The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

CHAPTER THREE THE INTENDED AIMS, OBJECTIVES AND COVERAGE OF THE WARDEN SCHEMES

Introduction

3.1 This Chapter draws on the analysis undertaken, at the start of the evaluation, of the application forms. It looks at the original schemes' aims and then, drawing on the case study work, considers how these have changed. It finishes by looking at the size of the schemes.

Project Type

3.2 The Executive made it clear in its guidance that it would support 2 broad models of community warden schemes (Scottish Executive, 2003b, pp. 13-14), those focused on:-

• Crime prevention; and
• Environmental improvements.

These did not have to be mutually exclusive, so that a scheme could contain elements of both. Analysis of the submissions identified which model each of the schemes was to be based upon. Of the 32:-

• Seven had a crime prevention focus;
• Three had an environmental focus; and
• The remaining 22 had both crime prevention and environmental objectives.

Schemes' Aims

3.3 Analysis of the aims and objectives of the schemes, based on the funding submissions, identified the most commonly mentioned aims, outcomes or desired benefits from having a community warden scheme (Table 3.1). Reducing the fear of crime and increasing public confidence was the most commonly stated aim, followed by improving environmental quality, reducing the occurrence of antisocial behaviour and reducing and preventing crime.

3.4 Other outputs, or desired benefits, included a reduction in violent behaviour, improving visitor experiences, increasing the confidence of businesses in the area, improving services and the use of services, reducing homelessness, empowering communities and addressing the concerns of communities.

3.5 Submissions varied in terms of the number of aims stated. The most frequent number of aims was 3. Half of all schemes (16) had between 2 and 4. This would probably be higher if all schemes had stated aims in their submission. As it is, 6 did not.

3.6 The Inverclyde scheme had 8 aims, well above the average, whilst Aberdeenshire, Dumfries and Galloway and Eileen Siar all had 6 aims or outcomes.

TABLE 3.1 Aims and Outcomes of the Schemes

Note:-

1. Schemes mentioned more than one aim, outcome or benefit.

Development of the Wardens' Role

3.7 The wardens' role differed across schemes and was very much linked to the scheme's focus. However, the development process across all schemes can be distilled down to 3 key elements:-

• The establishment of a multi-agency working group made up of the main services involved in delivery, such as police, fire and rescue and other council departments (for example cleansing and housing);
• Identification of, and visits to, similar warden schemes in other areas. This element helped to provide a framework on which to base the duties and responsibilities; and
• Consultations with local community groups in order to refine the role of the wardens in line with public concerns.

3.8 Each of the above elements happened to varying degrees across the case studies. However, consultation with community representatives was found to be the least undertaken element, with several groups stating their input in the development phase had been minimal.

3.9 Several of the managers had previous experience of working with warden schemes in other areas. This knowledge was seen as important in helping to establish their own schemes and implement improvements.

The Schemes' Development

3.10 By the end of the evaluation (late 2006) all of the case study areas had been running wardens schemes for a minimum of 8 months, ranging from Edinburgh where the scheme had been operational since August 2005, to areas such as Aberdeen and South Lanarkshire where wardens had existed in some form for a number of years. It is interesting to look at how they have developed and how the focus has changed.

3.11 Although all the schemes had a dual focus (antisocial behaviour and environmental issues) the tackling of antisocial behaviour now predominates in the majority of case study areas. This represents a shift for the Edinburgh South area scheme (the focus of the case study) where it is claimed that the wardens now spend the majority of their time on antisocial behaviour activities ¹². Previously they undertook a predominantly environmental role, undertaking clean-ups themselves rather than referring these to environmental services. This function is still performed. However, antisocial behaviour has gradually asserted itself alongside these original duties.

3.12 The main exception to this is East Renfrewshire where the environmental role remains the primary function. This environmental message was continually reinforced to the wardens and analysis of their logs highlighted the prominence of environmental issues in their day-to-day duties (Table 5.4). However, duties related to antisocial behaviour, such as dispersing groups of youths, were also undertaken by East Renfrewshire's wardens.

3.13 The diversity of duties undertaken by the wardens in Orkney meant that defining the scheme's focus was more difficult than in the other case study areas. The main explanation for this appears to be the smaller scale of antisocial behaviour and environmental problems in Orkney. As such, the wardens take on a broader range of duties than they do in other areas. The result is that they devote small amounts of time to many discrete activities as opposed to considerable time to one or two big issues as in some other areas.

3.14 The balance between dealing with antisocial behaviour and environmental duties appears to be shaped by 3 inter-related factors:-

• The nature of the area the wardens operate in;
• The management of the scheme; and
• The expectations of the community the wardens serve.

3.15 Community expectations were identified through consultations with the key partners involved in the delivery of the schemes and with the communities themselves. What emerged strongly was that community expectations were a "fluid" concept that varied across scheme areas. The clearest indicator of this was said to be the nature of telephone calls to the wardens' service. For example, in Dundee it was estimated that over 60% of calls to the wardens were related to antisocial behaviour. The expectation of the community was that wardens would tackle and resolve these problems. By contrast in Orkney, where there was not the same level of antisocial behaviour, environmental concerns, such as dog fouling, were a primary concern of the community. As such the Orkney wardens were expected by their community to take steps to address this.

3.16 In light of this, all scheme managers displayed a willingness to accommodate the needs of the local community. The view of the wardens as the "eyes and ears" of the community strongly influenced this approach. The main reason why antisocial behaviour had become the primary focus in the majority of case study areas was that this issue tends to cause more distress to residents than environmental issues. Accordingly the schemes had changed in order to respond to these concerns.

3.17 An example of this willingness to respond to community concerns can be seen in Inverclyde, where school children from 2 nearby secondary schools were repeatedly engaging in gang fights at lunchtime. Accordingly the scheme's manager arranged for 2 wardens to start their shift early so that they covered the volatile school lunchtime period. The result was an almost instantaneous reduction in the activity.

3.18 However, this view of a reactive service, that is now placing greater stress upon dealing with antisocial behaviour, is somewhat at odds with the analysis of wardens' activities in Chapter 5. This shows that, overall, an environmental focus still predominates. Whilst there may be methodological reasons for these differences, the extent to which the schemes say they are becoming more responsive to antisocial behaviour problems may need to be treated with a degree of caution.

The Size of the Warden schemes

3.19 The schemes vary considerably in size (Table 3.2). The following figures relate to the case study schemes when they are fully staffed, thus:-

• Aberdeen has 30 wardens in total, 20 from the initial allocation and a further 10 through second round funding. In addition, they have 10 neighbourhood wardens (formerly traffic wardens), funded by the police, who operate throughout the city and can be deployed flexibly to assist the community wardens;
• Dumfries and Galloway operates with a full complement of 5 wardens: 1 senior and 4 wardens;
• Dundee has a total of 41 wardens: 7 senior wardens, 24 wardens, 4 support team (deployed as required to cover sickness and absence) and 6 mobile wardens;
• East Renfrewshire operates with a relatively flat structure, with 8 wardens, no seniors and no team leaders. However, a recent decision has been taken to employ 2 senior wardens. Currently one senior is in post whilst the other is in the process of being recruited;
• Edinburgh has total of 5 schemes, employing 49 community safety concierges ( CSCs). The South area (the case study focus) has 5 CSCs and a team leader;
• Inverclyde started with an initial complement of 16 wardens. This has now increased to 24 wardens and 4 seniors. This scheme also employs an additional 4 wardens on 9 month contracts through New Deal;
• The Orkney scheme is the smallest case study, with 4 wardens;
• Perth and Kinross has a total of 5 wardens; and
• South Lanarkshire has a full complement of 36 wardens. Of these 4 are supervisors and 2 team leaders. Half are funded directly by the local authority through the Housing Revenue Account.

TABLE 3.2 Key Features of the Case Study Schemes

Notes:-

1. Inverclyde employs 4 wardens through the New Deal programme.

2. Although the Orkney scheme theoretically covers the whole of the council area (population 20,000) in practice it is focussed on the main centres of population. Accordingly the 10,000 population figure has been used here.

3. The wardens cover the whole of South Lanarkshire, although they tend to concentrate on the more deprived areas.

3.20 The distinction between community wardens, CSCs and neighbourhood wardens was explored in the fieldwork. In 7 of the 9 case study areas wardens were called community wardens whilst in Edinburgh they were called CSCs and in Aberdeen, as well as community wardens, there are also 10 neighbourhood wardens.

3.21 In Edinburgh, the decision to call the wardens community safety concierges was taken following consultation with the local community. This found a proportion of the community who did not like the connotations that the word "wardens" had with prison wardens. The association with the custodial duties of prison wardens was seen as a potential barrier to building up relations with local communities. Accordingly, the term community safety concierges was coined. However, there are no significant differences between the duties, powers and responsibilities of CSCs in Edinburgh and those undertaken by community wardens in other areas.

3.22 The 10 neighbourhood wardens in Aberdeen are distinct from the community wardens in a number of ways. The differences are:-

• The neighbourhood wardens have been in place longer than the community wardens, having originally grown out of an initiative to extend the duties of a selected group of traffic wardens;
• Neighbourhood wardens can issue fixed penalty notices for offences such as parking, dog fouling and littering. Community wardens in Aberdeen do not yet have such powers, although they are in the process of being granted them;
• Neighbourhood wardens are funded through the mainstream Grampian policing budget rather than the Antisocial Behaviour budget from the Scottish Executive; and
• Neighbourhood wardens earn around £10,000 more per annum than Community Wardens.

3.23 The relatively high financial cost of the neighbourhood wardens in Aberdeen has led some of the partners to question their value for money in comparison to funding extra police officers. For example, it was said that a newly qualified police officer in Grampian started on a salary of £17,000 a year whilst a neighbourhood warden could earn up to £30,000, including shift allowances and overtime.

3.24 Given the different sizes and geographies of the warden schemes, it is useful to look at the wardens-resident ratio. This allows comparison of coverage to be made across different sized schemes. Table 3.2 presents this information. The population of areas covered are the estimates of the schemes' managers based on their knowledge of the patrolled areas. From the Table it can be seen that:-

• Dundee has the lowest ratio with one warden to every 963 residents of its patrol areas;
• Aberdeen, Dumfries and Galloway, Inverclyde, Orkney and Perth and Kinross have between 1,400 and 3,000 residents for every warden;
• East Renfrewshire and Edinburgh have slightly higher ratios with one warden for every 3,125 residents and one warden for every 3,756 residents respectively; and
• South Lanarkshire has the highest ratio: one warden for every 8,508 residents. This reflects the fact that the scheme covers the whole of the local authority area, although the wardens tend to focus on the areas of deprivation within the authority.

3.25 It should be noted that the ratios are based on each scheme having a full complement of staff. Depending on staff turnover, warden-resident ratios can be higher than the above figures. An example of this is East Renfrewshire which has operated consistently below its full complement of 8 wardens. The average number has been 4, which in reality doubles the ratio to one warden for every 6,250 residents. Recruitment and retention is covered in more detail below.

3.26 Having looked at the aims of the schemes, and how these have changed over time, Chapter 4 now turns to consider the characteristics of wardens who have to attain these aims.

« Previous | Contents | Next »