluation. ATE is also working with local authorities to understand their ability to deliver active travel interventions effectively. ATE published the ‘capability ratings’ for all local authorities on 10 March 2023, and plans to publish revised ratings in 2024.