DOCSLIB.ORG

Appendix 6 Performance Indicator and CIPFA Data Comparisons BVPI Comparisons

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Appendix 6 Performance Indicator and CIPFA Data Comparisons BVPI Comparisons Appendix 6 Performance Indicator and CIPFA Data Comparisons BVPI Comparisons Southend-on-Sea vs CPA Environment High Scorers / Nearest Neighbours / Unitaries BV 106: Percentage of new homes built on previously developed land 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Southend-on-Sea 100 100 100 CPA 2002 Environment score 3 or 4 in unitary authorities, by indicator 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Blackpool 56.8 63 n/a Bournemouth 94 99 n/a Derby 51 63 n/a East Riding of Yorkshire 24.08 16.64 n/a Halton 27.48 49 n/a Hartlepool 40.8 56 n/a Isle of Wight 84 86 n/a Kingston-upon-Hull 40 36 n/a Luton 99 99.01 n/a Middlesbrough 74.3 61 n/a Nottingham 97 99 n/a Peterborough 79.24 93.66 n/a Plymouth 81.3 94.4 n/a South Gloucestershire 41 44.6 n/a Stockton-on-Tees 33 29.34 n/a Stoke-on-Trent 58.4 61 n/a Telford & Wrekin 54 55.35 n/a Torbay 39 58.57 n/a CIPFA 'Nearest Neighbour' Benchmark Group 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Blackpool 56.8 63 n/a Bournemouth 94 99 n/a Brighton & Hove 99.7 100 n/a Isle of Wight 84 86 n/a Portsmouth 98.6 100 n/a Torbay 39 58.57 n/a Unitaries 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Unitary 75th percentile 94 93.7 n/a Unitary Median 70 65 n/a Unitary 25th percentile 41 52.3 n/a Average 66.3 68.7 n/a Source: ODPM website BV 107: Planning cost per head of population. 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Southend-on-Sea 8.24 8.68 9.45 CPA 2002 Environment score 3 or 4 in unitary authorities, by indicator 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Blackpool 7.26 7.53 n/a Bournemouth 13.95 14.43 n/a Derby 7.41 8.2 n/a East Riding of Yorkshire 12.36 12.63 n/a Halton 8.22 9.88 n/a Hartlepool 7.73 8.31 n/a Isle of Wight 14.75 15.41 n/a Kingston-upon-Hull 6.86 6.7 n/a Luton 8.82 9.11 n/a Middlesbrough 5.37 5.01 n/a Nottingham 8.63 8.48 n/a Peterborough 13.46 15.45 n/a Plymouth 8.09 6.12 n/a South Gloucestershire 13.81 13.09 n/a Stockton-on-Tees 8.3 9.34 n/a Stoke-on-Trent 6.86 7.04 n/a Telford & Wrekin 9.52 9.69 n/a Torbay 11.17 11.25 n/a CIPFA 'Nearest Neighbour' Benchmark Group 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Blackpool 7.26 7.53 n/a Bournemouth 13.95 14.43 n/a Brighton & Hove 9.91 12.28 n/a Isle of Wight 14.75 15.41 n/a Portsmouth 9.73 10.01 n/a Torbay 11.17 11.25 n/a Unitaries 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Unitary 75th percentile 13.5 14.1 n/a Unitary Median 9.7 10 n/a Unitary 25th percentile 8.2 8.5 n/a Average 11 11.5 n/a 109a: The percentage of planning applications determined within the Governments new development control targets to determine: 60% of major applications within 13 weeks 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Southend-on-Sea n/a 39 48 CPA 2002 Environment score 3 or 4 in unitary authorities, by indicator 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Blackpool n/a 46 n/a Bournemouth n/a 42 n/a Derby n/a 32 n/a East Riding of Yorkshire n/a 52.7 n/a Halton n/a 57.9 n/a Hartlepool n/a 61.9 n/a Isle of Wight n/a 42.5* n/a Kingston-upon-Hull n/a 55 n/a Luton n/a 49.45 n/a Middlesbrough n/a 31.6 n/a Nottingham n/a 44 n/a Peterborough n/a 36 n/a Plymouth n/a 24 n/a South Gloucestershire n/a 40 n/a Stockton-on-Tees n/a 60 n/a Stoke-on-Trent n/a 51.28 n/a Telford & Wrekin n/a 41 n/a Torbay n/a 34 n/a CIPFA 'Nearest Neighbour' Benchmark Group 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Blackpool 46 n/a Bournemouth 42 n/a Brighton & Hove 21.74 n/a Isle of Wight 42.5* n/a Portsmouth 50 n/a Torbay 34 n/a Unitaries 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Unitary 75th percentile 49.5 n/a Unitary Median 40 n/a Unitary 25th percentile 31 n/a Average 39.5 n/a *doubts were expressed about the arrangements for collecting the information 109b: 65% of minor applications within 8 weeks 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Southend-on-Sea n/a 34 58 CPA 2002 Environment score 3 or 4 in unitary authorities, by indicator 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Blackpool n/a 67 n/a Bournemouth n/a 40 n/a Derby n/a 49 n/a East Riding of Yorkshire n/a 58.3 n/a Halton n/a 80.2 n/a Hartlepool n/a 59.1 n/a Isle of Wight n/a 62* n/a Kingston-upon-Hull n/a 53 n/a Luton n/a 58 n/a Middlesbrough n/a 70.4 n/a Nottingham n/a 60 n/a Peterborough n/a 68.55 n/a Plymouth n/a 34 n/a South Gloucestershire n/a 49 n/a Stockton-on-Tees n/a 55.56 n/a Stoke-on-Trent n/a 70.4 n/a Telford & Wrekin n/a 58 n/a Torbay n/a 55.78 n/a CIPFA 'Nearest Neighbour' Benchmark Group 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Blackpool 67 n/a Bournemouth 40 n/a Brighton & Hove 46.76 n/a Isle of Wight 62* n/a Portsmouth 56.75 n/a Torbay 55.78 n/a Unitaries 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Unitary 75th percentile 62 n/a Unitary Median 55.8 n/a Unitary 25th percentile 46.8 n/a Average 54.1 n/a *doubts were expressed about the arrangements for collecting the information 109c: 80% of other applications within 8 weeks 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Southend-on-Sea n/a 48 71 CPA 2002 Environment score 3 or 4 in unitary authorities, by indicator 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Blackpool n/a 78 n/a Bournemouth n/a 70 n/a Derby n/a 65 n/a East Riding of Yorkshire n/a 77.2 n/a Halton n/a 86.5 n/a Hartlepool n/a 73.03 n/a Isle of Wight n/a 77.7* n/a Kingston-upon-Hull n/a 61 n/a Luton n/a 83 n/a Middlesbrough n/a 83.9 n/a Nottingham n/a 77 n/a Peterborough n/a 88.39 n/a Plymouth n/a 46 n/a South Gloucestershire n/a 74 n/a Stockton-on-Tees n/a 64.17 n/a Stoke-on-Trent n/a 78.89 n/a Telford & Wrekin n/a 73 n/a Torbay n/a 66.21 n/a CIPFA 'Nearest Neighbour' Benchmark Group 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Blackpool 78 n/a Bournemouth 70 n/a Brighton & Hove 58.82 n/a Isle of Wight 77.7* n/a Portsmouth 76.95 n/a Torbay 66.21 n/a Unitaries 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Unitary 75th percentile 78.6 n/a Unitary Median 73 n/a Unitary 25th percentile 65.3 n/a Average 71.2 n/a *doubts were expressed about the arrangements for collecting the information 188: The number of decisions delegated to officers as a percentage of all decisions 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Southend-on-Sea n/a 79 88 CPA 2002 Environment score 3 or 4 in unitary authorities, by indicator 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Blackpool n/a 82 n/a Bournemouth n/a 88 n/a Derby n/a 91 n/a East Riding of Yorkshire n/a 76.22 n/a Halton n/a 88.9 n/a Hartlepool n/a 80.77 n/a Isle of Wight n/a 89.3 n/a Kingston-upon-Hull n/a 76 n/a Luton n/a 77.71 n/a Middlesbrough n/a 58.9 n/a Nottingham n/a 85 n/a Peterborough n/a 93.18 n/a Plymouth n/a 84 n/a South Gloucestershire n/a 73.89 n/a Stockton-on-Tees n/a 88.41 n/a Stoke-on-Trent n/a 81.29 n/a Telford & Wrekin n/a 85 n/a Torbay n/a 77 n/a CIPFA 'Nearest Neighbour' Benchmark Group 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Blackpool 82 n/a Bournemouth 88 n/a Brighton & Hove 82.9 n/a Isle of Wight 89.3 n/a Portsmouth 91.6 n/a Torbay 77 n/a Unitaries 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Unitary 75th percentile 88.6 n/a Unitary Median 85 n/a Unitary 25th percentile 79 n/a Average 83.1 n/a 200a: Plan making - Do you have a development plan (or alterations to it) that has been adopted in the last 5 years and the end date of which has not expired? 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Southend-on-Sea n/a n/a NO CPA 2002 Environment score 3 or 4 in unitary authorities, by indicator 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Blackpool n/a n/a n/a Bournemouth n/a n/a n/a Derby n/a n/a n/a East Riding of Yorkshire n/a n/a n/a Halton n/a n/a n/a Hartlepool n/a n/a n/a Isle of Wight n/a n/a n/a Kingston-upon-Hull n/a n/a n/a Luton n/a n/a n/a Middlesbrough n/a n/a n/a Nottingham n/a n/a n/a Peterborough n/a n/a n/a Plymouth n/a n/a n/a South Gloucestershire n/a n/a n/a Stockton-on-Tees n/a n/a n/a Stoke-on-Trent n/a n/a n/a Telford & Wrekin n/a n/a n/a Torbay n/a n/a n/a CIPFA 'Nearest Neighbour' Benchmark Group 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Blackpool n/a n/a n/a Bournemouth n/a n/a n/a Brighton & Hove n/a n/a n/a Isle of Wight n/a n/a n/a Portsmouth n/a n/a n/a Torbay n/a n/a n/a Unitaries 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Unitary 75th percentile n/a n/a n/a Unitary Median n/a n/a n/a Unitary 25th percentile n/a n/a n/a Average n/a n/a n/a 200b: If 'No', are there proposals on deposit for an alteration or replacement, with a published timetable for adopting those alterations or the replacement plan within three years? 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Southend-on-Sea n/a n/a NO Southend-on-Sea CPA 2002 Environment score 3 or 4 in unitary authorities, by indicator 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 CPA 2002 Environment score 3 or 4 in unitary authorities, by indicator Blackpool n/a n/a n/a Blackpool Bournemouth n/a n/a n/a Bournemouth Derby n/a n/a n/a Derby East Riding of Yorkshire n/a n/a n/a East Riding of Yorkshire Halton n/a n/a n/a Halton Hartlepool n/a n/a n/a Hartlepool Isle of Wight n/a n/a n/a Isle of Wight Kingston-upon-Hull n/a n/a n/a Kingston-upon-Hull Luton n/a n/a n/a Luton Middlesbrough n/a n/a n/a Middlesbrough Nottingham n/a n/a n/a Nottingham Peterborough n/a n/a n/a Peterborough Plymouth n/a n/a n/a Plymouth South Gloucestershire n/a n/a n/a South Gloucestershire Stockton-on-Tees n/a n/a n/a Stockton-on-Tees Stoke-on-Trent n/a n/a n/a Stoke-on-Trent Telford & Wrekin n/a n/a n/a Telford & Wrekin Torbay n/a n/a n/a Torbay CIPFA 'Nearest Neighbour' Benchmark Group 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 CIPFA 'Nearest Neighbour' Benchmark Group Blackpool n/a n/a n/a Blackpool Bournemouth n/a n/a n/a Bournemouth Brighton & Hove n/a n/a n/a Brighton & Hove Isle of Wight n/a n/a n/a Isle of Wight Portsmouth n/a n/a n/a Portsmouth Torbay n/a n/a n/a Torbay Unitaries 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Unitaries Unitary 75th percentile n/a n/a n/a Unitary 75th percentile Unitary Median n/a n/a n/a Unitary Median Unitary 25th percentile n/a n/a n/a Unitary 25th percentile Average n/a n/a n/a Average 111: Percentage of applicants satisfied with the service received 2000/01 20003/04 72 63 2000/01 20003/04 77 n/a 82 n/a 74 n/a n/a n/a 81 n/a 83.7 n/a 75 n/a 86 n/a 72.2 n/a 96.1 n/a 74.94 n/a 76.45 n/a 75 n/a 79 n/a 82 n/a 84.6 n/a 78 n/a n/a n/a 2000/01 20003/04 77 n/a
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sexual Health Introduction This Constitutes the Full Section on Sexual Health for the Adults’ JSNA 2016
    For feedback, please contact [email protected] Last updated 4-Apr-16 Review date 30-Apr-17 Sexual Health Introduction This constitutes the full section on Sexual Health for the Adults’ JSNA 2016. ‘Sexual health is a state of physical, mental and social well-being in relation to sexuality. It requires a positive and respectful approach to sexuality and sexual relationships, as well as the possibility of having pleasurable and safe sexual experiences, free of coercion, discrimination and violence.’1 Who’s at risk and why? According to the National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles Surveys (Natsal)2,3 sexual health behaviour of the population of England has changed since the survey was first undertaken in 1991. The 2011 Natsal survey demonstrated an increase in the: number of sexual partners over a person’s lifetime, particularly for women, where this has increased from 3.7 (1991) to 7.7 (2011) sexual repertoire of heterosexual partners, particularly with oral and anal sexual intercourse All sexually active individuals of all ages are at risk of sexually transmitted infections (STIs), including HIV, and unplanned pregnancies (in the fertile years). However, the risks are not equally distributed amongst the population, with certain groups being at greater risk. Poor sexual health may also be associated with other poor health outcomes. Those at highest risk of poor sexual health are often from specific population groups, with varying needs which include: Men who have sex with men (MSM) Young people who are more likely to become re-infected with STIs Some black and ethnic minority groups Sex workers Victims of sexual and domestic abuse Other marginalised or vulnerable groups, including prisoners Nationally, there is a correlation between STIs and deprivation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Local Authorities (Goods and Services) (Public Bodies) (England) (No
    Status: This is the original version (as it was originally made). This item of legislation is currently only available in its original format. STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS 2001 No. 691 LOCAL GOVERNMENT, ENGLAND The Local Authorities (Goods and Services) (Public Bodies) (England) (No. 2) Order 2001 Made - - - - 5th March 2001 Laid before Parliament 9th March 2001 Coming into force - - 31st March 2001 The Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, in exercise of the powers conferred on him by sections 1(5) and (6) of the Local Authorities (Goods and Services) Act 1970 and now vested in him(1) hereby makes the following Order: Citation, commencement and extent 1.—(1) This Order may be cited as the Local Authorities (Goods and Services) (Public Bodies) (England) (No. 2) Order 2001 and shall come into force on 31st March 2001. (2) This Order extends to England only(2). Designation as a public body 2. Each of the following bodies, being a person appearing to the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions to be exercising functions of a public nature, shall be a public body for the purposes of the Local Authorities (Goods and Services) Act 1970 in its application to England: NewSchools (Cornwall) Limited(3); and United Waste Services (South Gloucestershire) Limited(4). (1) 1970 c. 39. The powers conferred on the Minister of Housing and Local Government are exercisable by the Secretary of State, see article 2 of the Secretary of State for the Environment Order 1970 (S.I. 1970/1681), and see also S.I.
    [Show full text]
  • The Berkshire Echo 52
    The Berkshire Echo Issue 52 l The Grand Tour: “gap” travel in the 18th century l Wartime harvest holidays l ‘A strange enchanted land’: fl ying to Paris, 1935 l New to the Archives From the Editor From the Editor It is at this time of year that my sole Holidays remain a status symbol Dates for Your Diary focus turns to my summer holidays. I in terms of destination and invest in a somewhat groundless belief accommodation. The modern Grand Heritage Open Day that time spent in a different location Tour involves long haul instead This year’s Heritage Open Day is Saturday will somehow set me up for the year of carriages, the lodging houses 11 September, and as in previous years, ahead. I am confi dent that this feeling and pensions replaced by fi ve-star the Record Offi ce will be running behind will continue to return every summer, exclusivity. Yet our holidays also remain the scenes tours between 11 a.m. and 1 and I intend to do nothing to prevent it a fascinating insight into how we choose p.m. Please ring 0118 9375132 or e-mail doing so. or chose to spend our precious leisure [email protected] to book a place. time. Whether you lie fl at out on the July and August are culturally embedded beach or make straight for cultural Broadmoor Revealed these days as the time when everyone centres says a lot about you. Senior Archivist Mark Stevens will be who can take a break, does so. But in giving a session on Victorian Broadmoor celebrating holidays inside this Echo, it So it is true for our ancestors.
    [Show full text]
  • Transport for the South East – Consent for Submission of Proposal to Government
    CABINET 7 APRIL 2020 TRANSPORT FOR THE SOUTH EAST – CONSENT FOR SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL TO GOVERNMENT Portfolio Holder: Councillor Phil Filmer, Portfolio Holder for Front Line Services Report from: Richard Hicks, Director of Place and Deputy Chief Executive Author: Michael Edwards, Head of Integrated Transport Summary This report seeks Cabinet support for the creation of a Sub-National Transport Body for the South East, confirmation of Medway’s position as a constituent authority, and consent for the submission of a Proposal to Government for statutory status. 1. Budget and Policy Framework 1.1 Medway Council does not have a stated policy position on Sub-National Transport Bodies. It is possible, however, to align the principles behind its creation with the Council’s priority of maximising regeneration and economic growth. 2. Background 2.1 Transport for the South East (TfSE) formed as a shadow Sub-National Transport Body (STB) in June 2017, and brings together sixteen local transport authorities: Bracknell Forest, Brighton and Hove, East Sussex, Hampshire, Isle of Wight, Medway, Kent, Portsmouth, Reading, Slough, Southampton, Surrey, West Berkshire, West Sussex, Windsor and Maidenhead and Wokingham. The Shadow Partnership Board also includes arrangements for involving five Local Enterprise Partnerships in its governance process, along with two National Park Authorities, forty-four Boroughs and Districts in East Sussex, Hampshire, Kent, Surrey and West Sussex, and representatives from the transport industry. 2.2 TfSE’s aim, as set out in its vision statement, is to grow the South East’s economy by delivering a safe, sustainable, and integrated transport system that makes the South East area more productive and competitive, improves the quality of life for all residents, and protects and enhances its natural and built environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Neighbourhoods in England Rated E for Green Space, Friends of The
    Neighbourhoods in England rated E for Green Space, Friends of the Earth, September 2020 Neighbourhood_Name Local_authority Marsh Barn & Widewater Adur Wick & Toddington Arun Littlehampton West and River Arun Bognor Regis Central Arun Kirkby Central Ashfield Washford & Stanhope Ashford Becontree Heath Barking and Dagenham Becontree West Barking and Dagenham Barking Central Barking and Dagenham Goresbrook & Scrattons Farm Barking and Dagenham Creekmouth & Barking Riverside Barking and Dagenham Gascoigne Estate & Roding Riverside Barking and Dagenham Becontree North Barking and Dagenham New Barnet West Barnet Woodside Park Barnet Edgware Central Barnet North Finchley Barnet Colney Hatch Barnet Grahame Park Barnet East Finchley Barnet Colindale Barnet Hendon Central Barnet Golders Green North Barnet Brent Cross & Staples Corner Barnet Cudworth Village Barnsley Abbotsmead & Salthouse Barrow-in-Furness Barrow Central Barrow-in-Furness Basildon Central & Pipps Hill Basildon Laindon Central Basildon Eversley Basildon Barstable Basildon Popley Basingstoke and Deane Winklebury & Rooksdown Basingstoke and Deane Oldfield Park West Bath and North East Somerset Odd Down Bath and North East Somerset Harpur Bedford Castle & Kingsway Bedford Queens Park Bedford Kempston West & South Bedford South Thamesmead Bexley Belvedere & Lessness Heath Bexley Erith East Bexley Lesnes Abbey Bexley Slade Green & Crayford Marshes Bexley Lesney Farm & Colyers East Bexley Old Oscott Birmingham Perry Beeches East Birmingham Castle Vale Birmingham Birchfield East Birmingham
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Our Performance So Far
    Draft: Final. APPENDIX 6: South Gloucestershire Council Climate Emergency Declaration Review of Year One of the Climate Emergency Action Plan South Gloucestershire Council Climate Emergency University Advisory Group UWE Bristol October 2020 1 Draft: Final. Index Section Page Executive Summary 3 Introduction and Context 8 South Gloucestershire’s Climate Emergency Process 10 South Gloucestershire’s Baseline 13 South Gloucestershire’s Climate Emergency Year 1 15 Action Plan Gaps in the Content of the Year 1 Plan 19 Year on Year Reduction in Emissions Required to 20 Meet the Target Areas of Focus for the Year 2 Plan 22 Recommendations for Improving Partnership Work 24 and Increasing Area Wide Engagement on the Climate Emergency Strategic Context (Political, Environmental, Social, 29 Technical, Legal, Economic) analysis Comparison of South Gloucestershire’s Climate Action 30 with that of North Somerset, Oxford, Plymouth and Wiltshire. Fit of South Gloucestershire’s Actions with the 42 National Policy Direction Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations 46 Appendix 1. 50 Setting Climate Commitments for South Gloucestershire. Quantifying the implications of the United Nations Paris Agreement for South Gloucestershire. Tyndall Centre Method Appendix 2. Oxford City Council Climate Emergency 52 Appendix 3. Wiltshire Climate Emergency 58 Appendix 4. North Somerset Climate Emergency 60 Appendix 5. Plymouth City Council Climate 62 Emergency Appendix 6. Global Warming of 1.5°C IPCC Special 64 Report. Summary Report for Policymakers Appendix 7 A Note on Terms 64 Note: All web sites accessed in September and October 2020 2 Draft: Final. Executive Summary South Gloucestershire Council asked UWE’ University Advisory Group to review Year One of the Climate Emergency Action Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix A: Reading Health and Wellbeing Strategy 2017-20 - Action Plan - Updated January 2019
    Appendix A: Reading Health and Wellbeing Strategy 2017-20 - Action Plan - updated January 2019 PRIORITY No 1 Supporting people to make healthy lifestyle choices – dental care, reducing obesity, increasing physical activity, reducing smoking What will be done – the task Who will do it By when Outcome – the Supporting national Progress Update – January 2019 difference it will make indicators To Prevent Uptake of Smoking Wellbeing Team; From April 2017 Maintain/reduce the PHOF 2.03 - Smoking 3 Reading schools have Trading number of people >18 status at the time of expressed interest in the young - Education in schools Standards; CS; years who are estimated delivery person’s smoking and drinking - Health promotion to smoke in Reading S4H; Youth attitudinal survey. Deadline Dec - Quit services targeting PHOF 2.09i – Smoking th pregnant Services; 14 . Improve awareness of prevalence at age 15- women/families Schools; impact of smoking on current smokers (WAY The Tobacco Control Alliance - Underage sales children survey) [TCA] Coordinator work has Reduce the illegal sale of involved: PHOF 2.09ii – Smoking tobacco to >18 years prevalence at age 15 – - Year 9 Assembly at st Increase uptake of regular smokers (WAY Prospect School on 1 smoking cessation >18 survey) March. years - Year 9 students at PHOF 2.09iii – Smoking Reading Girls School on prevalence at age 15 – 27th November – rest of occasional smokers (WAY school year groups survey) booked in for the next PHOF 2.09iv – Smoking year prevalence at age 15 – - Year 7 students about regular smokers (SDD smoking health harms at survey) The Wren School on 7th November. Rest of PHOF 2.09v – Smoking school booked in for prevalence at age 15 – next year.
    [Show full text]
  • Initial Proposals for New Parliamentary Constituency Boundaries in the South East Region Contents
    Initial proposals for new Parliamentary constituency boundaries in the South East region Contents Summary 3 1 What is the Boundary Commission for England? 5 2 Background to the 2018 Review 7 3 Initial proposals for the South East region 11 Initial proposals for the Berkshire sub-region 12 Initial proposals for the Brighton and Hove, East Sussex, 13 Kent, and Medway sub-region Initial proposals for the West Sussex sub-region 16 Initial proposals for the Buckinghamshire 17 and Milton Keynes sub-region Initial proposals for the Hampshire, Portsmouth 18 and Southampton sub-region Initial proposals for the Isle of Wight sub-region 20 Initial proposals for the Oxfordshire sub-region 20 Initial proposals for the Surrey sub-region 21 4 How to have your say 23 Annex A: Initial proposals for constituencies, 27 including wards and electorates Glossary 53 Initial proposals for new Parliamentary constituency boundaries in the South East region 1 Summary Who we are and what we do Our proposals leave 15 of the 84 existing constituencies unchanged. We propose The Boundary Commission for England only minor changes to a further 47 is an independent and impartial constituencies, with two wards or fewer non -departmental public body which is altered from the existing constituencies. responsible for reviewing Parliamentary constituency boundaries in England. The rules that we work to state that we must allocate two constituencies to the Isle The 2018 Review of Wight. Neither of these constituencies is required to have an electorate that is within We have the task of periodically reviewing the requirements on electoral size set out the boundaries of all the Parliamentary in the rules.
    [Show full text]
  • 11K Donation from the DPS to Help LGBT Young People in Brighton and Hove Find a Home Through YMCA Downslink Group - Youth Advice Centre
    Computershare Investor Services PLC The Pavilions Bridgwater Road Bristol BS99 6ZZ Telephone + 44 (0) 870 702 0000 Facsimile + 44 (0) 870 703 6101 www.computershare.com News Release Monday 27 February 2017 Date: Subject: £11k donation from The DPS to help LGBT young people in Brighton and Hove find a home through YMCA DownsLink Group - Youth Advice Centre Bristol, Monday 27 February 2017 – An £11,000 donation by The Deposit Protection Service (The DPS) will fund specialist support from YMCA DownsLink Group - Youth Advice Centre for LGBT young people in Brighton and Hove to help them find a home, the UK’s largest protector of tenancy deposits has announced. The Centre will train volunteers one-to-one to become ‘peer mentors’ and provide support to other members of the local LGBT community. Daren King, Head of Tenancy Deposit Protection at The DPS, said: “83,000 young people experience homelessness every year and the South East has the second highest rate of homeless applications in England. “As a result, we’re delighted to be supporting YMCA DownsLink Group - Youth Advice Centre’s fantastic work in helping LGBT young people in Brighton and Hove find a home.” YMCA DownsLink Group - Youth Advice Centre is a “one-stop shop” for advice and information for young people aged 13-25 years old in the City of Brighton and Hove. Julia Harrison, Advice Services Manager at YMCA DownsLink Group - Youth Advice Centre, said: “LGBT young people account for 13% of the total number of clients accessing our housing service, with a 50% increase in transgender clients since April 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • Recovery Service Leaflet South Glos
    Advocacy Contact If you feel that you are struggling to get your South Gloucestershire Recovery Service point of view across, you may wish to consider North Team having someone to act as an advocate. The Elms, 26 Gloucester Road, Thornbury, Bristol, BS35 1DG You can find out more about this from Tel: 01454 271000 Care Forum South Team 0117 956 9331 Kingswood Civic Centre High street, Kingswood https://www.thecareforum.org/advocacy/ South Bristol, BS15 9TR Local Information Tel: 0117 378 4611/4621 9am - 5pm Gloucestershire (For medical emergencies dial 999) Your care co-ordinator is: Recovery Service PALS To make a comment, raise a concern or make a complaint, please contact the Trust’s Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALS) Tel: 01225 362 900 Other people involved in your care are: Freephone: 0800 073 1778 Information for service users and carers Email: [email protected] Other languages and formats If you need this information in another language or format (such as large print, audio, Braille), please call the PALS number. Lead: South Glos Recovery Team Manager Leaflet code: AWP 022E Last reviewed: March 2021 Next review due: March 2023 What is the recovery service? Together, we will regularly review your care Where possible, they will involve family, friends plan and what support you require. and carers in the care plan, making sure We provide care, treatment and support for everyone knows who to contact in an people who have been referred for further help Some people need higher levels of support at emergency. after assessment from the primary care liaison times or struggle with seeking help.
    [Show full text]
  • C TIG Deeds and Historical Papers Relating to 1807-1935 Various Families and Properties in Hull
    Hull History Centre: Deeds and historical papers relating to various families and properties in Hull C TIG Deeds and historical papers relating to 1807-1935 various families and properties in Hull Accession number: 06/25 Historical Background: Scott Street, laid out in the late 18th century, was named after the designer, Christopher Scott, a builder, merchant and twice Mayor of Hull, in 1763 and 1776. Custodial history: Records passed by Allen Ticehurt, solicitors of East Grinstead, West Sussex in April 2006 to Hull City Council's Information Governance team, which had been established in 2004. Transferred to the History Centre in May 2006. Description: Deeds, legal and family papers Arrangement : C TIG/1 Deeds, legal and family papers relating to properties on Scott Street 1807-1935 Extent: ½ box Related material: The deeds can also be found at the East Riding Registry of Deeds, which is located at the East Riding of Yorkshire Archives Service at the Treasure House, in Beverley Access conditions: Access will be granted to any accredited reader C TIG/1 Deeds, legal and family papers relating to 1807-1935 properties on Scott Street, Hull 19 items and I bundle C TIG/1/1 Deeds relating to properties on Scott Street, Hull 1807-1935 8 items C TIG/1/1/1 Feoffment of ground in Scott Street, in the Parish of 6 Jul 1807 Sculcoates, County of York i) John Carr, of Dunstan Hill, in the County Palatine of Durham, esquire; Christopher Machell of Beverley in the County of York, esquire and John Alderson of Sculcoates, County of York, doctor of physic
    [Show full text]
  • North Lincolnshire
    Archaeological Investigations Project 2003 Post-Determination & Non-Planning Related Projects Yorkshire & Humberside NORTH LINCOLNSHIRE North Lincolnshire 3/1661 (E.68.M002) SE 78700380 DN9 1JJ 46 LOCKWOOD BANK Time Team Big Dig Site Report Bid Dig Site 1845909. 46 Lockwood Bank, Epworth, Doncaster, DN9 1JJ Wilkinson, J Doncaster : Julie Wilkinson, 2003, 13pp, colour pls, figs Work undertaken by: Julie Wilkonson A test pit produced post-medieval pottery and clay pipe stems and a sherd of Anglo-Saxon pottery. [AIP] SMR primary record number:SLS 2725 Archaeological periods represented: EM, PM 3/1662 (E.68.M012) SE 92732234 DN15 9NS 66 WEST END, WINTERINGHAM Report on an Archaeological Watching Brieff Carried out at Plot 3, 66 West End, Winteringham, North Lincolnshire Atkins, C Scunthorpe : Caroline Atkins, 2003, 8pp, figs Work undertaken by: Caroline Atkins Very few finds were made during the period of archaeological supervision, other than fragments of assorted modern building materials, and only one item, a sherd from a bread puncheon, might have suggested activity on the investigated part of the site prior to the twentieth century. [Au(abr)] SMR primary record number:LS 2413 Archaeological periods represented: MO, PM 3/1663 (E.68.M008) SE 88921082 DN15 7AE CHURCH LANE, SCUNTHORPE An Archaeological Watching Brief at Church Lane, Scunthorpe Adamson, N & Atkinson, D Kingston upon Hull : Humber Field Archaeology, 2003, 6pp, colour pls, figs, refs Work undertaken by: Humber Field Archaeology Monitoring of the site strip and excavation of the foundation trench systems revealed the location of a former garden pond. No archaeological features and no residual archaeological material was identified within the upper ground layers.
    [Show full text]