Assessment of promotion of road safety and demand management programmes

For road safety promotion programmes costing:

• less than $1,000,000: 
  Approved organisations and Waka Kotahi will provide the rationale for their proposed activities in their activity management plans (AMP). Regional councils will include their proposals in the regional land transport programme (RLTP). Waka Kotahi expects the majority of road safety promotion programmes to be made up of activities costing less than $1,000,000. These will be treated similarly to low cost, low risk programmes which means they will not require formal business case and cost–benefit appraisal information.
• $1,000,000 or more: 
  Approved organisations and Waka Kotahi follow a formal business case approach at an appropriate scale. This may be as a standalone business case or may be developed through a programme business case with a focus wider than safety promotion, for example.

The promotion of road safety and demand management activity class includes the following work categories:

• Work catebory 421: Travel demand management
• Work category 432: Safety promotion, education and advertising

Waka Kotahi expects that proposals for funding assistance for any transport service delivery activity will be supported by an appropriate business case. Proposals for services associated with significant public infrastructure investment will also reflect AMPs or similar plans that meet the requirements of  clause 2 of schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 2002(external link) for approved organisations; or Cabinet Office circular CO (15) 5: Investment Management and Asset Performance(external link)  for the State Services, Crown entities (including Waka Kotahi for state highways), and the Department of Conservation).

In particular, Waka Kotahi will look for:

• recommendations in the approved organisation’s and Waka Kotahi (state highways) travel demand management strategies of the AMP
• changes to levels of service targets relating to transport user satisfaction, safety and access
• quality assurance
• innovation.

Waka Kotahi has aligned its IAF, and how it applies to  road safety promotion, with the Safer Journeys areas of concern as set out in the Safer Journeys strategy(external link). However, we know that some communities are over-represented in national statistics for other risk areas.

The Safer Journeys strategy(external link) defines 13 areas of concern where current performance needs to be strengthened. The strategy has grouped these into three levels of significance from a national perspective: areas of high concern, areas of medium concern and areas of continued and emerging focus. The level of significance of these areas may also be defined by the Communities at Risk Register or the new layered spatial tool(external link). Waka Kotahi may also consider an investment partner’s own evidence.

The Communities at Risk register, based on information in the national Crash Analysis System (CAS) database, enables Waka Kotahi to:

• prioritise funding to those communities of highest concern within a national risk area
• address issues that are not identified as an area of high concern in the Safer Journeys strategy, but are still a significant local risk issue, by helping local authorities identify and prioritise resources towards the specific areas of concern.

The register is updated prior to the start of each National Land Transport Programme (NLTP). Briefing notes issued annually to each approved organisation will further define localised risks.

The road safety action planning process is an essential element in the planning activities funded through the NLTP, particularly within road safety promotion.  Effective action planning requires a collaborative approach from key partners to provide direction, commitment and urgency to address and mitigate road safety risks.

Action planning works most effectively when led and owned by regional leadership, with alignment to national safety strategies.

Activities delivering on key priority areas for the region, cluster or approved organisation, as informed by evidence, should reflect a number of the Safe System(external link) pillars and integrate investment from all parties utilising advertising, education, enforcement and infrastructure. It is essential that investment proposals for road safety promotion activities  reflect this broad Safe System approach.

A promotion of road safety and demand management activity may be given a low results alignment rating if the activity addresses as many of the following criteria as possible: 

A promotion of road safety and demand management activity may be given a medium results alignment rating if the activity addresses as many of the following criteria as possible:

 ¹As defined in the Communities at Risk register

²Community is widely defined and may include residents, schools, employers, logistics providers and developers.

A promotion of road safety and demand management activity may be given a high results alignment rating if the activity addresses as many of the following criteria as possible:

¹As defined in the Communities at Risk register

²Community is widely defined and may include residents, schools, employers, logistics providers and developers.

A promotion of  road safety and demand management activity may be given a very high results alignment rating if the activity addresses as many of the following criteria as possible:

Where a new road safety promotion initiative proposes to achieve a significant change or where it targets a particular issue, a cost-benefit appraisal needs to be completed.  A cost-benefit appraisal also needs to be completed for all demand management activities.

The cost-benefit appraisal methods for promotion of road safety and demand management activities and programmes are:

1. All road safety promotion activities that individually cost $1,000,000 or more, and all demand management activities require a formal cost-benefit appraisal to calculate a benefit cost ratio (BCR). Activities costing more than $1,000,000 must not be split into smaller components to avoid determining a BCR.
2. Waka Kotahi may require a value for money assessment to justify the programme. This assessment should be based on the priorities identified in a road safety or travel demand management strategy or action plan using benchmarking and cost effectiveness methodologies, and any other means of cost-benefit appraisal that may be applicable.

The Monetised benefits and costs manual (from August 2020) and Economic evaluation manual(external link)  (superseded August 2020) contain simplified procedures for cost-benefit appraisal for safety promotion (SP13) and travel behaviour change (SP12).

A continuous programme is a group of activities relating to existing assets and services, such as road maintenance, public transport or road safety programmes, delivered on an ongoing basis from one NLTP to the next to maintain an adequate customer level of service.

A value for money assessment needs to be completed for continuous programmes.

Road safety promotion programmes, or components of programmes, are given a rating using low, medium, or high based on their relative cost effectiveness and benchmarking performance comparisons:

• low - when cost effectiveness and benchmarking shows below-average band efficiency
• medium - when cost effectiveness and benchmarking shows average band efficiency
• high - when cost effectiveness shows above-average band efficiency.

Use of generic or default BCR

No placeholder, generic or default BCRs are to be used.

Peer review

Waka Kotahi reserves the right to require a peer review of benefit and cost appraisal determinations and measures, including any non-monetised/additional benefits and adverse impacts, regardless of the scope, prior to an investment decision.