JBA Consulting Report Template 2015
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
LGA Special Interest Group Annual Report to LGA Leadership Board
LGA Leadership Board LGA Special Interest Group Annual Report to LGA Leadership Board SIG Name: Unitary Councils’ Network Lead Member: Cllr Paul Bettison OBE – Leader of Bracknell Forest Council Lead Officer: Stuart McKellar – Borough Treasurer of Bracknell Forest Council Email: [email protected] Address: Time Square, Market Street, Bracknell, Berks, RG12 1JD Telephone: 01344 352041 Website: www.bracknell-forest.gov.uk Membership Bath & North East Somerset; Bournemouth Borough; Bracknell Forest Borough; Cheshire East; Leicester City; Luton, Medway; North Lincolnshire; North Somerset; Plymouth City; Portsmouth City; Rutland County; Slough Borough; South Gloucestershire; Swindon Borough; Telford & Wrekin; Torbay; West Berkshire; Windsor & Maidenhead Royal Borough; Wokingham Borough. Aim To promote, support and represent the aims and ambitions of the Unitary Councils of England. Key Activities / Outcomes of work undertaken The past year has been one of consolidation for the Unitary Councils’ Network, establishing itself as the unique voice and representative body of unitary councils throughout England to ministers and their civil service officials. Meetings and regular dialogue have been set up with ministers and MHCLG officials, as well as MHCLG briefing the network at its own regular meetings. To further the relationship between UCN and MHCLG, the services of an independent consultant have been engaged to further work on the unique offer that UCN can make to MHCLG in the furtherance of joint ambitions. LGA Leadership Board Councillor Paul Bettison OBE Leader of Bracknell Forest Council Chairman of the Unitary Councils’ Network . -
Introduction Accessibility Across UK Local Authorities
Accessibility across UK Local Authorities Socitm and Sitemorse collaboration – supporting BetterConnected Introduction Digital accessibility regulation is challenging to manage and is negatively impacting those for whom the rules should be assisting. Public sector bodies must deal with accessibility, against a timetable. Now with a specific timeline in relation to the public sector achieving accessibility compliance for their websites, we have summarised our Q3 / 2019 results, reporting the position across the sector. For over 10 years Sitemorse have been in partnership with Socitm, working on numerous initiatives including BetterConnected. Sept. 29th 2019 | Ver. 1.9 | Release | © Sitemorse In Summary. For the Sitemorse 2019 Q3 UK Local Government INDEX we assessed over 400 authority websites for adherence to WCAG 2.1. The INDEX was compiled 37% following some 250 million tests, checks and measures across nearly 820,000 URLs. 17% Comparing the Q3 to the Q2 results; 49 improved, 44 dropped, with the balance remaining the same. Three Local Authorities achieved a score of 10 (out of 10) for accessibility. It’s important to note that the INDEX covers the main website of each authority. The law applies to all websites operated, directly or on behalf of the authority. 46% The target score is 7.7 out of 10. • Pages passing accessibility level A: 87.11% • Pages passing accessibility level AA: 12.2% • Of the 3,550 PDF’s 56.4% PDF’s passed the accessibility tests. Score 10 - 7 Score 5 - 6 Score 1 - 4 It is important to note that this score is for automated tests; there are still manual tests that need to be performed however, a score of 10 demonstrates a thorough understanding of what needs to be done and it is highly likely that the manual tests will pass too. -
Local Flood Risk Management Strategy
Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead Local Flood Risk Management Strategy Published in December 2014 RBWM Local Flood Risk Management Strategy December 2014 2 RBWM Local Flood Risk Management Strategy December 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART A: GENERAL INFORMATION .............................................................................................8 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................8 1.1 The Purpose of the Strategy ...........................................................................................8 1.2 Overview of the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead ................................................9 1.3 Types of flooding ....................................................................................................... 11 1.4 Who is this Strategy aimed at? .....................................................................................12 1.5 The period covered by the Strategy ...............................................................................12 1.6 The Objectives of the Strategy ......................................................................................12 1.7 Scrutiny and Review ...................................................................................................13 2 Legislative Context ..........................................................................................................14 2.1 The Pitt Review .........................................................................................................14 -
15 Road Drainage and the Water Environment
HIGHWAYS AGENCY – M4 JUNCTIONS 3 TO 12 SMART MOTORWAY 15 ROAD DRAINAGE AND THE WATER ENVIRONMENT 15.1 Introduction 15.1.1 This chapter assesses the impacts of the Scheme on road drainage and the water environment during construction and operation, focussing on the effects of highway drainage on the quality and hydrology of receiving waters. In view of the long design-life of the Scheme (30 years for new gantries, 40 years for new carriageway construction, and 120 years for new bridges), the decommissioning phase of the Scheme has not been considered in this chapter because its effects are not predicted to be worse than the effects assessed during the construction and operational phases. The chapter assesses four principal impacts: a) effects of routine runoff on surface water bodies; b) effects of routine runoff on groundwater; c) pollution impacts from spillages; and d) flood impacts. 15.1.2 Although Interim Advice Note (”IAN”) 161/13 ‘Managed Motorways, All lane running’ (Ref 15-1) has scoped out the assessment of ‘Road Drainage and the Water Environment’ for smart motorway schemes, the assessment is required to ensure the protection of the water environment, to prevent its degradation, and ensure adequate mitigation measures are in place to prevent any adverse impacts. 15.1.3 The road drainage and water environment assessment for the Scheme has been undertaken in accordance with standard industry practice and statutory guidance. 15.1.4 This chapter details the methodology followed for the assessment, and summarises the regulatory and policy framework relating to road drainage and the water environment. -
Loddon Catchment Implementation Plan
Loddon Catchment Implementation Plan January 2012 – FOR COMMMENT (Version C2) Glossary.....................................................................................................................3 1 Introduction...................................................................................................6 2 Loddon catchment summary.......................................................................9 2.1 General Description .....................................................................................9 2.2 Catchment map........................................................................................... 10 3 Water body information ............................................................................. 11 3.1 Classification.................................................................................................. 11 3.2 Heavily Modified Water Bodies..................................................................... 11 4 Actions ........................................................................................................ 11 4.1 Operational monitoring (2010-12) ............................................................. 12 4.2 Investigations (2010-12)............................................................................. 12 4.3 Improvement actions (in place by 2012)................................................... 12 4.3.1 ‘Day Job’ activities.............................................................................................. 13 4.3.2 Field actions ...................................................................................................... -
Local Authority / Combined Authority / STB Members (July 2021)
Local Authority / Combined Authority / STB members (July 2021) 1. Barnet (London Borough) 24. Durham County Council 50. E Northants Council 73. Sunderland City Council 2. Bath & NE Somerset Council 25. East Riding of Yorkshire 51. N. Northants Council 74. Surrey County Council 3. Bedford Borough Council Council 52. Northumberland County 75. Swindon Borough Council 4. Birmingham City Council 26. East Sussex County Council Council 76. Telford & Wrekin Council 5. Bolton Council 27. Essex County Council 53. Nottinghamshire County 77. Torbay Council 6. Bournemouth Christchurch & 28. Gloucestershire County Council 78. Wakefield Metropolitan Poole Council Council 54. Oxfordshire County Council District Council 7. Bracknell Forest Council 29. Hampshire County Council 55. Peterborough City Council 79. Walsall Council 8. Brighton & Hove City Council 30. Herefordshire Council 56. Plymouth City Council 80. Warrington Borough Council 9. Buckinghamshire Council 31. Hertfordshire County Council 57. Portsmouth City Council 81. Warwickshire County Council 10. Cambridgeshire County 32. Hull City Council 58. Reading Borough Council 82. West Berkshire Council Council 33. Isle of Man 59. Rochdale Borough Council 83. West Sussex County Council 11. Central Bedfordshire Council 34. Kent County Council 60. Rutland County Council 84. Wigan Council 12. Cheshire East Council 35. Kirklees Council 61. Salford City Council 85. Wiltshire Council 13. Cheshire West & Chester 36. Lancashire County Council 62. Sandwell Borough Council 86. Wokingham Borough Council Council 37. Leeds City Council 63. Sheffield City Council 14. City of Wolverhampton 38. Leicestershire County Council 64. Shropshire Council Combined Authorities Council 39. Lincolnshire County Council 65. Slough Borough Council • West of England Combined 15. City of York Council 40. -
Southend-On-Sea Borough Council Infrastructure Delivery Plan
Southend-on-Sea Infrastructure Delivery Plan Southend-on-Sea Borough Council Infrastructure Delivery Plan Navigus Planning February 2015 0 Southend-on-Sea Infrastructure Delivery Plan Southend-on-Sea Infrastructure Delivery Plan CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 1 2 RELEVANT PLANNING POLICY AND CONTEXT FOR GROWTH .............. 3 National policy ........................................................................................................ 3 Local context .......................................................................................................... 5 3 EDUCATION ........................................................................................ 11 Early Years and Childcare ...................................................................................... 11 Primary, Secondary and Sixth Form Education ........................................................ 12 Free Schools and Academies ................................................................................. 14 4 HEALTH AND SOCIAL WELLBEING ..................................................... 15 GP services .......................................................................................................... 15 Social care ........................................................................................................... 17 5 UTILITIES .......................................................................................... 19 Water – used water ............................................................................................. -
Style Guide Ensuring a Strong, Recognisable Brand and Identity
Style Guide Ensuring a strong, recognisable brand and identity A shared service provided by Bracknell Forest Council, West Berkshire Council and Wokingham Borough Council Contents Introduction 3 The logo 4 The Partner footer 5 Fonts 6 Colour palette 7 Using our branding 8 How not to use our branding 8 Print design elements 9 Digital design elements 10 Stationery 11 Templates, forms and PPP PowerPoint template 12 Public Protection Partnership - Style Guide 2 Introduction The principal elements of the corporate identity are the: • Logos • Partner footer • Corporate colours and • Corporate fonts This Style Guide details the corporate identity of the PPP and how it should be applied across the service and its associated projects, either in print or digitally. There are no exceptions. This guide is aimed all PPP officers and explains what is allowed and what is not. The Style Guide racnell orest is also for all outside organisations who have been Public Protection authorised to produce information or publicity West ershire material on behalf of the PPP. Partnership Woinha In applying these brand rules, designers, as well as officers and members of the PPP, will be playing a vital role in upholding the consistent, corporate image presented by the PPP, contributing to it being a strong and recognisable brand. When creating stationery, printed or digital materials in the first instance please contact: Lead Officer – Community Engagement Claire Lockwood e-mail: [email protected] Tel: 01635 519507 Public Protection Partnership - Style Guide 3 The logo racnell orest This logo is at the heart of the PPP’s corporate Public Protection West ershire identity and it is the primary PPP logo. -
Safety Advisory Group Event Form
Safety Advisory Group event form Name of event Address or location of event Local authority area Bracknell Forest West Berkshire Wokingham Date(s) of event Event start time Event finish time Name of organisation Contact name Phone Email Brief outline of event programme / activities Approximate number of people to attend Have you held this event before? Yes No Has the event changed at all? Yes No N/A If yes, please give details of changes Do you intend to have any of the following? Please tick relevant boxes and provide brief details overleaf Sale or supply of alcohol * Music * Exhibition of film or performance of dance * Food and drink stalls Fairground rides or inflatables Barriers / fencing Temporary stage Marquees Bonfire / fireworks / pyrotechnics Lasers Amplified speech / PA system Parking prohibition * Carnival / procession Banners or posters Portable power supply Road closure / traffic diversion * Motor vehicles Animals *Please note that applications for licences for these activities may take up to 8 weeks to be processed Please provide details reference any activities ticked on page 1: Please provide details of any toilet and sanitary facilities: Please provide details of method to be used to dispose of waste from the event: Please provide details of any car parking provision and how this will be managed: Please give details of any first aid provision: Please give details of any fire safety provision: Please give details of any noise control measures: Please give details of any temporary drinking water supplies to be provided: Please give details of any external contractors and/or concessions: Are you submitting a site/route plan? Site plans should be to scale and show the position of any stalls, stages or structures, toilets, first aid points, access/egress routes for emergency vehicles, car parking etc. -
UASC Capacity Support - Proposed Distribution of £21.3M Allocation Is Based on Latest Available Home Office Management Data Capturing Numbers at September
UASC capacity support - proposed distribution of £21.3m Allocation is based on latest available Home Office management data capturing numbers at September. The information on NTS transfers has been confirmed by the Strategic Migration Partnership leads and is accurate up to December 2017. Please see attached FAQ and methodology document for further information. Local Authority Amount Total 21,258,203.00 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham £ 141,094.00 London Borough of Barnet £ 282,189.00 Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council £ 94,063.00 Bath and North East Somerset Council £ 94,063.00 Bedford Council (Unitary) £ 94,063.00 London Borough of Bexley £ 282,189.00 Birmingham City Council £ 188,126.00 Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council £ 94,063.00 Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council £ 94,063.00 Bournemouth Borough Council £ 141,094.00 Bracknell Forest Council £ 94,063.00 Bradford Metropolitan District Council £ 94,063.00 London Borough of Brent £ 329,219.00 Brighton and Hove City Council £ 188,126.00 Bristol City Council £ 188,126.00 London Borough of Bromley £ 141,094.00 Buckinghamshire County Council £ 188,126.00 Bury Metropolitan Borough Council £ 94,063.00 Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council £ 94,063.00 Cambridgeshire County Council £ 235,157.00 London Borough of Camden £ 329,219.00 Central Bedfordshire Council £ 282,189.00 Cheshire East Council (Unitary) £ 94,063.00 Cheshire West and Chester Council £ 94,063.00 City of London £ 94,063.00 City of Nottingham Council £ 94,063.00 Cornwall Council (Unitary) £ 94,063.00 Coventry City -
Winners of the Geoplace Exemplar Awards 2014
Winners of the GeoPlace Exemplar Awards 2014 Exemplar Award 2014 Winner Joint Emergency Services Group (Wales) Runner-up Oxford City Council Highly commended Northumberland County Council Custodian of the Year 2014 Marilyn George East Riding of Yorkshire Most Improved Address Data Ribble Valley Borough Council Most Improved Street Data Milton Keynes Council Best Address Data in Region Best Address Data in East Midlands Region 2014 Mansfield District Council Best Address Data in East of England Region 2014 Huntingdonshire District Council Best Address Data in Greater London Region 2014 London Borough of Enfield Best Address Data in North East Region 2014 South Tyneside Council Best Address Data in North West Region 2014 Allerdale Borough Council 1 Best Address Data in South East Region 2014 Lewes District Council Best Address Data in South East Region 2014 Adur District Council Best Address Data in South West Region 2014 Torridge District Council Best Address Data in Wales Region 2014 Flintshire County Council Best Address Data in West Midlands Region 2014 Wyre Forest District Council Best Address Data in Yorkshire and the Humber Region 2014 Kingston upon Hull City Council and Sheffield City Council Best Street Data in Region Best Street Data in East Midlands Region 2014 Northamptonshire County Council Best Street Data in East of England Region 2014 Peterborough City Council Best Street Data in Greater London Region 2014 London Borough of Enfield Best Street Data in Greater London Region 2014 London Borough of Hillingdon Best Street Data -
Draft Financial Statements 2018/19
Draft Financial Statements 2018/19 CONTENTS Narrative Report 1 Annual Governance Statement 14 Independent Auditor’s Report 31 Statement of Accounts Approval of Accounts 34 Statement of Responsibilities 35 Comprehensive Income & Expenditure Statement 36 Movement in Reserves Statement 37 Balance Sheet 38 Cash Flow Statement 39 Notes to the Core Financial Statements 40 The Collection Fund 110 Notes to the Collection Fund 111 Group Accounts 113 Notes to the Group Accounts 118 Glossary of Terms 123 Index 130 Bracknell Forest Council i Draft Financial Statements 2018/19 Bracknell Forest Council ii Draft Financial Statements 2018/19 NARRATIVE REPORT 1 Introduction The Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015 require the Council to produce a Statement of Accounts for each financial year giving certain specified information. This Narrative Report accompanies the accounts and provides a brief explanation of the financial aspects of Bracknell Forest Council’s activities and draws attention to the main characteristics of the Council’s financial position. To assist readers, a glossary of accounting terms is included on pages 123 to 129. Bracknell Forest is a Unitary Council and following the transfer of its housing stock accounts for its expenditure in two distinct categories: General Fund Revenue Account – This includes day to day spending on all services. Expenditure is financed mainly from government grant, a proportion of the Business Rates income collected, charges to users of services, and Council Tax. Capital – All improvements and additions to the Council’s assets and the creation of new assets with a life or more than one year are included in this category. This expenditure is primarily financed from the sale of capital assets, government grants, contributions from developers, and borrowing from internal and external sources.