Active & Safe Routes to Schools

Background

Program Goals:

Reducing child pedestrian injuries; promoting safety; creating a cleaner environment by reducing traffic congestion; promoting a healthy and active lifestyle; encouraging better planning and design of school catchment areas through changes in land-use and transport policy

Intent:

Unintentional injuries

Risk Factors Addressed:

Traffic congestion near schools; children’s health

Place of occurrence:

Community

Age/Age Range:

School-aged children

Resources

Year Developed:

1996

Collaborative Organization(s):

Toronto District School Board; Toronto Public Health; City of Toronto Transportation Services Department; Green Communities Association

Funding Resource(s):

Ontario Trillium Foundation, the J.W. McConnell Family Foundation, the Climate Change Action Fund, Transport Canada MOST (Moving on Sustainable Transportation) Initiative, and the Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario (IWALK supporter only).  In addition, the Ontario Ministry of Tourism and Recreation became a new funding partner in September 2004.  In-kind support is provided by The Cooperators, The Printing House, Way to Go! School Program, Go for Green, and Natural Resources Canada (No Idling At School campaign).  Some of the past funders have included the Laidlaw Foundation, the Toronto Atmospheric Fund, Toronto Heart Health, and Toronto Public Health.

Costs:

$200,000/year to maintain the current level of support and increase participation across Ontario. This includes two full time staff salaries with benefits, seed funds for new communities, program resources (IWALK, Walking School Bus, No Idling At School campaign, Cross Canada Walking Challenge Maps, etc.), provincial communications and promotion, and research opportunities.  The current estimated average value of annual cash and in-kind contributions in these communities today is $150,000. 

Implementation

Context/Setting:

200 Elementary schools in the Greater Toronto Area; Community-based

Strategies Used:

Education, Engineering, Economics, Enactment

Activities Used:

Four approaches provide common components of all SRTS programs:

Traffic calming model, Funding model, Encouragement model, and Enforcement model. ASRTS uses: Neighbourhood walkabouts, promotion of community advocacy; Traffic calming measures in school zones, traffic reducing technology (speed humps, red light cameras); Environmental celebrations; Policy changes to reduce speed limits in school zones, priority snow clearance for routes to schools; by-laws to reduce wait times in school parking zones to decrease traffic volume.

Program Evaluation:

ASRTS program manager in conjunction with the main collaborators conducts an assessment.Factors      examined: the participation rate, the program activities that are working, the identification of support needs, how stakeholders and collaborators feel, motivation for families to meet their intended school travel plans

Source of Best Practice:

Road Safety 2006

Original Source:

Safe Routes to School program developed in Denmark, mid-1970s

ATKINS, Road Traffic and Safety (2002). Evaluation of projects regarding routes to schools in the municipality of Odesne (Denmark). Retrieved May 17, 2004, from http://www.saferoutestoschool.org.uk/?c=5000&t=freepublist.htm

Supplementary Material:

www.saferoutestoschool.ca
http://www.saferoutestoschools.org.uk 

Contact Information: 

Ms. Jacky Kenney
Program Manager
Active & Safe Routes to School
Green Communities Association
57 Douglas Avenue
Toronto, ON M5M 1G4
Email: info@saferoutestoschool.ca
Tel: 416-488-7263

Outcomes

Long-term outcomes/Effectiveness:

ASRTS strives to create a sustainable program in each community. Parents who participated reduced their car trips to school and changed other travel behaviour

Short-term outcomes:

Participation rate – in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), the program has grown steadily over the years and demand remains high. Ontario has had the highest level of participation in North America.

Other Benefits:

Increased physical activity levels for children; environmental gaols through the No Idling at School campaign

Other

Date of Review:

2005

Classification:

Best Practice