Road Traffic Safety in Lewisham.

1. INTRODUCTION

The largest number of serious unintentional injuries and deaths in children are because of road

traffic accidents1. In 2009 in Great Britain, 2332 children and young people aged 0–14 were seriously

injured and 65 died as a result of road traffic accidents2 3. Five per cent of all such accidents are

known to involve children, therefore ensuring necessary measures are in place to keep roads safe is

essential to protect children and young people4.

This report was written at the request of the Lewisham Safeguarding Children Board (LSCB) to

explore what might be done to reduce mortality and serious injury due to road traffic accidents

(RTAs) in Lewisham. The report is for discussion at the September 2012 meeting of the LSCB.

The aims of the report are:

1. To analyse the pattern of road traffic accidents (RTAs) involving children in Lewisham

2. To examine how policy related to road safety in children and young people is formulated and

implemented in the UK

3. To examine what is known to be effective in preventing RTAs in children

4. To identify gaps in the current service provided in Lewisham and make recommendations

This report was written using an extensive literature review of policy and peer-reviewed journal

articles related to the prevention of road traffic accidents in the UK, with a particular emphasis on

measures which have been considered to reduce road traffic accidents in children and young people.

In addition, data on road traffic accidents causing serious or fatal injuries to children and young

people in Lewisham were obtained from Transport for London. These data were analysed using

simple descriptive techniques.

The report was written in collaboration with the Road Safety and Sustainable Transport team at

Lewisham Council who provided information regarding past and current initiatives employed by

their department to reduce RTAs in children and young people in Lewisham.

2. BACKGROUND

1 http://www.capt.org.uk/resources/road-safety

2 Department of Transport, 2010.

3 Preventing unintentional injuries among under-15s. Costing report. Implementing NICE guidance. 2010.

4 Better safe than sorry. Preventing unintentional injury to children. Audit Commision. February 2007.

2.1 Road traffic accidents as a cause of death and serious injury in children and young people

Unintentional injury is a leading cause of death among children aged 1-14 years, and leads to more

children attending hospital than any other cause. Unintentional injury kills three children per

100,000 population, a similar rate to that of cancer. Five per cent of all road traffic accidents involve

children and they are a leading cause of child fatalities4.

Road traffic injuries among those under 25 years rank as the eighth leading cause of death around

the world5. However, when analysed in five-year age bands, the significance of road traffic injuries

rises dramatically. Among 15–19 year-olds, road traffic injuries are the leading cause of death

worldwide, while among the 10–14 years and 20–24 years age groups they are the second leading

cause of death5. Under-reporting of deaths and injuries resulting from road traffic accidents is known

to be widespread, and may be more common among children, particularly when they incur

moderate injuries.

In March 2000, the previous government published a national road safety strategy and casualty

reduction targets for 2010 in ‘Tomorrow’s roads: safer for everyone’6. At this time it was noted that

every year over 130 children died and more than 4,500 were seriously injured while walking and

cycling, many of them close to their homes. Another 60 died and over 1,100 were seriously injured

travelling in cars. At this time, despite road deaths falling by nearly 40% and serious injuries by 45%

compared to the 1981-85 average, the record for child pedestrian deaths still lagged behind other

European countries.

Therefore, the targets laid out in ‘Tomorrow’s roads: safer for everyone’ were formulated with a

special focus on reducing the number of children who are killed or injured in road accidents. By

2010, the Government set out to achieve, compared with the average for 1994-98:

a 40% reduction in the numbers of people killed or seriously injured in road accidents;

a 50% reduction in the numbers of children killed or seriously injured; and

a 10% reduction in the slight casualty rate, expressed as the number of people slightly

injured per 100 million vehicle kilometres6.

5 WHO Youth and road safety. 2007

6 http://www.ukroads.org/ukroadsafety/articlespapers/tomorrowsroadssaferforeveryone.pdf

In London, The Mayor’s Transport Strategy was published in 2001 promoting an increase in walking

and cycling, and recognizing an increase in the use of powered two-wheelers7. At the same time, the

London Road Safety Plan was published endorsing the targets set in ‘Tomorrow’s roads: safer for

everyone’ and also recognising the extra measures needed in London to protect vulnerable road

users8. The Mayor’s strategy set a target of a 40% reduction for accidents causing fatal or serious

injuries (KSI) in pedestrians, whilst the target to reduce the number of children killed or seriously

injured by 50% was maintained.

By 2005, these targets had largely been achieved in London, with the exception of that for powered

two-wheelers, therefore in 2006 after consultation with stakeholders, the Mayor of London

announced new more challenging targets which set out to achieve by the end of 2010, compared

with the average for 1994-98:

a 50% reduction in the number of people killed or seriously injured;

a 50% reduction in the number of pedestrians killed or seriously injured;

a 50% reduction in the number of pedal cyclists killed or seriously injured;

a 40% reduction in the number of powered two-wheeler users killed or seriously injured

(unchanged);

a 60% reduction in the number of children killed or seriously injured; and

a 25% reduction in the slight casualty rate, reduction in the slight casualty rate expressed as

the number of people slightly injured per 100 million vehicle kilometres9.

The Government published its new National Strategic Framework for Road Safety (SFRS)4 in May

201110. The SFRS sets out the national policies that are intended to continue to reduce deaths

and injuries on the roads and places an expectation on local government to continue to

prioritise road safety and to seek improvements by adopting policies that reflect local priorities

and circumstances.

In July 2012, the Mayor of London launched ‘Towards a Road Safety Action Plan for London: 2020’ a

consultation document which sets out a comprehensive draft Road Safety Action Plan to meet the

continuing challenges of road safety, and which sets a new target of cutting the number of those

7 http://legacy.london.gov.uk/mayor/strategies/transport/pdf/final_execsumm.pdf

8 http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/Londons-road-safety-plan.pdf

9 http://www.lscp.org.uk/lrsu/data-research_casualty-red_lon.html

10 http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/strategic-framework-for-road-safety/strategicframework.pdf

killed or seriously injured by a further 40 per cent by 2020 from a baseline of the 2005-09 average; a

total reduction of 10,000 over the life of the plan11 . Despite the apparent road safety successes of

the last 15 years there is still work to be done. This report contains the latest published data for

London’s road safety targets, and highlights further areas for improvements, as London moves

towards 2020. This will be explored in more detail in Section 2.4.

2.2 The evidence base for initiatives to improve road safety

Road safety measures generally fall into two categories: traffic calming measures, which may be

area-wide or localised, and education programmes, which again may be population-level or targeted

to specific groups e.g. vulnerable road users.

2.21 Traffic calming measures

A Cochrane Collaboration systematic review and meta-analysis entitled ‘Area-wide traffic calming for

preventing traffic-related injuries’ was published in 200912. In the absence of randomised control

trials meeting their inclusion criteria, they analysed 22 controlled before-after studies of area-wide

traffic calming schemes including:

Vertical and horizontal shifts in traffic (e.g.) road humps, speed cushions, mini-roundabouts,

road narrowing etc;

Optical measures (e.g.) chevron road sings, road surface treatments), reduced horizontal

visibility, audible measures, alterations to road lighting;

Redistribution of traffic of alteration to road hierarchy (e.g.) permanent or temporary

blocking of road, creation of one-way streets, four way stops;

Changes to road environment (e.g.) increased vegetation along road; and

Reduced speed limit zones (e.g. 20 mph-zones, 30 km/h zones) where speeds are physically

limited by traffic calming measures.

Data was extracted and pooled on the total number of road traffic accidents, all road user deaths

and injuries, pedestrian-motor vehicles collisions and road user deaths. The results of the meta-

analyses were inconclusive. Nine studies reported the number of road traffic crashes resulting in

11 https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/road-safety-plan

12 Area-wide traffic calming for preventing traffic related injuries (Review). The Cochrane Collaboration. 2009.

deaths; pooled rate ratio 0.79 (95% CI 0.23 to 2.68). Eighteen studies reported a pooled slight

reduction in number of road traffic accidents resulting in injuries (fatal and non-fatal) of 0.85 (95% CI

0.75 to 0.96). Fourteen trials reported the number of pedestrian-motor vehicles collisions, pooled

rate ratio 1.01 (95% CI 0.88 to 1.16). There was significant heterogeneity reported for the total

number of crashes and road user injuries outcomes.

Regarding road traffic accidents affecting children - in November 2010, the NICE guidelines

‘Preventing unintentional injuries among children and young people aged under 15: road design and

modification’ were published13. This is one of three pieces of guidance from NICE on how to prevent

unintentional injuries amongst children and young people under fifteen years of age. Due to a lack of

evidence related to other measures meeting the NICE inclusion criteria, the guidance only covered

20 mph limits, 20 mph zones and engineering measures to reduce speed or makes routes safer. A

key recommendation from the guidance was that local highway authorities and strategic

partnerships should take action to introduce measures to reduce speed in streets that are primarily

residential, or where pedestrian and cyclist movements are high. These measures could include

speed reduction features (for example, traffic calming measures on single streets, or extended 20

mph zones) or changes to the speed limit with signing only (20 mph limits) where current average

speeds are low enough13. This is consistent with previous evidence that higher speeds reduce the

time available for people to react and increase the severity of collisions. Studies have shown that

pedestrians have a 90% chance of surviving a car crash at speeds below 30 kph but a less than 50%

chance at speeds of 45 kph14.

A research review ‘Reducing unintentional injuries in childhood’ conducted by the National

Children’s Bureau in 2010 investigated the evidence for effective strategies to prevent unintentional

injuries in childhood15. They found that seatbelts and child safety restraints and relevant legislation

mandating their use were effective in reducing child injuries. Bicycle helmets were also cited as an

important measure in reducing injury, with studies from outside the UK reporting that legislation

mandating the use of helmets led to fairly sizable increases in use (43-84%) and reduced injuries in

children. Area-calming measures also appeared to be effective in reducing casualties and accidents 13 NICE public health guidance 31. Preventing unintentional injuries among children and young people aged under 15: road design and modification. November 2010

14 Racioppi F, Ericsson L, Tingvall C et al (2006). Walking, cyclist and transport safety: an analysis of child road deaths. Journal of the Roayal Society of Medicine. 99: 402-5.

15 Fauth R and Ellis A. Reducing unintentional injuries in childhood: a research review. National Children’s Bureau. September 2010.

involving children. Reduced speed zones were also found to be effective, but the injury reduction

was less demonstrable for pedestrians and cyclists compared to car occupants.

A review of evidence for the prevention of RTAs was published by the Centre of Public Health (CPH)

at the Liverpool John Moores University in September 201016.They found that environmental

changes such as implementing area-wide traffic calming (e.g.) speed humps, 20mph zones and speed

cameras), marked pathways for cyclists, and school crossing patrols were effective in reducing road

traffic accidents and associated injuries.

The introduction of 20mph zones in residential areas or areas frequently used by pedestrians and

cyclists were recommended in the Department of Transport’s ‘A Safer Way’ consultation document

in April 200917. Concentrating traffic calming measures in deprived areas have also been shown to

help reduce the inequalities gap in child pedestrian injuries seen between more deprived and less

deprived geographical areas of the UK18.

2.22 Road safety education programs

Education programmes can be used to increase an individual’s ability to cope with traffic

environments and so reduce pedestrian injuries. Courses targeted at children either alone or along

with their parents and teachers and can take place in the home, school or road setting. The CPH

evidence review found that safety education programmes can increase safety knowledge and skills

or behaviours among children17. The Kerbcraft child pedestrian training programme has been

associated with an increase in road safety skills among those aged five to seven years 19. However,

these is little evidence to show the impact of these safety education programmes on accidents or

injuries. Evidence on injury reduction in children, rather than the acquisition of road safety skills, was

also found to be lacking in the research review from the National Children’s Bureau16.

A recent systematic review investigating the effectiveness of educational programs found mixed

results in the prevention of outdoor unintentional injuries (including road traffic accidents) to

children under 15 years. There were very few studies evaluated reporting data related to the

16 Road traffic accidents. A review of evidence for Prevention for the UK focal point for violence and injury prevention. Centre for Public Health, Liverpool John Moores University. September 2010.

17. A safer way: Consultation on making Britain’s roads the safest in the world. Department of Transport April 2009.

18 Jones SJ, Lyons RA, John A, Palmer SR. Traffic calming policy can reduce inequalities in child pedestrian injuries: database study. Injury Prevention 2005; 11: 152-156.

19 Whelan K et al. Road safety research report no. 82. Evaluation of the national child pedestrian training pilot projects. London. Department for Transport. 2008.

behaviours, knowledge and attitudes of children aged under 15 years relating to road safety;

however, one programme delivering oral presentations to students delivered over the course of a

school year reporting statistically significant changes in children’s behaviour and attitudes towards

safety outdoors. This may indicate that prolonged initiatives and education programmes may have

better results than more sporadic ‘one-off’ educational sessions20.

2.2.3 Mass media campaigns

In the UK, media education campaigns have been used to increase knowledge and change behaviour

towards road safety, through the use of television, radio, printed materials such as newspapers,

posters and magazines, and more recently, social media21. The Government’s THINK! Campaign run

in England and Wales has targeted issues such as using a mobile phone when driving or crossing a

road and driving when tired, to both drivers and pedestrians22. However, once more whilst evidence

shows that these campaigns effectively increase knowledge about injury prevention, was not shown

to translate to a reduction in actual childhood injuries16,17,21.

2.24 Community-based approaches

The Health Development Agency report entitled ‘Injuries in children aged 0-14 years and

inequalities’ published in 2005 examine 10 studies that had evaluated the effectiveness of

community-based injury programmes and included elements related to child safety23. Of the 10

studies, the Harstad WHO Safe Community Programme, included interventions related to road

safety. The Harstad programme reported that interventions were more effective in specific age

groups, eg in children under 10 years the greatest reductions were seen in traffic injury rate,

pedestrian injury rate and increased use of cycle helmets24. However, the NCB review noted the

positive impact of the community-wide interventions across all 10 studies in promoting awareness of

good practice, and leading to some behaviour change and injury reduction16.

2.3 Progress on these initiatives in London

20 Pearson M, Hunt H, Garside R, Moxham T, Peters J, Anderson R. Preventing unintentional injuries to children under 15 years in the outdoors: a systematic review of the effectiveness of educational programs. Injury Prevention 2012; 18:113-123.

21 http://www.grsproadsafety.org/news/building-culture-road-safety-social-media

22 http://think.direct.gov.uk/

23 Injuries in children aged 0-14 years and inequalities. Health Development Agency. 2005.

The total length of roads within 20mph zones in London have increased rapidly since the mid-1990s

(Figure 1)24. The changes in the annual frequency of injury accidents demonstrated by Webster and

Layfield in 2003 are shown in Figure 2, with an overall annual accident frequency reported reduction

of 43% (1.84 accidents per year per 20 mph zone) between the ‘before’ and ‘after’ periods. The total

length of roads in the seventy eight 20mph zones used for the accident analyses was 253.4 km,

giving a ‘before’ overall accident frequency of 1.31 accidents per year per km, and an ‘after’ overall

accident frequency of 0.74 accidents per year per km25.

Figure 1. Location of 20 mph speed zones in London (1991-2007), based on Census boundaries25.

24 Grundy C et al, Effect pf 20mph traffic speed zones on road injuries in London. 1986-2006: controlled interrupted time series analysis. BMJ 2009; 339: 4469.

25 Webster D, Layfield R. Review of 20 mph zones in London boroughs. Transport for London, 2003 (Project report (PP243).

Figure 2. Accidents in 20mph zones in London (78 zones)26

A similar but more recent study by Grundy et al found that the introduction of 20 mph zones in

London was associated with a 41.9% (95% CI 36.0-47.8%) reduction in road casualties between 1986

and 200625. The percentage reduction was greatest in younger children and for the category of killed

of seriously injured casualties than for slight injuries. Furthermore there was no reported evidence

of casualty migration to areas adjacent to 20 mph zones where casualties also fell by an average of

8.0% (95% CI 4.4-11.5%).

Across London as a whole, the target set in 2006 to reduce the number of children and young

people killed or seriously injured (KSI) by road traffic accidents has been reached and surpassed

(highlighted in Figure 3). Since 1998 levels of KSI casualties have decreased each year expect for

a small increase in 2006. However a decrease of 5% in 2010 meant that they are now at the

lowest level since records began26.

Figure 3. Summary of changes in casualties for London target categories by year 201011

Category Casualties % change by 2010 compared with

Target change by 2010 (%)

1994-98 average

2009 2010 2009 1994-98 average

Killed or seriously injured casualties

Total -50% 6684.4 3227 2886 -11% -57%

Pedestrians -50% 2136.6 1055 913 -13% -57%Pedal cyclists -50% 566.8 433 467 8% -18%Powered 2-wheelers -40% 932.8 706 615 -13% -34%Children -60% 935.4 263 250 -5% -73%Child casualties represented 9% of the total casualties in 2010. Child pedestrian casualties accounted

for 66%, child car occupants for 12% and pedal cyclists for 9%of all child KSI casualties. Data from

2011, shown in Figure 4, demonstrates that child pedestrian casualties peak at around 11 to 12

years old, at around the time children move from primary to secondary school11.

Figure 4. All child casualties in London in 2011 by age11

26 http://www.lscp.org.uk/lrsu/www/downloads/publications/report_200907_towards2010.pdf

2.4 Progress on these initiatives in Lewisham

In 2006, the overall lowest ever total of injuries for people of all ages was recorded in Lewisham with

1019 people injured on the roads. At this time there were two fatalities, 130 serious and 887 slight

injured recorded27. Despite the general reduction, it was noted at this time that certain road users

remain vulnerable on Lewisham’s roads and are still highly represented in the casualty figures for

those killed or seriously injured.

The most vulnerable road users by mode of transport (2004-6) were reported to be pedestrians

(making up 33% of all KSI in Lewisham), followed by powered two-wheelers and car occupants.

Children aged fifteen years and under were found to be highly represented in the pedestrian figures,

with those aged between 12-15 years deemed most at risk. This is similar to patterns noted both

throughout London as shown previously in Figure 4, and described nationally in the DfT’s 2007 ‘Child

Road Safety Strategy’28.

Despite an increase in reported child KSI casualties between 2009 and 2010, Lewisham met both the

national target, as well as the TfL extended casualty target for reduction in the number of children

killed or seriously injured by 2010 (Figure 5)26.

Figure 5. Casualties in children under 16 years in 2010 compared with the 1994-1998 average and 200926.

User group Casualty numbers Percentage change in 2010

1994-1998 average

2009 2010 2009 1994-1998 average

Children (under 16 years): Fatal and serious casualties

41.4 8 13 63% -69%

The overall trend in numbers of children under 16 years of age killed on Lewisham’s roads are shown

in Figure 6. This figure also shows that at every recorded time point, the number of KSI casualties in

children has been below the casualty reduction target. Since 2001, six child road traffic accident

fatalities were reported in Lewisham, three in 2002, one in 2003, and two in 2008.

Figure 6. Children (under 16 yrs) killed or seriously injured on Lewisham's road networks

27 Draft Lewisham Road Safety Plan, 2010.

28 http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/8530/1/childrdsafetystrategy2007

The next target for the reduction in number of children killed or seriously injured on Lewisham’s

roads by 2020 was set as a 40% reduction of the 2005-2009 average, totalling 14 casualties. Current

trends, shown in Figure 6, suggest that this target has already been obtained in Lewisham, however,

continued work is needed to ensure the number of KSI road casualties in children are maintained at

the current low levels.

3. THE PREVENTION OF ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN LEWISHAM

Improving road safety has been highlighted as a goal of Lewisham Council within the Local

Implementation Plan (LIP) 2011-2031, published in April 2011. One of the objectives highlighted in

the LIP is to ‘reduce the number of road traffic collisions and improve safety on the public transport

network’29.

However it is evident that, within the last decade, work has been done to reduce the number of fatal

and serious casualties on the roads of Lewisham. This has been achieved by the targeted work of

Lewisham Council’s Road Safety and Sustainable Transport team.

3.1 What is being done to increase road safety in children and young people in Lewisham?

3.1.2 Accident hot-spots identification and traffic calming measures

Between 2006 and 2008 there were on average 926 casualties in Lewisham in people of all ages. Of

these 44% were using a car, 18% were pedestrians, 16% were motorcyclists and 11% were using

pedal cycles29. These incidents, when mapped to the location of the road traffic accident, showed a

number of key roads where a greater number of collisions occurred. Roads with a greater frequency

of accidents are shown in Figure 7 by an increase in the size of coloured dots29.

Looking at road traffic accidents resulting in child KSI casualties only, it is possible to map the

collisions in a similar way. Figure 8 shows all known child KSI collisions in Lewisham between 2007

and 2012. Whilst fewer collisions are recorded in Figure 8, it is still notable that many of the

collisions occur on major roads, with increased concentrations of incidents taking place on the A20,

the A2 and the A209 (South Circular), as well as in Lewisham and Catford town centres.

In order to reduce the number of casualties associated with road collisions, Lewisham Council’s

proposed 20 mph zone programme reflects area where there have been high casualty rates.

Lewisham has adopted an area-wide approach to the introduction of 20 mph zones with the aim for

20 mph zones to cover all local residential access roads. By 2010, 17 of the 27 geographically-defined

zones in Lewisham had appropriate 20 mph zones27.

Another important collision-reducing measure used in Lewisham is the use of safety cameras.

Decisions regarding the use of safety cameras in Lewisham are data-led and are taken with the

29 London Borough of Lewisham: Local Implementation Plan 2011-2031. April 2011.

Figure 7. Road traffic collisions (all ages) from 2006-200829

Borough’s approval, by the London Safety Camera Partnership. In 2010, there were 18 safety

cameras in the borough – 13 red light cameras, 3 fixed speed cameras and 2 fixed digital speed

cameras27.

The use of traffic engineering measures as targeted local safety schemes remain an important

method of reducing collisions. Between 2007 and 2010 the following measures have been used in

Lewisham:

Installing mini-roundabouts

Figure 8. Road traffic collisions resulting in a child KSI casualty 2007-2012 (compiled using data from TfL)

Providing traffic refuges

Providing anti-skid surfaces

Traffic calming features

Junction realignment27.

Finally, adequate street lighting and regular maintenance of Lewisham’s roads are essential for road

safety. A comprehensive relighting of the Borough has been begun as part of a joint 25 year PFI with

the London Borough of Croydon, with the installation of new lighting to be finished by 2014.

Maintenance works is also continually on-going and effort is made to ensure that work associated

with road safety, such as the renewal of anti-skid materials, replacement of traffic signs, School Keep

Clear marking and other safety markings are prioritised.

3.1.3. Road safety education programmes

Much work is also undertaken in Lewisham to improve road safety education, both for children and

young people within the school, home and leisure settings, as well as through the education of

targeted road users, such as new drivers.

Many specific projects have been undertaken in Lewisham to educate children in road safety. These

have included:

Kerbcraft

Kerbcraft is a practical child pedestrian training scheme, developed in Drumchapel, Glasgow,

by Professor James Thomson at the University of Strathclyde. It was designed to teach

pedestrian skills to 5 to 7 year olds, by means of practical road-side training rather than

teaching in the classroom and is built around teaching three skills:

o choosing safe places and routes

o crossing safely at parked cars

o crossing safely near junctions

Skills are taught over the course of at least 12 roadside sessions. Children are taught in the

road environment near their schools, in pairs or groups of three children, by trained

volunteers.

The Department for Transport (DfT) piloted this programme in areas that could demonstrate

a need for child pedestrian training, that were areas of deprivation, and showed a

commitment and ability to host the pilot. Lewisham was successful in two rounds of the

three year programme in 2001 and 2002.

The programme worked intensively with 20 schools in the south of the borough and the

northern wards. The programme funded a full time officer to work intensively with up to 10

schools, encouraging parents and school teaching assistants to carry out roadside practical

training. The work, due to the health and safety guidelines, is quite costly. To continue to

offer this programme Lewisham Road Safety has had a How to set up and run your own

pedestrian skills guide. This is available to all schools in the borough free of charge.

Bikeablity

Cycle Training is offered by an in-house team to children currently in Year 6. The cycle

training comprises of off road and on road training.

The numbers of children trained to Bikeability levels 1 and 2 has increased year on year to

nearly 1000 pupils per year. The training is funded by TFL through the LIP programme. The

programme also enables the team to train adults. This has been very successful in

encouraging parents to cycle with their children.

There is anecdotal evidence that children trained practically on the road as a cyclists become

more traffic aware and therefore safer more aware pedestrians.

Work with the RATED new drivers, see below, is also being carried out to ensure an

understanding of why cyclists cycle as they do, in an effort to create a greater respect of

vulnerable road users.

RATED

RATED (the Road Safety and ADI Driving Instructor Programme) is a unique scheme

developed by the Lewisham Council. The aim of the programme is to reduce the numbers of

young drivers & their passengers injured on our roads.

Young drivers are taught about protecting their own safety and the safety of their

passengers, as well as the need for them to consider the safety of vulnerable road users, in

particular, children.

The programme works in partnership with local instructors with the aim to reduce the

collision involvement of newly qualified drivers and create an awareness of personal risk

factors. It includes a Theory workshop to help learners to pass the theory test, e-learning

tools.

All instructors are given the information and training to deliver the in-car micro lessons

covering topics including drugs and medication, alcohol, speed choices, fatigues,

distractions, the influence of others, and the use of seatbelts.

DFT Funded Pilots –Lewisham was successful in attracting £18,000 over two separate three

year periods and a further £150,000 for a two year programme working with Young

Lewisham Motor Project, working with young moped and cycle riders.

In addition to these individually funded projects, the involvement of primary and secondary schools

has been essential in improving road safety in Lewisham. This has occurred in through both physical

and practical improvements and through educational programmes:

School Travel Plans (STPs)

The aim of the School Travel Plan Programme is to reduce the number of car journeys to and

from schools and to increase the number of people choosing healthier and more sustainable

‘active travel’ options such as walking and cycling. In conjunction with this, safety forms a

significant component within the aims of STPs, as walking and cycling routes around school sites

are often developed to make these modes of travel safer. In addition, by reducing car usage

roads become less congested, more pedestrian friendly and air quality is improved by lowering

pollution levels.

Lewisham Council has actively worked with local schools identifying local safety concerns

through School Travel Plans, which can be addressed by the implementation of physical

measures including:

Raised crossings

Bollards

Parking restrictions

Traffic signs

Improved Lighting

Speed humps

Where particular concerns have been identified in a travel plan, funding can be sought for traffic

calming features. One such example is the implementation of the 20 mph zone in Downham

East (in and around Haberdasher’s Aske’s Knights Academy and Launcelot Primary School).

The appointment of a School Travel Plan advisor in April 2004 has enabled a co-ordinated work

programme targeting all schools to produce and publish school travel plans. Transport for

London’s target is that all schools in London should have a School Travel Plan. Schools with STPs

can apply for additional funding for the installation of cycle racks, waiting shelters, CCTV etc. In

2011, 85 of 95 schools in Lewisham were involved in the School Travel Plan programme, of the

remaining ten schools – eight declined and two were closed for redevelopment. A total of 53

schools updated their school travel plan in the same year. Lewisham schools also received the

second highest funding level in London for their walking bus initiative to encourage children to

walk to school.

Unfortunately, there is no longer a school travel plan advisor appointed in Lewisham. This post

was part of the savings during 2011/2012.

School Crossing Patrols

School Crossing Patrols provide a vital service by escorting children across the road at points on

their journey where they are often most vulnerable.

Since April 2000 the school crossing patrol service (SCP) became a London borough remit. Since

this time all existing sites have been reassessed and some new sites have been added, whilst

others have been deemed to be no longer necessary. In Lewisham there are currently 50 sites in

need of a school crossing patrol, of which 28 are staffed. These sites are assessed in line with the

LARSOA School Crossing Patrol Guidelines. The Council runs an ongoing recruitment drive to

attempt to fill all vacancies.

Junior Road Safety Officer

Majority of primary schools in Lewisham are involved in the Junior Road Safety Officer (JRSO)

scheme. This gives pupils a dynamic role in road safety and active travel education along with

the chance to get serious messages across in a fun way. The road safety team offers support

throughout the year to the JRSO.

Schools usually appoint two JRSOs from pupils in years five or six. Their role is to spread road

safety and active travel messages to their school community by:

Giving talks

Running competitions

Putting up posters

Using their own ideas to spread the message

Each JRSO receives an activity pack to help them get started.

Lewisham Peer To Peer Road Safety Programme

The aims of the Lewisham Peer to Peer Road Safety Programme are:

o to educate year 5 pupils to cascade train year 1 & 2 pupils

o to support the JRSO programme

o to encourage safer road use by year 5 & 6 pupils

The pack is aimed at Year 5 students and explores five areas of road safety. The work

culminates in the year five students presenting the information they have learned to

children in years 2 and 3. This is carried out in ‘junior citizen’ style activities. It is designed to

cater for mixed ability groups throughout.

The theme of road safety runs through all the work areas, including an introductory session -

hazard spotting, then 5 main topics of be safe be seen, the rules of the road, in car safety,

cycle safety and cycle maintenance.

The year 5 pupils are taught all together in the starter session, then split in to smaller groups

with each group being given a topic to work on. Together they produce a 10 minute

presentation to be delivered to their peers and the younger pupils at a later stage.

The road safety work offers pupils an opportunity to learn skills to plan, prepare

presentations, to carry out research. To deliver a message in a fun, lively way and the skill of

being able to speak in public with clarity and enthusiasm.

The local child casualty data shows that children are most at risk at between 3 and 6pm,

pedestrians and start to increase from the age of 8. The topics chosen to cover with pupils

are chosen to address the problems.

Secondary School Talks

A number of programmes have been developed for secondary schools, some for curriculum time

and some for one off presentations. These include topics such as advertising and road safety,

and geography and road safety. Road safety based lessons plans are available for teachers to link

to the curriculum targets. Additionally, school assembly presentations are available for all

secondary schools covering issues such as passenger safety, pre driver, moped riding and

pedestrian safety. Presentations at secondary school citizenship days are available to all schools

by road safety officers.

3.3 Where we currently stand: Data on road traffic accidents in children and young people aged 18 years and under in Lewisham between 2007 and 2011

The number of KSI casualties, in children and young people aged 18 years and younger between

2007 and 2011 is shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9. KSI casualties in children and young people aged 18 years and younger in Lewisham from 2007-2012

Accident Severity 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011Fatal 2Serious 22 21 9 14 10 Total 22 23 9 14 10

When these casualties are stratified according to mode of transport (Figure 10) it is notable that 70%

of the KSI casualties occurred to children who were pedestrians.

Figure 10. KSI casualties in under 18s stratified for mode of transport.

KSI casualties

70%

1%

21%

8%

Pedestrian

Pedal CycleCar

Bus Or Coach

Despite, the road safety measures used in Lewisham, highlighted in the previous section, the

number of child pedestrians involved in KSI accidents has not shown a consistent downward trend

over the last 5 years (Figure 11). However, the number of casualties is low, and it may take some

time for a consistent downward trend to emerge.

Figure 11. The number of child pedestrian casualties in Lewisham from 2007-2011

The age range of children at increased risk of involvement in KSI accidents in Lewisham has

previously been suggested to be those aged 12-15 years. Figure 12 suggests a wider age range, with

increased numbers of accidents occurring in children aged 10-15 years. This may indicate that road

safety education should take place at an even earlier age, as by later ages, risk-taking behaviours

may already have developed in children leading to KSI casualties.

28% of child KSI accidents (22 of 78 casualties) occurred in the dark, including one fatality, and whilst

32% of accidents (25 of 78 casualties) occurred in roads further than 20m from a junction, 42% of

accidents (33 of 78 casualties, including one fatality) occurred at T-junctions, or staggered junctions,

and 18% (14 of 48 casualties, including one fatality) occurred at cross-roads. This may indicate that

whilst children understand how to be safe in basic road environments, education is still needed to

help them make good road safety choices the more complex situations mentioned above.

2007 2008 2009 2010 20110

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

No of Child pedestrian casualties

Year

No

of C

hild

ped

estr

ian

casu

altie

s

Figure 12. Child KSI casualties in Lewisham from 2007-2011 stratified by age

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16Age

Num

ber o

f roa

d tra

ffic

casu

altie

s

FatalSerious accidents

3.4 Major issues and concerns

It is evident that much work has been done in Lewisham in the last decade to improve road safety

and to reduce the number and severity of road traffic accidents. However, continued investment of

both time and money is needed in order to maintain this work. Lewisham’s next Local

Implementation Plan comes into effect in 2014 and at this time the amount of LIP money is being

reduced, with the potential for less money being available for road safety measures. At the current

time, there is no possibility of Lewisham Council being able to make up this shortfall. These financial

constraints at best will slow the pace of progress in road safety in Lewisham, and at the worst will

risk jeopardising the advances in road safety made over the last decade leading to an increase in the

number of child KSI casualties in Lewisham.

Secondly, the road safety figures for Lewisham, and indeed for the whole of London rely heavily on

the completion of the STATS19 form at the time of the accident. The STATS19 form is filled out by

the police officer attending the scene of the accident and then passed through the relevant official

channels. This can pose two issues. Firstly, it is not uncommon for this form to be incomplete.

Incomplete forms, which fail to provide important information about the place, time or type of

accident which has taken place, could prevent the necessary measures being put in place to stop

further accidents taking place. Secondly, it routinely takes six to nine months after year end for

information about accidents which have taken place in a particular year, to be sent to the Road

Safety team from TfL. This means that if trends or patterns of accidents are present, there is a

significant time delay before the necessary measures can be introduced. This is time during which

further accidents could take place, accidents which could be preventable if this information was

obtained sooner. Further work is needed to identify whether key information could be available

sooner, either from TfL or through other routes e.g. the use of A&E records or other hospital data.

4. RECOMMENDATIONS

This report has provided an insight into the vast amount of work undertaken over the past decade in

order to improve the safety of children and young people on Lewisham’s roads. These

recommendations serve not to detract from all that has been achieved so far, but to ensure both

that this work is maintained in years to come, and to continue to allow road safety initiatives, both

engineering and education based, to develop and grow further over the next decade with the aim of

reducing the number of child KSI casualties in Lewisham even further.

We therefore recommend the following:

In order to maintain the observed decrease in numbers of child KSI casualties in Lewisham,

current levels of financial resources should be maintained.

Regular review or audit of the use of road safety measures in Lewisham is needed in order to

ensure the needs of children and young people are being met on the roads of Lewisham.

There is consistent evidence to suggest that a 20 mph speed limit increases the chance of

survival after a road traffic accident. Plans for an area-wide 20 mph zone on appropriate

roads in Lewisham by 2014 should be delivered.

Targeted education programmes for children and young people including guidance on how

to cope with complex situations on the road e.g. complex road junctions, or road safety at

night, should be available to school age children.

Lewisham Council should work with Transport for London and other relevant bodies to

identify ways in which key data regarding road traffic accidents can be made available to the

Road Safety team within three months of the year end.

Dr K MohanLiz BrookerIan RansomDr D O’Sullivan