In interviewing 24 warden schemes in London and the South East we discovered that although constitutional arrangements were mixed (while 29% had a multi-agency committee, only 12% had a local champion, for example), almost all schemes considered the local impact to be substantial.

In addition, 93% considered that they provided a Value for Money service (though less than 40% had performed any kind of empirical evaluation to demonstrate this), whilst 96% believed withdrawal of their service would damage the life of their local community.

The direct impact of the recent recession and impending spending cuts on individual schemes appeared to be modest (less than half believed their service would change because of the changing financial climate, and 78% had a positive outlook as to their own future).

About The Schemes:

The degree of local autonomy enjoyed by individual teams was striking, regardless of their constitutional arrangements, or relationship to their local authority (98% of respondents could not point to a local champion, for example, and 71% were unable to identify a management committee of any kind). In addition, only 36% of respondents understood in any way their relationship to their Local Area Agreement, or could quote any of the relevant service targets, while a surprisingly high 62% had either never evaluated their scheme performance, or were unable to explain how their evaluation had taken place (or when).

The Financial Climate & Funding:

Direct experience of service changes caused by the recent financial crisis was low (63% were totally unaffected by the recession, and 73% had experienced no team contraction as a result of funding cuts). Service contraction featured for a third of those schemes interviewed; though service expansion was also a feature for 1 in 10 of the schemes (10% had a larger operating budget than a year before, for example, while 15% had a larger team than during the previous financial year). Changes in contract and management for individual schemes was a theme for 12% of those questioned, though concerns about the future and the next financial year was also a common theme.

Service Impact & The Future:

It was striking from the research that attitudes to current activities and their impact was generally positive (77% claimed they have changed local community relations for the better through their work), but that concerns about the future were also substantial (32% stated that team moral was low because of financial concerns).
In addition there were common concerns expressed about the negative impact on local communities if services were to be withdrawn (particularly with regard to anti-social behaviour) and the damage that may be caused to local authority/community relations if this were to happen (only 4% believed services could be closed without a negative local impact, for example).

In order to gain a comprehensive spread of informed opinion, research subjects were selected from a wide spread of London boroughs, and areas outside of the capital, all of which had trained with LT&RC, as follows:
 LB of Hackney (Shoreditch Warden Scheme)Neighbourhood Training & Resource Centre (SE)Neighbourhood SolutionsBrent Housing PartnershipColchester Borough CouncilGallions Housing AssociationWyre Forest CouncilTamworthWherry Housing AssociationLeicester City CouncilAmber Valley HousingAttwood Green Community Wardens (Optima)Rugby Bid RangersNorwich City CouncilShropshire CouncilWolverhampton Neighbourhood WardensCannock District CouncilWychavon District CouncilNRCECELB of Southwark (Nunhead & Peckham Rye)Luton Borough CouncilLB of Camden (Camden Wardens)Croydon Housing Warden Service)Cambridge Council (Rangers Scheme)
 
 
The study concentrated on the experience of the warden schemes in meeting local resident needs, and specifically:
 The effect of schemes on local communitiesHow service impact is measuredThe reality of efficiency demands on practitionersThe impact of service restructuringAttitudes to the future/fundingWhether (additional) training/support would help local practitioners