Frontline staff spoke about what they saw to be an ongoing agenda in terms of social housing by subsequent governments. Because of this, staff highlighted how they believed it was likely that social housing providers would be increasingly required to provide homes for some of the most disadvantaged and marginalised in society. Such groups and individuals might include people experiencing severe socio-economic hardship, those from minority ethnic, refugee and migrant backgrounds, as indeed others with social, behavioural and mental health issues each of whom might have different and at times competing priorities and needs. Many saw the future landscape as looking particularly bleak as they felt that social housing providers would also need to face the challenge of greater diversity and difference amongst its resident population, something that could cause tensions and conflict. One member of frontline staff spoke about how:
Interestingly, some frontline staff spoke about how in locations where CCTV and security gates had been fitted, not only had the levels of fear about ASB amongst residents risen but so too had the complaints of ASB also. For frontline staff, whilst visible measures were important – and indeed had a role to play in certain cases – there was also the potential for them to increase fear and thereby make the perceptions of ASB worse also. The issue of greater security measures highlighted the disparity which seemed to exist between frontline staff’s understandings of ‘what works’ in tackling ASB with ‘what residents want’. Frontline staff spoke about how Peabody was going beyond traditional approaches to explore more preventative measures also. As part of this, frontline staff spoke about the recent development of more communitycentred approaches which sought to incorporate elements of community building, community engagement, self-help and changeability, to understanding change as a means of dealing and responding to it. Frontline staff spoke about recent parenting courses for young parents which focused on self-help, bringing people together from different cultural, ethnic and social backgrounds around a common issue. All hoped that the outcome of such initiatives would be a strengthening of community and a building of bridges between quite different people living in close proximity under similar circumstances.
‘People just need to learn how to live with each other...how to talk to each other and get along’. Whilst such a statement might appear throwaway, there was the recognition by some of the frontline staff of the value of giving residents ‘good citizen’ training. For them, explaining how to ‘get along’ and resolve problems between fellow residents was necessary and could make a big difference. This latter point was acknowledged as being important for frontline staff. One approach which seemed to offer significant value was mediation. A number of Peabody’s frontline staff explained how they have recently been trained in mediation techniques which have enabled them to work with both complainants and alleged perpetrators to bring about positive resolutions. The value of this is clear to Peabody’s frontline staff: complainants see that Peabody are actively responding and seeking to bring about a successful resolution to the situation. For frontline staff, such approaches recognise the highly personal and emotional nature of ASB. Likewise also, mediation offers a means by which Peabody and its frontline staff are able to work in partnership with complainants and residents more widely. As one member of staff put it, mediation offers a far more constructive means of ‘holding people’s hands’. There was the acknowledgement that mediation has its limitations, particularly in relation to high-level ASB but where appropriate, it would seem to be an approach that can be utilised with relative ease and has been shown to have a positive outcome for all.
There was also an explanation about how Peabody had facilitated various summer holiday programmes including a project run in collaboration with the London Fire Brigade to provide young people from different Peabody estates the opportunity to participate in a whole range of different physical and practical activities. Other frontline staff spoke about estate barbeques and a whole host of other similar events that they felt had a positive preventative impact. All felt that more of these type of activities would be beneficial. One such approach that many frontline staff identified as having an extremely positive impact was its recent approach to domestic abuse and violence. Having added a qualified domestic violence co-ordinator to the CST, many frontline staff spoke about how they were now able to combine approaches to tackle ASB and domestic violence at the same time. For residents who are or may be subjected to domestic violence, such an approach provides a means of self-help, engaging residents, complainants and victims alike whilst supporting the building of networks across residents. For frontline staff it also has benefits. As one worker explained:
Responding to the observation by one worker that ‘residents want the reassurance of having someone there 24/7’, frontline staff spoke about how complainants and residents seemed to want more CCTV, security gates, fences, community wardens and security staff. Of all of those engaged, only one frontline member of staff thought that this was a good idea. Instead, most frontline staff spoke about how CCTV and other similar security measures had little real impact in tackling and resolving ASB.
‘A complaint about loud noises accompanying sexual activity from a neighbour could also be evidence of domestic violence including rape or assault.’ Raising awareness was seen to be not only preventative but so too impacting in bringing about resolution. Exploring other similar combinative approaches was seen to have significant benefit and impact. 31