⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 28 findings
F01
School transportation systems have been studied extensively at the national level, and that information indicates that school buses are one of the safest modes of transportation. (FA-01 through FA-04)
No recommendations for this finding
F02
Nationally, the majority of people killed in school transportation- related crashes are not school-age bus riders, but are occupants of other vehicles involved or pedestrians. Students are safer as passengers on school buses than they are as passengers in cars involved in crashes with school buses, or as pedestrians in school bus crashes. (FA-02)
No recommendations for this finding
F03
Not all Districts maintain information on school bus safety statistics. Some Districts do not track this information at all, while others rely on their contracted bus companies to do so. (FA-10) School Bus Safety 7
No recommendations for this finding
F04
Due to the lack of comparable, consistent school bus safety statistics provided by the Districts, it is not possible to determine objective measures of school bus safety, such as accident rates. Thus, it is difficult to conclude that school bus transportation in the County is safe, as previously demonstrated at the national level. It is only possible to infer that school bus transportation in the County is safe from the information provided by the Districts. (FA-03, FA-10 through FA-13)
No recommendations for this finding
F05
School bus safety statistics, for Districts or for individual schools, are not readily available to the public. (FA-09, FA-15 and FA-16)
No recommendations for this finding
F06
The efforts of the CHP, including certifying school bus drivers, investigating school bus accidents, and inspecting school buses, contribute significantly to ensuring school bus safety in California. However, the CHP does not collect information at the school district level. (FA-17 through FA-19)
No recommendations for this finding
F07
The Grand Jury was unable to identify any single local agency responsible for collecting, collating, and reporting County school bus safety information on a countywide basis. (FA-14, FA-18, and FA-19)
No recommendations for this finding
F08
It is unclear whether seat belts on school buses significantly increase school bus safety. (FA-21, FI-25 through FA-28) Recommendations
No recommendations for this finding
F09
Information on school bus safety statistics is not available on District websites. Examination of a representative sample of individual school websites revealed that none contained such information.
No recommendations for this finding
F10
The Grand Jury requested school bus-related data for the 2009-2010 school year from the Districts, including: the number of student school bus riders, the number of school bus-related accidents and injuries, and total school bus passenger miles. Many school districts responded with clear, thorough answers. Some responses appeared incomplete and some were ambiguous and difficult to understand. The information was not provided in a comparable, consistent manner. School Bus Safety Three school districts stated that they do not maintain passenger mile information. Two school districts said that they do not keep statistics on school bus accidents or injuries. One school district referred the Grand Jury to private, contracted school bus companies, to the VCOE, and to the CHP for information this district does not maintain.
Related Recommendations (2)
R02
The VCOE should develop a standard form for the annual collection of school bus safety information from the Districts. This information should include: the total number of students who ride the bus to and from school on a daily basis; the total number of students who are transported for field trips, special events, or athletic events; total miles ridden by students; and total number of school bus- related accidents and injuries resulting from those accidents. (FI-04)
R03
The Districts should use the VCOE standard form recommended in
F11
The Grand Jury was only able to estimate the number of student school bus riders from the information provided by the Districts because of inconsistent reporting of data. For the 2009-2010 school year, the estimated average number of daily student bus riders in the County was 16,167.
No recommendations for this finding
F12
The 20 County school districts that do keep information on school bus-related accidents and injuries recorded a total of 41 school bus accidents in the 2009-2010 school year, resulting in four injuries to student bus riders, the only injury statistic studied by the Grand Jury. Eleven school districts reported zero accidents during that school year.
No recommendations for this finding
F13
The Grand Jury was unable to calculate a school bus accident rate, i.e., the number of accidents per passenger mile, for the 2009-2010 school year since mileage figures provided by the Districts were not comparable.
No recommendations for this finding
F14
The VCOE stated that each District is a Local Educational Agency and a self-governing governmental entity. Therefore, the VCOE does not collect countywide school bus safety data. According to the VCOE, the only County school bus-related information they collect is financial in nature.
No recommendations for this finding
F15
All public schools in the State are required to complete a Student Accountability Report Card annually containing information required by State and federal laws. Student Accountability Report Cards are intended to provide the public, including parents of school children, with important information about each public school and to communicate a school's progress in achieving its goals. Schools have the option to supplement the required data. However, school bus safety statistics are not a requirement. [Ref-10 and Ref-11]
No recommendations for this finding
F16
An examination of a representative sample of Student Accountability Report Cards for schools within the County revealed that none contained information on school bus safety statistics.
No recommendations for this finding
F17
In 1959, the State Legislature designated the CHP as the department responsible for supervision of the school pupil transportation industry. The CHP adopts and enforces rules and regulations relating to the equipment, maintenance, construction, design, color, and operation of school buses. School Bus Safety 5 Among CHP responsibilities are: • inspecting and certifying all school buses at least once each school year • inspecting and licensing private school bus contractors • inspecting driver records and school bus preventive maintenance and inspection records • investigating school bus accidents • administering written and driving tests for applicants seeking to renew or obtain school bus driver certificates • fingerprinting applicants for an original certificate to drive a school bus [Ref-12 and Ref-13]
No recommendations for this finding
F18
The CHP Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System is a database that serves as a means to collect and process data from collision scenes. School bus-involved collision data is available by California county, but not by school district. [Ref-14] The data available for the County includes all school bus accidents occurring within the County, whether or not the school buses involved were County school buses or from other jurisdictions.
No recommendations for this finding
F19
According to the CHP, it does not gather information on County school bus passenger miles.
No recommendations for this finding
F20
Effective April 1, 1977, Federal Motor Vehicle Standard 222, “School Bus Passenger Seating and Crash Protection,” established occupant protection requirements for school bus passenger seating and restraining barriers. Standard 222 requires that: • all newly manufactured small buses (with a gross vehicle weight under 10,000 pounds) be equipped with lap belts • all newly manufactured large buses (with a gross vehicle weight over 10,000 pounds) be required to protect riders through compartmentalization, which utilizes higher, padded seat backs, narrow seat spacing, and stronger seat structure to protect passengers from crash impact [Ref-15 and Ref-16]
No recommendations for this finding
F21
A 1989 TRB report concluded that the potential benefits of requiring seat belts on large school buses were insufficient to justify a federal requirement. [Ref-17]
No recommendations for this finding
F22
In 2008, the NHTSA ruled that all new small school buses manufactured on or after September 1, 2011 be equipped with three-point, lap/shoulder belt systems. [Ref-15] 6 School Bus Safety
No recommendations for this finding
F23
The California Vehicle Code requires three-point lap/shoulder belts on all school buses manufactured after July 1, 2005. [Ref-18]
No recommendations for this finding
F24
The California Code of Regulations requires that all school bus passengers use seat belts, if provided, and that all pupils be taught how to use seat belts in an age-appropriate manner. [Ref-18]
No recommendations for this finding
F25
State requirements for three-point lap/shoulder belts on small and large school buses exceed federal standards. No national consensus exists on the benefits of seat belts on all school buses. [Ref-15 through Ref-21]
No recommendations for this finding
F26
Advocates of school bus seat belts, including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the National Coalition for School Bus Safety, recommend that all newly manufactured school buses be equipped with three-point lap/shoulder belts. They argue that seat belts would reduce injuries or deaths. They maintain that the use of seat belts would also improve student behavior, reduce bullying, and decrease behavior that might be a distraction to school bus drivers. [Ref-19 and Ref-20]
No recommendations for this finding
F27
Other organizations, including the National Association of State Directors of Pupil Transportation Services and the National Association of School Transportation, assert that school buses are already the safest way for students to travel to and from school. They contend that seat belts on school buses would result in little or no improvement in school bus safety at significant expense. [Ref-20]
No recommendations for this finding
F28
A 2010 Summary Report of a University Transportation Center for Alabama investigation into the implementation of seat belts on school buses reached the following conclusions: seat belt use on school buses is extremely variable, school bus seat belts reduce capacity, and the costs of school bus seat belts “far exceed” the benefits. [Ref-21] Findings
No recommendations for this finding
Agency Responses 5
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.
No Responses Found 14
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Briggs Elementary School District
School District
Conejo Valley Unified School District
School District
Hueneme Elementary School District
School District
Mesa Union Elementary School District
School District
Mupu Elementary School District
School District
Oak Park Unified School District
School District
Ocean View Elementary School District
School District
Pleasant Valley Elementary School District
School District
Rio Elementary School District
School District
Santa Clara Elementary School District
School District
Simi Valley Unified School District
School District
Somis Union Elementary School District
School District
Ventura Unified
School District