Social Exclusion Unit
Policy Action Team 6 Report: Neighbourhood Wardens
Following the publication of its report into neighbourhood renewal in September 1998, the Social Exclusion Unit asked Policy Action Team 6 (PAT 6) to look further at the concept of neighbourhood wardens. In particular, it asked what models of neighbourhood warden schemes are cost-effective and how they are financed; and whether the Government ought to take steps to encourage neighbourhood warden schemes more widely.
The PAT included a wide range of external people including those with expertise in housing management and the police. Its approach was a practical one. The team tried to identify what types of warden scheme exist and which of them work well - or less well - through a combination of research, which identified 50 schemes, and visits. Some further work is needed (indicated in the report’s recommendations).
Key points
The PAT found that there are already a wide variety of warden schemes - though all the schemes they were asked to visit had the common element of providing an official presence in a residential area which is designed to assist in the maintenance of order through a visible and accessible presence. The key functions of schemes fall into one or more of four broad categories:
crime prevention
environmental improvements
community development
housing management.
There are also, broadly speaking, four methods by which these functions are met - patroller, concierge, caretaker/supercaretaker and neighbourhood support worker.
Why neighbourhood warden schemes?
Why should local authorities, police and other partners be interested in neighbourhood warden schemes? There are a number of reasons:
Crime and the fear of crime: There has been a significant rise in crime and disorder over the past 20 years. Between 1981 and 1993, recorded crime rose by 111%. The rise in crime measured by the British Crime Survey was less steep at 77%. 40% of crime takes place in just 10% of areas. 10% of residents of inner city areas are burgled once or more in a year - double the rate elsewhere. Half the people who were victims of crime were repeat victims, accounting for 81% of recorded crime. 25% of minority ethnic residents in low income multi-ethnic areas say racially motivated attacks are a fairly or very big problem for them. The impact of crime on these victims is compounded by their poverty and relative inability to protect themselves. The public overwhelmingly and consistently cite crime as one of their three main concerns. The Survey of English Housing found it was the single most important factor that determined peoples’ satisfaction with their neighbourhood.
Social housing: At the same time, the population housed by social landlords has become progressively more disadvantaged over the past 20 years. There are more households whose income is less than half the national average, more teenage pregnancy, more youth under-achievement, more children who truant or who have been excluded from school, more unemployment, more drug misuse, more ill health. These problems are associated with higher crime and offending rates but also reduce levels of informal social control and the capacity of the community to police and regulate itself.
Neighbourhood staff: In spite of this, there has been a gradual withdrawal of staff from neighbourhoods by a range of agencies over the last 20 years. Housing departments have withdrawn their caretakers and locally-based staff, with often serious consequences. There are far fewer patch-based social workers and youth and community workers. Park keepers and bus conductors are much less in evidence. Generally, there are fewer people around able to exercise the sort of informal surveillance that can enhance safety and deter crime.
In areas where all of the above factors exist, such as in many deprived neighbourhoods, neighbourhood wardens can make a real difference to the quality of residents’ lives, to their sense of security, and to the way they feel about their environment.
Successful schemes
The key factors of successful schemes are:
having clear objectives and being well designed
full involvement of residents and of relevant local partners
particular emphasis on signing up and involving local authorities and the police
effective communications between all partners
high quality training and proper lines of accountability
continuity - the presence of wardens sustained over a period of time can ensure they realise their potential to contribute to prevention rather than just reacting to problems.
Of course, warden schemes cannot be the only solution for every residential area faced by problems of crime, poor housing and a run-down environment. Local agencies, including the residents themselves, need to consider carefully whether a warden scheme is the right answer; whether it needs other supporting measures (e.g. to design out crime) to enable it to work effectively; and what form the scheme should take. These are some of the key issues statutory partnerships formed under the Crime and Disorder Act are designed to address.
Last update: September 2003