EDITOR’S TAKE
Securing Industry Wins Written by Ryan Gray |
ryan@stnonline.com I
n another galaxy not that long ago, conversations about contracting school transportation focused solely on the yellow school bus. Not anymore. Today’s discussions, while still centering on school
buses, have evolved to include the growth of alternative vehicles such as vans, sedans and SUVs. Many of these are operated by third-party companies
with no previous school bus experience. Traditional school bus contractors also now offer this form of trans- portation, and that has led the industry to do something that is even more historic. As previously reported, the National Congress on School Transportation in May for the first time approved non-school bus recommen- dations. This month, I talk with the recent alternative transportation writing committee chair, Tyler Bryan. He is the education associate for the Delaware Depart- ment of Education and de facto state director of student transportation. Bryan is also the president-elect for the National Association of State Directors of Pupil Trans- portation Services, which organizes NCST. He told me that this topic has been of great interest to him because Delaware, like all states, is grappling with alternative transportation for schoolchildren and how to provide training and oversight. A couple of states have strong laws or regulations, such as California’s inclusion of mandatory pre-employment drug and alcohol testing among the provisions that go into effect this month. But most states do not. Hence, the writing committee was formed at the behest of my good friend and renowned expert in transporting students with disabilities and pre- schoolers, Linda Bluth, TSD Conference tenured faculty emeritus and long-time magazine contributor. The main issues discussed at NCST were driver
credentialing, vehicle inspection and student behavior management, as the intent of the recommendations is to more align vans and the like with what is required to operate a school bus. These are much needed aspects of alternative transportation and reasons why recom- mendations needed to be made in the national school transportation specifications and procedures. In the meantime, one of the vital aspects of alternative transportation that had not been addressed, at least to the liking of certified child passenger safety technicians I have spoken with, is the issue of child safety restraint systems on these alternative transportation vehicles. The NHTSA-sponsored, eight-hour, hands-on Child Pas-
14 School Transportation News • JULY 2025
senger Safety on School Buses seminar that is presented again at STN EXPO West in Reno, Nevada, this month and returns to the TSD conference in Frisco, Texas, in November provides everything a student transporter or a child passenger safety technician needs to know about the differences with CSRS in school buses, compared to other vehicles. The training also demonstrates how to properly and
safely secure students in a variety of CSRSs, whether those are traditional rear- or forward-facing car seats for infants and toddlers, the various safety vests and harnesses that students with disabilities might need, or proper securement and support in wheelchairs. CPSTs I’ve spoken with were at first dismayed that
initial industry conversations on alternative transpor- tation lacked focus on CSRS. In the run up to NCST, a NASDPTS paper on alternative transportation did not mention the need for training alternative transportation providers on correct CSRS usage (Indiana is the only state that requires CSRS for preschool children riding in school buses.) Those same CPSTs expressed relief when CSRS training did make it into the NCST proposal in Des Moines, Iowa, where state delegates approved it. That was a win for the industry. It gives the guidance
that alternative transportation companies as well as school districts need when increasingly transporting students with disabilities, out-of-district students, and preschoolers in non-school bus vehicles. Already we have seen proactive measures taken by providers when it comes to managing student behavior. EverDriven an- nounced earlier this year it is requiring video cameras in all vehicles. Ostensibly in response to the CSRS inclusion in the national specifications, HopSkipDrive last month said it was offering new rider assistants and a “car seat program” in addition to wheelchair-accessible vehicles. The new industry recommendations that give best-practice guidance on alternative transportation could be a defining moment in the industry’s evolution. You can bookmark that, literally. The updated National School Transportation Specifications and Procedures manual is expected to be available later this summer. ●
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84
