Agenda item

Mr Shafick Peerbux (Head of Community Safety), Ms Kat Dardry (Community Safety Practice Development Officer) and Mr Mark Rolfe (Interim Head of Community Protection) were in attendance for this item. 

1.          Mrs Bell explained that the review was a budgetary measure and not a reflection on the performance of the community wardens. She highlighted that at this year’s National Safeguarding Adults Board Excellence Awards ceremony in November the Maidstone and Tonbridge & Malling team won both the empowerment team award and the protection team award for their work with adults at risk within communities and thanked all the community wardens across the county for their work. Mrs Bell explained that resources would be targeted to areas of highest need and the model was designed to be flexible if opportunities to add to the service became available in the future.

2.          Mr Peerbux introduced the report and provided a summary of the consultation responses.   He explained that Appendix 2 of the report listed alternative funding options that had been explored. Unfortunately, there were not any viable alternatives that could offset the savings required to continue the current operating model. 

3.          A member asked whether support was being given to staff currently in post and Mr Peerbux said face to face meetings had taken place with staff from the outset, and throughout, to engage and consult with them on the process.

4.          A Member asked about the cost of the external market research and Mr Peerbux said internal options were considered and the resources were not available within the timeframe. The total cost was approximately £8,000.

5.          A Member asked whether any calculations were carried out to look at the wider cost to the authority and the increased demand on adult social care as a result of the new operating model. Mr Peerbux said the preventive work of the wardens was extremely valued but proving prevention was difficult and would be a key part of the work going forward which included a new case management system.

6.          Members expressed concern for the amount of time wardens would spend travelling under the new model and asked whether the areas covered would be regularly reviewed and monitored.  Mr Peerbux said the Geographical Allocation Policy would focus on targeting the areas of need and identifying available services within communities. The policy allowed for regular reviews using objective data measures.

7.          The Chairman put to the vote the recommendation set out in the report and the voting was as follows:

For (11)

Mr Brazier, Mr Broadley, Mr Cannon, Mr Crow-Brown, Mr Holden, Mr Meade, Mr Ridgers, Mr Sandhu, Mr Shonk, Mr Thomas,

Against (4)

Mr Baldock, Mr Hood, Mr Sole, Dr Sullivan, 

Abstain (0)

RESOLVED to endorse the proposed decision to:

(i)             Agree a new Geographical Allocation Policy for the Community Warden’s service;

(ii)            Agree to implement a new model of operation for the Community Warden’s service; and

(iii)          Delegate authority to the Director Growth and Communities to take any necessary actions including but not limited to entering into contracts or legal agreement as required to implement the decision.