DOCSLIB.ORG

ORGANIZATION of ALARM RECEPTION in NORWAY and ABROAD Surveys and Recommendations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ORGANIZATION of ALARM RECEPTION in NORWAY and ABROAD Surveys and Recommendations On behalf of the Norwegian Directorate of Health, PA Consulting Group has carried out a survey of experiences with organizations of alarm reception in Norway, Denmark, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States. We would like to thank the representatives from Norwegian, Swedish, Danish, British and American organizations who welcomed us and shared their experiences of welfare technology. Oslo 15 September 2014 ORGANIZATION OF ALARM RECEPTION IN NORWAY AND ABROAD Surveys and recommendations October 2014 PREFACE On behalf of the Norwegian Directorate of Health, PA Consulting Group has carried out a survey of how emergency reception for welfare technology solutions is organized in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, the United Kingdom and the USA. In addition, an overall survey has been carried out of how welfare technology is implemented in the various geographies. The purpose of the survey is to give Norwegian municipalities insight and inspiration in the further work of organizing emergency reception and implementing welfare technology on a larger scale. We would like to thank the representatives from Norwegian, Swedish, Danish, British and American organizations who have shared their experiences. Grete Kvernland-Berg Chief Consultant in PA Consulting Group Oslo, October 2014 1 CONTENTS PREFACE................................................. .................................................. .................................... 1 SUMMARY ................................................. .................................................. ......................... 5 BACKGROUND................................................. .................................................. ............................... 8 The challenge for health and care services in Norway .......................................... ......... 8 National Welfare Technology Program ................................................ ............................... 13 THE INVESTIGATION ................................................. .................................................. .................. 16 The mandate ................................................. .................................................. .................... 16 Method ................................................. .................................................. ...................... 17 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................... .................................................. ............ 18 1.1 Definitions of terms ................................................. ........................................... 19 1.1.1 Definition of concept of welfare technology ............................................ ............... 19 1.1.2 Definition of alarm reception ............................................ ...................... 20 1.2 Welfare technology in Norway ............................................... ..................................... 20 1.3 Alarm reception in Norway ............................................... ........................................... 23 1.4 Alarm reception in other countries .............................................. ..................................... 26 1.5 Standards for alarm reception and welfare technology in Norway and other countries .............. 26 1.5.1 The Continua Framework ............................................ ....................................... 26 1.5.2 TeleSCoPE .............................................. .................................................. ........ 27 CHAPTER 2 ORGANIZATION OF ALARM RECEPTION IN THE UNITED KINGDOM ........................................... ... 29 2.1 Health & Care Organization in the UK ........................................... ....... 30 2.1.1 Organization of health and care in England ........................................ ............. 31 2.1.2 Organization of health and care in Scotland ........................................ .......... 32 2.1.3 Organization of health and care in Wales ........................................ ................ 33 2.2 Welfare technology in the UK ............................................... .......................... 34 2.2.1 The British definition of welfare technology ........................... 34 2 2.2.2 Status of work on welfare technology United Kingdom ........................... 34 2.2.3 Telecare Services Association (TSA) ......................................... ....................... 36 2.2.4 National framework agreement for telecare ........................................... ...................... 38 2.3 Case descriptions from the UK ............................................... ........................ 38 2.3.1 Cardiff Council ............................................. .................................................. .. 38 2.3.2 Royal Borough of Greenwich ........................................... ........................... 45 2.3.3 Edinburgh Council ............................................. ........................................... 52 2.3.4 Hampshire County Council and Medvivo Group ......................................... ...... 59 2.3.5 Metropolitan Borough of Tameside ........................................... ..................... 68 CHAPTER 3 ORGANIZATION OF ALARM RECEPTION IN THE UNITED STATES ........................................... ...................... 72 3.1 Organization of Health and Care in the United States ........................................... ..................... 73 3.2 Welfare Technology in the United States ............................................... ....................................... 74 3.3 Case description from the USA ............................................... ........................................... 75 3.3.1 Permanent Emperor ............................................. ........................................... 76 CHAPTER 4 ORGANIZATION OF ALARM RECEPTION IN DENMARK ........................................... ............ 78 4.1 Organization of health and care in Denmark ........................................... ............. 79 4.2 Overall strategy for the development of the health care system in Denmark ........................... 80 4.3 Welfare technology in Denmark ............................................... ........................... 81 4.4 Case descriptions from Denmark ............................................... ........................... 82 4.4.1 Aabenraa municipality ............................................. ........................................... 82 4.4.2 Odense municipality ............................................. ........................................... 87 CHAPTER 5 ORGANIZATION OF ALARM RECEPTION IN SWEDEN ........................................... ............... 91 5.1 Organization of health and care in Sweden ........................................... ................ 92 5.2 Welfare technology in Sweden ............................................... ................................... 92 5.3 Case descriptions from Sweden ............................................... ........................... 93 93 5.3.1 Central alarm reception provided by CareTech AB ......................................... ......... 94 5.3.2 Lund Municipality ............................................. .................................................. 97 3 CHAPTER 6 ORGANIZATION OF ALARM RECEPTION IN NORWAY ........................................... ............... 100 6.1 Case descriptions from Norway ............................................... .................................. 101 6.1.1 Bærum municipality ............................................. ........................................... 101 6.1.2 Lindås municipality ............................................. ........................................... 107 6.1.3 Stavanger Municipality ............................................. ......................................... 111 6.1.4 Trondheim municipality ............................................. ....................................... 115 6.1.5 Fredrikstad municipality ............................................. ...................................... 120 6.1.6 Tinn municipality ............................................. .................................................. 123 6.1.7 Lister regions .............................................. .............................................. 127 6.1.8 Oslo, St. Hanshaugen district ......................................... .................................. 130 6.1.9 SOS International ............................................. .............................................. 131 CHAPTER 7 ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................... ......................... 134 7.1 Common features for organizing welfare technology and alarm reception ....................... 135 7.1.1 United Kingdom .............................................. .................................................. .. 135 7.1.2 USA .............................................. .................................................. ................ 136 7.1.3 Denmark .............................................. .................................................. ........ 136 7.1.4 Sweden .............................................. .................................................. ........... 137 7.1.5 Norway .............................................. .................................................. ............. 138
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Annex F –List of Consultees
    ANNEX F –LIST OF CONSULTEES Local highway authorities Leicester City Council Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council Leicestershire County Council Bath & NE Somerset Council Lincolnshire County Council Bedfordshire County Council Liverpool City Council Birmingham City Council Local Government Association Blackburn & Darwen London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Blackpool Borough Council London Borough of Barnet Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council London Borough of Bexley Borough of Poole London Borough of Brent Bournemouth Borough Council London Borough of Bromley Bracknell Forest Borough Council London Borough of Camden Bradford Metropolitan Borough Council London Borough of Croydon Brighton and Hove City Council London Borough of Ealing Bristol City Council London Borough of Enfield Buckinghamshire County Council London Borough of Greenwich Bury Metropolitan Borough Council London Borough of Hackney Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council London Borough of Hammersmith and Cambridgeshire County Council Fulham Cheshire County Council London Borough of Haringey City of York Council London Borough of Harrow Cornwall County Council London Borough of Havering Corporation of London London Borough of Hillingdon County of Herefordshire District Council London Borough of Hounslow Coventry City Council London Borough of Islington Cumbria County Council London Borough of Lambeth Cumbria Highways London Borough of Lewisham Darlington Borough Council London Borough of Merton Derby City Council London Borough of Newham Derbyshire County Council London
    [Show full text]
  • New Regional Industrial Path Development: Entrepreneurs, Knowledge Exchange and Regional Contexts
    New Regional Industrial Path Development: Entrepreneurs, Knowledge Exchange and Regional Contexts Jan Ole Rypestøl New Regional Industrial Path Development: Entrepreneurs, Knowledge Exchange, and Regional Contexts Doctoral Dissertation for the degree of Philosophiae Doctor (PhD) University of Agder School of Business and Law 2018 This study was made possible by generous financial support from: Sørlandets Kompetansefond and Aust-Agder Utviklings- og Kompetansefond Doctoral Dissertations at the University of Agder 191 ISSN: 1504-9272 ISBN: 978-82-7117-890-1 Jan Ole Rypestøl, 2018 Printed by Wittusen & Jensen Oslo Abstract In recent years, new regional industrial path development has become more important than ever before due to increased competition fuelled by digitalisation and an intensifying globalisation. One way for regions to respond to this increasing global competition is to promote processes that can transform and renew regional industries, as well as processes that can create new industries within regional boundaries. Such processes of change are vital because, if there is no industrial dynamism, regional industries will eventually be outpaced by competitors and the region will face augmented economic challenges. As the issues related to regional industrial change are of such importance, economic geographers have increasingly turned their research attention towards the issue of regional industrial development. Such processes of industrial change have been identified in the relevant literature as evolutionary and path dependent, and it has also been found that processes of regional industrial development unfold within regional innovation systems (RISs). Further, the literature found that such regional innovation systems vary in their number and diversity of actors as well as in their institutional arrangements, and argued that such regional differences will affect the ability of regions to foster and promote industrial renewal and new path creation.
    [Show full text]
  • FORSTUDIE Ljosland 1041
    FORSTUDIE Ljosland 1041 Trond Grønbech T-H. Grønbech Reiselivsrådgivning 2013 Forstudie Ljosland 1041 T-H. Grønbech Reiselivsrådgivning Forord Denne forstudien har hatt som formål å avklare problemstillinger knyttet til utviklingen av Ljosland som reisemål. Dette gjelder både forhold knyttet til utviklingen av selve reiselivstilbudet, primært produktutvikling, markedsføring sommer som vinter, forholdet til kommunen og kommunal planlegging, og ikke minst potensielle samarbeidspartnere i og utenfor kommunen. Forstudien belyser dagens situasjon og fremtidige muligheter. Den avklarer også grunnlaget for å gå videre med en prosess i tråd med Innovasjon Norges Hvitebok for reisemålsutvikling. Forstudien har vært utført i perioden mai 2013 til september 2013. Det har vært avholdt to åpne møter med representanter fra reiselivet, utbyggere og hytteeiere på Ljosland, samt møter / intervjuer med en rekke sentrale aktører. Styringsgruppen har avholdt 4 møter. I perioden har det vært to befaringer i området (vinter- og sommerbefaring). Etter at rapporten er ferdig vil det bli gjennomført et åpent møte hvor grunneiere, hytteeiere og næringsaktører blir invitert. Deretter vil det bli avholdt et møte med kommunestyret. Jeg takker for et interessant oppdrag og håper forstudiet gir et tilstrekkelig grunnlag for videre arbeidet med utviklingen av Ljosland som et helårig, attraktivt og lønnsomt reisemål. Trond Grønbech 26.september 2013 Side 2 av 61 Forstudie Ljosland 1041 T-H. Grønbech Reiselivsrådgivning Sammendrag. Kapitel 1. Bakgrunn og formål med forstudiet. Denne forstudien ble utført i perioden mai 2013 til september 2013 og har hatt som formål å avklare problemstillinger knyttet til utviklingen av Ljosland som reisemål. Dette til beste både for næringsaktørene i Ljosland, hyttebeboere, lokalbefolkning og kommunen.
    [Show full text]
  • Strasbourg, 29 January 2014 ACFC/SR/IV(2014)
    Strasbourg, 29 January 2014 ACFC/SR/IV(2014)002 FOURTH REPORT SUBMITTED BY DENMARK PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 25, PARAGRAPH 2 OF THE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF NATIONAL MINORITIES Received on 29 January 2014 Sagsnr.: 058.78K.391 Denmark’s fourth report under the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities January 2014 1 Sagsnr.: 058.78K.391 Introduction Denmark ratified the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities on 22 September 1997. The Framework Convention entered into force for Denmark on 1 February 1998. On 6 May 1999, Denmark submitted its first state report under the Fremework Con- vention. The third state report under the Framework Convention followed on March 2010. As part of the monitoring mechanisms of the Framework Convention, Denmark now submits its fourth state report under the Framework Convention. The Danish government sees the report as an excellent opportunity to maintain the ongoing dialogue with the Council of Europe in the area. The report has been prepared on the basis of contributions received from a number of ministries and other autorities comprised by the provisions of the Framework Convention. The ministries and aut- horities include the Ministry of Employment, Ministry of Business and Growth Denmark, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Culture Denmark, Ministry for Gender Equality and Ecclesiastical Affairs, The Ministry of Social Affairs, Children and Integration, The Ministry of Health, The Prime Mini- ster’s Office, The Ministry of Economic Affairs and the Interior, The Ministry of Education, Mini- stry of Transport, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, Statistics Denmark as well as the muni- cipalities of Tønder, Haderslev, Aabenraa and Sønderborg.
    [Show full text]
  • Iodine, Inorganic and Soluble Salts
    Iodine, inorganic and soluble salts Evaluation of health hazards and proposal of a health-based quality criterion for drinking water Environmental Project No. 1533, 2014 Title: Editing: Iodine, inorganic and soluble salts Elsa Nielsen, Krestine Greve, John Christian Larsen, Otto Meyer, Kirstine Krogholm, Max Hansen Division of Toxicology and Risk Assessment National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark Published by: The Danish Environmental Protection Agency Strandgade 29 1401 Copenhagen K Denmark www.mst.dk/english Year: ISBN no. Authored 2013. 978-87-93026-87-2 Published 2014. Disclaimer: When the occasion arises, the Danish Environmental Protection Agency will publish reports and papers concerning research and development projects within the environmental sector, financed by study grants provided by the Danish Environmental Protection Agency. It should be noted that such publications do not necessarily reflect the position or opinion of the Danish Environmental Protection Agency. However, publication does indicate that, in the opinion of the Danish Environmental Protection Agency, the content represents an important contribution to the debate surrounding Danish environmental policy. Sources must be acknowledged. 2 Iodine, inorganic and soluble salts Content CONTENT 3 PREFACE 5 1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION 6 1.1 IDENTITY 6 1.2 PRODUCTION AND USE 6 1.3 ENVIRONMENTAL OCCURRENCE AND FATE 7 1.3.1 Air 7 1.3.2 Water 7 1.3.3 Soil 8 1.3.4 Foodstuffs 10 1.3.5 Bioaccumulation 11 1.4 HUMAN EXPOSURE 11 2 TOXICOKINETICS 15 2.1 ABSORPTION 15
    [Show full text]
  • Public Sector Organisation Listing
    Public Sector Organisation listing - completed energy efficiency projects using Salix financing in FY 2018/2019 Abertay University Addenbrooke's Hospital All Saints Catholic Primary School All Saints Church of England (C) Primary School All Saints Church of England Primary School Alsager School Angus Council Archbishop Ilsley Catholic School Arnold Academy Arthur Terry Academy Ash Trees Academy Austhorpe Primary School Bailey's Court Primary School Barbara Priestman Academy Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council Barwell Church of England Academy Beacon Primary Academy Beecroft Academy Beeston Hill St Luke’s Primary School Bemrose School Biggleswade Academy Birchfield Primary School Birmingham City Council Bishop Challoner Catholic School Blunham Parish Council Bolton-le-Sands CofE Primary School Boskenwyn Primary School Bottisham Village College Bournemouth Borough Council Bournemouth University Brampton Bierlow Parish Council Brandhall Primary School Bridgend County Borough Council Briercliffe Primary School Bristol City Council Britannia Bridge Primary School Broadlands Academy Broomhill Infants School Brunel University Buckinghamshire County Council Burnt Mill Academy Version 1 Public Sector Organisation listing - completed energy efficiency projects using Salix financing in FY 2018/2019 Burraton Community Primary School Burton End Primary School Caerphilly County Borough Council Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council Cansfield High School Cardiff Metropolitan University Carmarthenshire County Council Caroline Haslett Primary School
    [Show full text]
  • Data Centre Strategy 2022 DATA CENTRE STRATEGY2022 - AABENRAA MUNICIPALITY
    Aabenraa ,· Kommune �·, . Data Centre Strategy 2022 DATA CENTRE STRATEGY2022 - AABENRAA MUNICIPALITY: 'Aabenraa Municipality may evolve into one of the preferred European hubs where the data centre industry has the best development potential - for the benef it of citizens, bus i­ nesses and the environment. We and the companies must show willingness to grow and seize the opportunities created by the Data Centre Strategy'. THOMAS ANDRESEN, MAYOR, AABENRAA MUNICIPALITY AABENRAA MUNICIPALITY'S DATA CENTRE STRATEGY2022 HAS ONE OVERALL GOAL: MORE JOBS AND MORE PEOPLE SETTLING IN AABENRAA MUNICIPALITY AS A RESULT OF THE DATA CENTRES. In order to achieve our overall goal, the Data Centre Strategy 2022 sets up six objectives with associated action plans which focus the efforts by Aabenraa Municipality, as follows 0 To attract more data centres • To attract and develop downstream industry for the data centres 0 To increase the amount of sustainable energy and utilise surplus heat from the data centres • To attract and develop education programmes for the data centre industry • To attract a resident labour force for the data centre industry To create collaborations on digitalisation through the data centres' Community • Outreach projects 3 Overall goal - more jobs and more people settling in Aabenraa Municipality >>> GOAL AND OBJECTIVES Our Data Centre Strategy 2022 has one overall goal: 'More jobs and more people I settling in Aabenraa Municipality as a result of the data centres'. This overall goal is divided into six objectives which 2. Strengths in the local business community within must be pursued simultaneously. Each objective is transport/logistics and circular economy associated with a number of actions which combined will focus our efforts leading up to 2022.
    [Show full text]
  • Results from the Questionnaire: Analysis of Needs and Preferred Methods of Co-Operation
    Results from the questionnaire: analysis of needs and preferred methods of co-operation Following the demand-driven approach and in order to better assess the needs of the regional and local level, a questionnaire was sent in April 2012. The main findings were: 103 replies from 26 different countries were received in response to the questionnaire. Among the respondents there were several capital cites (for instance Berlin, Budapest, Lisbon, Belgrade, Vilnius, Tirana) as well as many other big cities. The majority of the respondents were municipal authorities and in particular mayors or deputy mayors. 88,3% gave a positive answer when responding to whether they would be interested in taking part in the activities of the Alliance The following graphs present other main findings: Graph 1 - Interest of cities to be part of the Alliance Graph 2 - Thematic issues of interest 1 Graph 3 - Transversal issues of interest Graph 4 - Activities of interest 2 Answers by countries cities and regions (26 Countries replied out of 43 contacted) Cities/Regio Cities/Regions ns Not- Total Number of Country Interested in Interested in Cities/Regions the Alliance the Alliance Austria 1 1 2 Albania 6 _ 6 Belgium 1 _ 1 Bosnia and Herzegovina 2 _ 2 Bulgaria 6 1 7 Croatia 3 _ 3 Czech Republic 5 _ 5 Finland 1 _ 1 France 1 _ 1 Germany 2 1 3 Greece 9 _ 9 Hungary 2 _ 2 Italy 9 1 10 Lithuania 7 4 11 Portugal 2 _ 2 Romania 1 _ 1 “the former Yugoslav Republic of 4 _ 4 Macedonia” Russia 1 _ 1 Serbia 7 _ 7 Slovakia 1 _ 1 Spain 5 _ 5 Sweden 2 _ 2 Switzerland _ 1 1 The
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2019
    The Danish Parliamentary Ombudsman has been elected by Parliament. His task is to help ensure that administrative authorities act in accordance with the law and good administrative practice, thus protecting citizens’ rights vis-à-vis the authorities. The Ombudsman investigates complaints, opens cases on his own initiative and carries out monitoring visits. Annual Report The Danish Parliamentary Ombudsman Gammeltorv 22 DK-1457 København K 2019 Phone +45 33 13 25 12 www.ombudsmanden.dk [email protected] This page has been intentionaly left blank. To Parliament In accordance with section 11(1) and (2) of the Parliamentary Ombudsman Act (consolidating Act no. 349 of 22 March 2013), I am hereby submitting my Annual Report for the year 2019. Copenhagen, March 2020 Niels Fenger Published by The Danish Parliamentary Ombudsman Gammeltorv 22 DK-1457 København K Printed by Rosendahls a/s, Copenhagen E-mail: [email protected] Printed in Denmark 2020 Also available in PDF format on www.ombudsmanden.dk Graphic design Conduce Umano (infographics on pages 9, 10, 39, 128 and 129) Photographers Jasper Carlberg Jakob Dall ISSN 1902-0120 Contents Preface: Protection of citizens’ legal rights Niels Fenger, Parliamentary Ombudsman .......................................... 4 Confusion about the roles of public authorities afects citizens Marianne Halkjær Ebbesen, Legal Case Ofcer, and Lisbeth Adserballe, Senior Head of Division ................................... 8 How do we introduce e-government without harming our legal rights? Niels Fenger, Parliamentary Ombudsman .......................................... 16 Is using the term ‘environmental information’ a magic formula? Kirsten Talevski, Senior Head of Division, and Kristine Holst Hedegaard, Deputy Head of Division ........................... 22 About the cases Complaint cases ....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Working with Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council Why Choose
    WHY CHOOSE US? WORKING WITH DUDLEY METROPOLITAN DUDLEY BOROUGH COUNCIL METROPOLITAN Dudley MBC turned to Verto to implement a simple easy to use system that would provide BOROUGH COUNCIL a robust fund management solution and easy access to quality management information. Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (MBC) is one of the 152 county councils and unitary authorities across England. County councils and unitary authorities are responsible for all services in their local areas. However, they work closely with partners to ensure these services are delivered in line with the needs of their local population. Dudley MBC has an annual budget of around £740 million and serves a population of nearly 313,000 across 24 wards. It is committed to building an effective and dynamic organisation, delivering services in partnership and helping communities to help themselves. Like all local authorities, Dudley MBC has a complex structure made up of the full council and its various committees, directorates and services. It has to report regularly on its progress in delivering its plans, both within the council itself, to central government and other regulatory bodies, and to its various partners. WHAT DUDLEY MBC WANTED TO ACHIEVE Prior to using Verto, Dudley MBC managed all its projects using spreadsheets and Microsoft Project. Aware that this could lead to a rather ad hoc approach, they also had a comprehensive manual to help staff work to a common project management system. However, at 90 pages it was too long for most people to read in detail. As a result, there was no consistency in how the authority was managing projects across its different departments.
    [Show full text]
  • Business Rates Pilot Scheme 2019/20 Application Form
    Business Rates Pilot Scheme 2019/20 Application Form This application form will be used to assess your application to pilot 75% business rates retention in 2019/20. Where relevant, further evidence to support points raised in this form may be included as an annex. Please note that authorities cannot apply to pilot 75% business rates retention as part of more than one application. Information provided in response to this application may be published or disclosed in accordance with the access to information regimes – these are primarily the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA), the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA), the EU General Data Protection Regulation, and the Environmental Information Regulations 2004). The personal data you provide as part of this application will be held on a secure government system in line with the department’s personal data charter. Contact details will only be used for contacting you about your application or to update you on our work relating to local government finance reforms. For any questions relating to the application process, please email: [email protected]. FAQs relating to applications will be published on the Government publications website at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/75-business-rates-retention-pilots-2019-to-2020- prospectus 1. Application Contact Details Please include details of the lead pilot authority and lead official responsible for responding to any departmental queries relating to the pilot application. a. Name of lead pilot authority Leeds City Council b. Name of lead official Carolyn Jolley c. Lead official job title Senior Financial Manager d. Lead official email address [email protected] e.
    [Show full text]
  • 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
    [Show full text]