Research and analysis
Public Procurement Review Service results - January 2018 to March 2024
Updated 25 April 2024
Download CSV 605 KB
| Year | Month | Authority | Subject | Sub Issue | Case Issue | Case Outcome | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | January | Bridgewater Community Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us to advise that they were owed over £5,000 from Bridgewater Community Healthcare NHS Trust for work carried out several months ago. | Within 4 weeks, the Trust had managed to pay all outstanding invoices. We were keen to understand why these delays had occurred, however, despite contacting the Trust several times they did not respond to explain what has caused the delay. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | January | Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier had been advised that the Trust was operating on 68 day payment terms. | The Trust was forecasting a deficit of nearly £13 million greater than planned, and thus a shortfall in cash of nearly £13 million to cover this deficit. In order to protect the running of key clinical services, the Trust made a decision to reduce the outflow of cash in payments to non-NHS Creditors, resulting in extended payment terms. The Trust advised this had been a short term position and that it has now secured some cash support which negates the requirement for such an extended payment period. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | January | Rotherham General Hospital | Payment | Payment | A supplier was advised their invoice had been approved but the Trust could not pay until they received more funds. The supplier was paid once legal action was threatened. | Rotherham General Hospital confirmed that it did have funding issues and that they are working with the Department of Health & Social Care and NHS Improvement to rectify this, they confirmed that whilst they are behind in payment terms, outstanding invoices up to the end of November have now been paid. Mystery Shopper will continue to monitor payment timescales and report cases like these to Department of Health & Social Care. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | January | Ministry of Justice (MOJ) | Procurement Process | Feedback | We were contacted by a Supplier regarding the feedback they received following their unsuccessful bid in Round 1 of the Common Platform Programme Back End Development Services 3 Competition, which was submitted on the Crown Commercial Services (CCS) Digital Outcomes and Specialists (DOS) Framework portal. | Mystery Shopper team and the CCS Commercial Agreements team reviewed the feedback in conjunction with the Public Contracts Regulations, particularly relating to Regulation 55 Informing Candidates and Tenderers - http://pcr2015.uk/regulations/regulation-55-informing-candidates-and-tenderers/ This competition was a two stage process. The supplier was eliminated at the first round and the second round was still open for bidder submission. It was not possible for MOJ to inform the supplier of the characteristics and relative advantages of the tender selected, as well as the name of the successful tenderer (Regulation 55, 2c) because a decision had not yet been made. The winner will be announced once the competition has finished and feedback provided to bidders as per the Regulations. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | January | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Process | Tender Documentation | A supplier queried a Brent Council evaluation process for the procurement of a telephony system for Brent and associated councils. The supplier felt the information about call usage and how to submit it for evaluation was not clear and was not explained in the feedback to the supplier. | Brent Council explained they had allowed suppliers to demonstrate call volumes in different ways but that the evaluation had still been fair and consistent. Mystery Shopper recommended that for future procurements Brent should ensure the evaluation strategy is clearly set out for bidders and results clearly explained in feedback to suppliers. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | January | Thames Valley Police and Crime Commissioner | Procurement Process | Selection | A supplier felt their opportunity to tender for a contract with Thames Valley Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) for the Emotional Support and Advocacy (ESA) Service was affected by having to clarify the Transfer of Undertaking (protection of Employment) (TUPE) information that was not included at the start of the procurement. | Thames Valley PCC explained the supplier had missed the clarification deadline and the tender submission deadline could not be extended due to the pressing need for the ESA Service to start. Thames Valley accepted the Mystery Shopper’s recommendation that for future procurements where TUPE will come into effect, all information should be provided at the start of the procurement to allow suppliers to clarify points early, so they can use this to inform their tender. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | January | City University London | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier contacted us regarding a procurement for Architectural Services for City University of London. They were unable to register an expression of interest although the notice stated it was still open with a deadline of midday 2 January 2018. | City University confirmed that the tender had 2 stages. Stage 1 was a standard Selection Questionnaire (SQ) open to all suppliers. Only those meeting the criteria were invited to the Invitation To Tender (ITT). There was an error in the advertisement that incorrectly implied that the first stage was open but it had closed on 11 December 2017. The ITT stage opened to shortlisted suppliers on 8 January 2018 and was scheduled to close 8 February 2018. Unfortunately the Mystery Shopper missed the deadline for Stage 1 (SQ). In future we recommend clear advertising ensuring accurate dates are published. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | January | Carillion Amey / HMS Raleigh | Procurement Strategy | Financial Requirement | A supplier tendered to install a screed on the Ajax Galley Floor. The Supplier was unable to respond to the tender as the requirement was specified as an Altro Resin system with no other equivalents allowed. | The Public Contracts Regulations 2015 state that unless justified by the subject-matter of the contract, technical specifications shall not refer to a specific make or source, or a particular process which characterises the products or services provided by a specific economic operator, or to trademarks, patents, types or a specific origin or production with the effect of favouring or eliminating certain undertakings or certain products. Carillion Amey responded fully to the claim and confirmed that alternative products are always considered for their suitability, cost, quality and after-care, warranties etc. All suppliers were given the opportunity to provide alternative recommendations along with samples and an assessment of the material in a real life environment. The final product decision was based on the level of confidence that the product would perform as required and, that there were sufficient warranties in place should things go wrong. We would recommend that this is clearly stated in all procurements. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | January | Trafford Council | Procurement Strategy | Social Value | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team following their unsuccessful bid for the procurement of Statutory Advocacy Hub Services run by Trafford Council. Their main concern was that they had scored poorly on Social Value and they felt that had that score been higher, they would have secured the contract. | We confirmed with the Authority it followed an open and transparent process, giving equal treatment to each bidder and that the bidders’ tender submissions were scored fairly by an appropriate evaluation panel. There was a similar challenge received during the standstill period that was also verified by the Council’s Legal Service. The supplier confirmed that they would not be pursuing the matter any further and the case was closed. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | February | Medway Community Healthcare Trust | Payment | Payment | We were contacted with regards to an outstanding invoice for £89.66 dated 27 July 2015. | The Trust advised payment had been made following our contact. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | February | Walsall Healthcare NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us to advise that they were experiencing delays in being paid for services totalling over £7,000 | The Trust advised that they are in financial deficit and as a result they have to borrow from Department of Health and Social Care to maintain payments to creditors. They confirmed that they are unable to pay all creditors within the required 30 days and had extended payment terms to almost all suppliers. The outstanding invoices were paid in January, within or as close to the 30 day deadline. We will continue to monitor payment timescales and report cases like these to Department of Health and Social Care. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | February | Stockport NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | We were contacted by a supplier to help them recover an outstanding payment of £1.9k from Stockport NHS Foundation Trust. | The Creditor Payments Department within the Trust advised that they have never received the Invoice. The Mystery Shopper team sent a copy of the statement of outstanding invoices, and payments have since been made to the supplier. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | February | Cabinet Office | Payment | Payment | The supplier completed work for the Cabinet Office on 30 November 2017. The invoice was paid two months late and they had claimed interest for late payment which had not been paid. | The Cabinet Office responded promptly, contacted the supplier directly to apologise for the delay and advised that payment would be made within 5 days. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | February | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Process | Financial Requirement | The Mystery Shopper team received an enquiry regarding the SARS (Spends Analysis and Recovery Services) II Tender. The supplier had been asked to provide a financial guarantor. They had been told it would be sufficient for the company founder to be the guarantor, but were later told personal guarantors would not be accepted. In addition they felt that the tender documentation was excessively long and not particularly SME friendly. | The financial criteria were set out clearly in the tender documents, which explained that bidders who failed a financial risk assessment would be required to provide a guarantor or banker’s guarantee. No bidders sought clarification during the tender period. The CCS Policy Implementation team developed the new simplified bid pack which was used for this procurement. The simplified bid pack aims to be easier to follow, it is shorter, simpler and clearly sets out the customer’s and CCS’s requirements, so that bidders can spend more time developing their best offer. In this case, the documentation was designed to accommodate the seven different lots. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | February | Barking, Havering and Redbridge NHS Trust | Procurement Process | Timescales | The supplier was invited to tender for a call off for Barking, Havering and Redbridge NHS Trust. The approach being adopted was to evaluate the written submissions and then invite the top three scoring tenderers to the presentation/interview stage, which was allocated 25% of the evaluation score. The main concern was that the presentation stage could have the potential to distort the competition in favour of a preferred supplier, with no objective way to validate this. | The Trust took on board the concerns about the presentation stage and changed this element to be weighted at zero. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | February | Countess of Chester Hospital | Procurement Strategy | Financial Requirement | A supplier contacted us to highlight that the Trust had recently published a tender for a “National Framework Agreement for the Provision of Asset and Contract Lifecycle Management Services” using a similar fee structure to one used before. Complaints had been made about the previous fee structure, and the Trust had agreed to address complaints in future frameworks. | Countess of Chester Hospital highlighted that 57% of their current framework suppliers are SMEs. They stated that they are striving to offer streamlined and alternative frameworks to allow quick and easy access over other frameworks already in the marketplace. This requires resource and introduces a level of financial risk to themselves as the frameworks are often for bespoke and or innovative products and services. The fee model looks to balance risk across the Trust and potential suppliers, it ensures the Trust are able to offer framework opportunities to suppliers who would otherwise have to bid for contracts at an individual hospital or other public sector authority level. We advised the Supplier that we would continue to monitor this situation. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | February | Salford City Council | Procurement Strategy | Timescales | A supplier contacted us with regards to the procurement for the “Provision of Parking Enforcement and Associated Services”. The Supplier did not apply for the opportunity, partly because they felt that the timescales were tight, but also because there was a minimum level of turnover stated that they could not meet. | The timescales were set by the Council and met the requirements for the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU). This procurement was for core services for two Authorities and the basis of the financial evaluation was included within the supplier questionnaire to ensure that the process was transparent to any potential tenderers. The Authority assesses financial capacity in line with the types of service and the risk of failure to the Council using accepted financial ratios, in this case the minimum threshold was based on yearly turnover, which was in accordance with Regulation 58 (Economic and financial standing) of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. The Authority did not receive any clarification questions through their e-tendering system in relation to the minimum threshold. Mystery Shopper team highlighted PPN 02/13 which is a procurement policy note on financial risk issues raised by suppliers. This highlights the importance of making a holistic assessment of a supplier’s financial standing and that suppliers should not be deselected on the basis of turnover size alone. Mystery Shopper team will follow up on future procurements to ensure compliance with current public sector procurement guidelines. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | March | Manchester City Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier provided linguistic services to Manchester City Council, who failed to set the supplier up correctly therefore preventing payments for additional work. | The Council advised that the first invoice was paid on a form used for a one time vendor, as they thought it was a one off purchase. Further services were provided, at this point the Council requested information from the supplier to allow them to set the supplier up as a Vendor on their financial system, the supplier refused to provide the required information as stated in the Council’s Financial Regulations therefore the invoices remained outstanding. Payment has now been made. We would recommend that services are not procured without the Vendor being established on the correct financial system. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | March | NHS Property Services | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us to advise that they were experiencing delays in being paid by NHS Property Services for invoices with approx. £183,000 outstanding. Some invoices had been outstanding for over a year. | NHS Property Services advised that they had changed their accounts payable systems in mid-2017, which had created some payment delays. They made a significant payment (approx. £100k) to the supplier in the two weeks since we raised the issue and have the remaining £83k scheduled for payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | March | Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust | Procurement Strategy | Payment | A supplier believed previously undisclosed criteria had been used at the evaluation stage for a procurement for the Provision of Routine Chemistry Solution: inclusive of equipment, maintenance, reagents and consumables, run by the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust. They felt the Trust had not complied with the EU Procurement Rules or EU Treaty principle of fairness. | Mystery Shopper team found that the Trust had issued an output-based specification and had set out the characteristics of the winning bid in the notification of contract award decision, which the supplier had mistaken as undisclosed award criteria. The Trust confirmed that all bids had been evaluated against the published award criteria which did not change throughout the procurement process. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | March | Isle of Wight Council | Procurement Process | Clarification | A supplier wanted to tender for a contract with the Council and were experiencing delays in receiving responses to clarification questions raised. This was hindering them in putting together a comprehensive bid submission. | The Council responded promptly to our enquiry and provided updates on the number of clarification questions outstanding. They extended the tender submission deadline, this allowed time for other clarification questions to be raised, for responses and sufficient time for potential suppliers to finalise their bids before submitting. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | March | Hackney Council | Procurement Process | Feedback | A supplier submitted a tender and was not provided with feedback when they were notified of being unsuccessful at the shortlisting stage. Hackney Council were contacted and advised to provide feedback and given guidance from the Digital Outcomes and Specialists Buyers Guide. | Hackney Council confirmed that they would provide feedback as per the guidance provided. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | March | Arts Council England | Procurement Process | Award | A supplier complained that the Arts Council funded ‘Prosper’ Business Support Programme was managed by a company but no competition was held to win this work. | The Arts Council confirmed that there was a grant for the Business Support Programme and therefore it does not fall under the remit of the Public Contracts Regulations. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | March | OFGEM | Procurement Process | Feedback | A supplier received the results for shortlisting and queried the process used for scoring as it did not seem to be compliant with GDS guidelines: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/how-to-evaluate-digital-outcomes-and-specialists-suppliers. They asked us to investigate this with OFGEM and confirm the scoring was valid. | The CCS Commercial Agreements Team reviewed the communication and confirmed that the guidance is not prescriptive but that in this case the Authority was non-compliant. The Commercial Agreements Team agreed to remind the Authority of the processes and guidance available, and will also run further webinars to clarify guidance for future procurements. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | March | Swindon Borough Council | Procurement Process | Selection | A supplier queried the financial requirement set by Swindon Borough Council for their 'Children Social Care Case Management system' required an annual turnover of at least £700,000 despite the total contract value of £764,000, over 8 years. | The Authority confirmed they undertook a pre-tender risk assessment of the contract opportunity and consciously set the minimum turnover requirements at a level less than the potential maximum amount they could have set within Public Contracts Regulations Regulation 58 ((3) Economic and Financial Standing and its Capping), with the ambition of ensuring a high level of competition including SMEs. Key factors when setting the economic and financial criteria for this contract were: a) recognition of the business critical nature of the subject matter and b) the operational and financial impact to the Authority resulting from failure of the successful bidder to perform the contract. Given these factors, the Authority considers this a proportionate, objective and non-discriminatory test of economic and financial standing. The Authority provided a clarification response to this question, which was raised on the 28th February via the supplyingthesouthwest.org.uk portal, this included a statement that if a bidder does not meet the specified financial test they can provide a bank guarantee. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | March | Crown Commercial Service on behalf of Home Office | Procurement Process | Timescales | A supplier contacted us to regarding an opportunity that Crown Commercial Service had run for the Home Office for an Independent Complaints Reviewer for their Disclosure and Barring Service. The ITT/Contracts Finder Notice was issued 16th May 2017 and stated that Tenders were due to be returned 8th June 2017 but the Invitation To Tender stated returns were due 15th May 2017. | The procurement team confirmed that the supplier had been looking at the document "Early Notification of Procurement Opportunity". This document asked potential providers to submit their interest by 15th May 2017, however as this was only to register an interest and it had no reflection on the procurement closure deadline. The procurement ran from 19th June 2017 to 4th July 2017 as stated on the contracts finder website and within the tender documentation. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | March | Brent Council | Procurement Process | Social Value | A supplier contacted about a Brent London Borough Council procurement for an architect-led design team. The supplier considered the social value criteria to be unclear and onerous for SMEs in comparison to larger businesses. | The local authority are legally obliged to include social value considerations in all procurements (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/social-value-act-information-and-resources/social-value-act-information-and-resources). The Council has used similar wording as published by the National Themes Outputs and Measures (TOMs) and the measures have been published in line with the Social Value policy (http://socialvalueportal.com/national-toms/). The social value action plan represented 5% of the award with 5% for the Social Value method statement. Suppliers were not obliged to complete all social value measures but to select what they felt was appropriate to this contract. The guidance the council provided in the ITT and the appendix itself did explain this, however we recommended in future procurements these could be made clearer. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | March | Ministry of Defence (MOD) | Procurement Process | Competition | A supplier contacted us regarding the MOD Framework Agreement for Technical Support / 5 (FATS/5). The supplier completed an online Pre Qualification Questionnaire (PQQ) but was not invited to the next stage despite previously supplying services to the MOD at the published required levels. | The Authority provided a response advising us they did not provide sufficient evidence within PQQ. Potential suppliers need to be clear what evidence is required and if suppliers are in doubt they should seek clarification during the tender process. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | March | Sanctuary Housing | Procurement Process | Financial Requirement | A supplier raised concerns about the Sanctuary Housing Architects (Housing) Development Consultancy Framework that included a zero fee clause in its standard contractual terms as they felt it would require architects to carry out substantial amounts of unpaid work. They also queried the specified minimum turnover threshold, as they believed these values to be excessive in view of the likely level of architects’ fees. | Sanctuary Housing,an organisation regulated by the Homes and Communities Agency, confirmed that they had used a zero fee provision as a mechanism to meet the Homes & Communities Agency's requirement to secure best value. They amended their position following requests for clarification from bidders and made it clear that they did not intend the zero fee provision to apply if a detailed planning application was submitted, they confirmed that they will ensure this is clear from the outset in any future procurements. The methodology used to set the minimum turnover thresholds was confirmed as meeting the requirements of the Public Contracts Regulations but they agreed to undertake an assessment on any future procurement to ensure the most appropriate method is used. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | March | Places for People | Procurement Process | Financial Requirement | The supplier expressed concern about a recent OJEU procurement being undertaken by Places for People (ref. 47577-2018) for a Major Projects Hub including construction works and consultancy services. Their concern was that according to the notice it would be awarded to a single supplier. | Places for People confirmed that the works and services will comprise all types of building construction works and associated civil, mechanical, electrical and services works and may also include design and other services required to develop a construction design and build. The Major Projects Hub framework is intended to select a single supplier with the relevant expertise, capacity and experience to manage the supply chain either on behalf of, or in conjunction with the contracting authority. By taking this approach the Authority was attempting to develop projects which otherwise may not have come to fruition. The supplier met with the Authority and had a fruitful discussion and will now be working together in order to address some of these concerns. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | March | University College Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust | Procurement Process | SME Exclusion | A supplier raised a concern that the introduction of a minimum turnover of £1m on a number of the lots in a procurement prevents SMEs from participating. The procurement was run by the University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust for a consultants Framework (OJEU Title, Consultants Framework (2018 — 2022). Reference number: CA4197) | The Trust confirmed the minimum turnover values were set following the development of a procurement strategy which considered the varying requirements of this framework. The financial assessment did not rely on turnover alone as the framework is also open to partners. Minimum turnover requirements set, were deemed appropriate for the supplier to be able to deliver the requirements of the Trust and other named Authorities over the life of the framework. The use of turnover requirements has long been an issue for smaller businesses and the Mystery Shopper team teamhighlighted PPN 02/13 - https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/137569/PPN_Supplier_financial_risk_Feb-18.pdf This stresses the importance of making a holistic assessment of a supplier's financial standing and that a supplier should not be deselected on the basis of turnover size alone. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | March | Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier contacted us about an opportunity for Technical Assessors of Applications to the Energy Entrepreneurs Fund, Thermal Efficiency and Low Carbon Technology Heating Fund (TRN 1377/10/2017) advertised by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS). The closing date was stated as 25th November in three places despite the notice being published on 24th November. | The Contract was published on Contracts Finder on 6th November with a closing date of 24th November at 5pm and provided time for suppliers to submit a bid. Unfortunately, due to an administrative error, the deadline for the notice on Contracts Finder was extended for a day on 24th November. This caused the ‘publication date’ to be overwritten, giving the impression that suppliers only had 1 day to submit a bid. BEIS apologised for the error and confirmed that this did not reflect the actual situation where there had been 18 days available to bid. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | April | York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding late payments from York Teaching Hospital totalling £83,700. | The Trust conveyed apologies to the supplier for the delay in payment. There had been some invoices with long-standing pricing and non-receipt queries and these legacy invoices had not migrated onto a new payments system. £50k of invoice payments have now been made and the outstanding balance is being investigated under a new Mystery Shopper case. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | April | HMP Lancaster | Payment | Payment | We have been contacted by a supplier currently working as a subcontractor at HMP Lancaster. The supplier had been advised that payment terms from the contractor were 45 days. Payments have been made up to 60 days on the final account. | HMP Lancaster reviewed the account and confirmed there have been some delays to initial payments as there was a lack of understanding of the contract process by both parties. The initial misunderstanding has been rectified, there should be no issue with the payments being made within the 30 day timescales in the future. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | April | HMP Moorlands | Payment | Payment | A supplier submitted an invoice on 21st October 2017 for workshops provided at HMP Moorland on 16th October 2017. There had been no disputes raised about the invoice but the total amount (plus interest for late payment) for £653.94 remained outstanding. | HMP Moorland confirmed that there is a process that should be followed, but had not been completed in this case. The invoice was escalated for the approval of HMP Moorlands Governor and submitted to Shared Services to process. Full payment was received by the supplier following our investigation. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | April | Derby City Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier recently took part in a tender opportunity for the Provision of Fire Risk Assessments for Derby City Council, reference number TD1294 (DN294323). The supplier believes the competition was scored unfairly and resulted in their bid being unsuccessful. | The Authority provided the original Invitation To Tender document containing the criteria to be applied by evaluators and the scoring matrix. We referred to Public Contract Regulation 55 http://pcr2015.uk/regulations/regulation-55-informing-candidates-and-tenderers/ regarding debriefing obligations on contracting authorities and found them to be in line with the minimum requirements of information to be supplied to candidates and tenderers. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | April | London Borough of Hounslow | Procurement Process | Previous Experience | A supplier contacted us with regards to a procurement that was being run by the London Borough of Hounslow for the Provision of Home Care Services. They were concerned that a clarification response confirmed that references must refer to contracts unrelated to the Council. This could exclude the incumbent providers from bidding for this contract. | The Authority investigated the clarification log for the Home Care tender and rescinded the original response to references and allowed the Council to be the identified referee. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | April | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Process | Tender Requirement | A sub consultant on the Project Management and Full Design Team Services Framework (RM3741) raised concerns about blanket requirements for the procurement. | The CCS Commercial Agreement Team advised that due to the high value and risk associated for the Lot, higher insurance levels are requested for both lead and sub consultants. At selection stage there were no minimum turnover requirements set to ensure a level playing field. With regard to the accreditation requested, the equivalent to ISO9001 would be accepted. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | April | Sandwell Metropolitan Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted us regarding the opportunity for Demolition Preparation Works at Shaftesbury House advertised by Sandwell MBC. The supplier was concerned that the evaluation process did not correspond with the specifics of the advertised tender requirements. | The Authority responded fully to the concerns raised. They provided detailed information on the procurement and selection process. Feedback was provided to the supplier detailing the reasons for non selection. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | April | Ministry of Defence (MOD) | Technology/Systems | Technical issue with e-portal | A supplier raised a concern about not appearing in a G-Cloud search despite being the incumbent supplier. Additionally they felt the G-Cloud competition process had been unfair and biased. | The G-Cloud team reviewed the procurement and assured the supplier that the procurement process had been adhered to and conducted in the correct way. Advice was provided on amending short descriptions to ensure visibility in searches for the future. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | April | Knowsley, Liverpool & Sefton Council | Procurement Process | Feedback | We had been contacted by two suppliers regarding the procurement for the Provision of Pseudo Dynamic Purchasing System for Domiciliary Care Services in Knowsley, Liverpool & Sefton Council. The suppliers were concerned that since the award outcome was notified on 19 January 2018 they had not received a full response to their request for feedback. | The information supplied was in accordance with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. Following our investigation, all unsuccessful bidders were provided with the characteristics, name and relative advantages of the winning tender along with the evaluation panel’s comments. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | April | London Borough of Croydon | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us during a dispute over an invoice for £2,700. The invoice was disputed because the supplier charged for delivery of two items on one order at double the rate of usual delivery and economies of scale were expected. | The supplier confirmed their usual practice is to charge a delivery charge for each item, even if they get delivered to the same address, due to the courier company charging by weight and dimension for each item. The outstanding invoice was paid and the Council has now confirmed they will raise any discrepancies against the official received purchase order prior to dispatch of goods. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | April | Doncaster Borough Council | Procurement Process | Clarification | A supplier contacted us regarding an opportunity with Doncaster Borough Council for the Supported Living Service. They were concerned that there was an inconsistency in Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) information provided by incumbent suppliers. A further concern was that the additional information was not shared with all potential suppliers resulting in a procurement that was not fair or transparent. | The TUPE information from the incumbent providers was provided by the Council to all suppliers who registered their interest. Potential suppliers were advised within the Invitation to Tender that TUPE was the responsibility of the tenderer. Due diligence upon the TUPE information provided might require the tenderer to approach the incumbent provider and the Council had no involvement in or control over this due diligence process. We recommended the council ensures that all relevant information within its possession is provided at tender stage to allow all suppliers sufficient time to carry out due diligence promoting a fair process for all potential suppliers. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | April | Department for Transport | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier applied for the Digital Outcomes and Specialists (DOS) opportunity entitled “PPRO 004/012/087 Alpha - Beta for Street Manager Service” run by the Department for Transport. The opportunity closed on 6 October 2017, but they were not told they were unsuccessful until 7 November 2017. The supplier was told that because their answer to one selection question scored 1 mark and the minimum acceptable level had been set at 2 marks, no further scoring was carried out. They believe this competition had not been conducted fairly. | The Crown Commercial Service Commercial Agreement Team confirmed that there had been a delay in notification, due to a change in electronic system at the Authority. They confirmed that each panel member had scored submissions individually, followed by a moderation exercise. In accordance with DOS guidance (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/how-to-score-digital-outcomes-and-specialists-suppliers) once a supplier scored 0 or 1 scoring was halted. The DOS Team are going to give additional guidance to customers on action to take at the point that a supplier fails to reach a minimum score to a mandatory question. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | April | Home Office | Procurement Process | Vetting | The supplier contacted us regarding an Invitation to Tender for the provision of consultancy to develop a target operating model for the Home Office. They expressed concern that there is a requirement for pre-existing security clearance. | The Home Office confirmed that this was an urgent requirement with a short implementation timescale. The provider would be required to work in Home Office premises, with access to internal data, on a daily basis from the start of the contract. The Home Office guidance states that Counter Terrorism Check level is the minimum level of security clearance required for this work. Timescales for obtaining security clearance mean that it will not be possible to secure the necessary security clearance between award and commencement. However, if the provider can provide adequate security cleared resources from commencement, it would be possible for some of the provider’s team members to apply for clearance after award and to start on the project at a later date, in a phased manner. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | April | Ministry of Defence (MOD) | Procurement Strategy | Financial Requirement | We were contacted by a potential subcontractor to the Defence Fire and Rescue Project (DFRP). In the current tender process, prime bidders were being instructed to use legacy exchange rates when calculating the cost of capital equipment to be purchased in foreign currencies. Capital funds were ring-fenced at an early stage (the tender process began in 2014) and the rates provided to the bidders for e.g. US Dollars, Euros etc appear based on pre-Brexit or even earlier rates. Given decreased value of the Pound over recent months, the impact of the use of older rates could see imported goods or services appear artificially better value when compared to their UK based alternative items. | Following approval from Defence Economics, the Authority (MOD) are taking the exchange rate risk on vehicles procured outside the UK. Bidders have not been instructed to use legacy exchange rates. PPRS shared this information with the supplier. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | May | Transport for London | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier was asked to demonstrate their Correspondence Management Solution (CMS) to the Authority. The supplier showed their solution in detail, explained their pricing and competitive advantages, to find out that their competitor in this area had been engaged to help the Authority run this procurement and had been at the demonstration. | The Authority confirmed it had previously engaged a supplier to assist with requirements gathering and product selection. They were selected for that role via a competition using the Digital Marketplace. An award notice was published via the Digital Marketplace that stated the successful supplier would be providing procurement consultancy for the replacement CMS, they also asked the successful supplier to sign an Ethical Walls Agreement that was deemed to provide suitable assurance for a fair process. The Authority apologise that supplier was not notified that their was another supplier present at the demonstration. We recommend that this is addressed in future procurements and roles are clearly defined and articulated within the Invitation To Tender. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | May | Swan Housing | Transparency | Evaluation | A supplier contacted us with concerns in relation to a ‘below threshold’ procurement opportunity being run by Swan Housing for the provision of mobile phone services. The supplier felt that the award criteria set out in the tender documentation were limited and unclear as they did not disclose weightings. A subsequent concern was raised suggesting that Swan Housing had offered a shorter contract duration in order to ensure the contract value remained below threshold. | The Authority responded fully to both concerns, providing strong justification for the process and structure of the procurement exercise, along with the rationale for the contract duration. The Authority has been found to be fully compliant since the award criteria was clearly contained in the contract documents. We recommended the Contracting Authority consider publishing a more detailed award criteria for complex cases. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | May | East Riding of Yorkshire Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | The supplier contacted us regarding an Invitation To Tender (ITT) for the YORconsult2 framework released on ProContract (Yortender) by East Riding of Yorkshire. The tender was for consultancy services across several varied lots, with one set of documents to cover all lots. There have been several changes to the tender documents via clarifications and the Authority has not released an updated version of the documents. The supplier considered there was potential risk of some bidders being excluded from the process for not submitting a compliant bid, due to the vast amount of response information that was spread over several documents. | The Authority confirmed that this is a regional framework for consultants that replaces YORconsult. YORconsult2 has a number of new clients that has increased the estimated total value to c£120m. This generated a great deal of interest from c380 companies and many asking questions through the YORtender portal. The Authority had extended the tender return date twice and planning a third extension in order to allow time for suppliers to take account of the clarification responses, all of which had been published. In order to assist suppliers they have held 4 briefing sessions with briefing slides and Q&As from these sessions have been made available to all suppliers, they have also issued examples of how to complete pricing tables, contract information tables etc. These were issued as clarifications not addendums as to not change the tender documents. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | May | Department for Work and Pensions | Procurement Process | Framework Ordering Procedures | A supplier saw a Product Design Lead opportunity advertised on the Digital Outcomes and Specialists (DOS) Framework (https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/6789?utm_id=20180502) working for BPDTS Ltd and not the end client. A check on Companies House revealed the directors are Senior Civil Servants (SCS). The supplier queried whether this is a permissible advertisement and use of a limited company headed by SCS directors, as it seemed somewhat of a monopoly and restrictive to other companies. | Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) have confirmed that as part of the Technology Vision for 2020, DWP established a ‘GovCo’ called BPDTS Ltd which became operational on 1 December 2016. The GovCo is wholly owned and fully funded by the DWP and operates as a non-departmental government body (NDGB) not for profit, but a private company limited by guarantee. The work by BPDTS Ltd is undertaken only for DWP at this point as per the agreement of the NDGB. On this basis, BPDTS Ltd can use the Framework. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | May | Sheffield University | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier raised concerns over the scoring of the evaluation for a Sheffield University procurement for Structural Engineering. | The University investigated the tender evaluation process and agreed there had been anomalies with the evaluation of some of the questions. They carried out another evaluation and some scores were adjusted. The revision to the tenderer’s score did not result in the supplier being taken forward to the next stage of the procurement. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | May | Public Health England | Procurement Process | Evaluation | The supplier applied to be shortlisted for the Public Health England (PHE) - Talk to Frank (https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/6373) opportunity at the end of February 2018. The work was supposed to start by 30 March 2018, but they had not heard anything since submitting answers for the shortlisting. | PHE confirmed that this opportunity is in the process of being awarded. There were a number of delays on this project which is also why the opportunity has not been updated on the Digital Marketplace. Detailed feedback has been provided to non-successful shortlisted suppliers but not to those suppliers who were not shortlisted to the Request For Price (RFP) stage. The Authority is in the process of sending out feedback to suppliers at the relevant stages of the procurement. Although the DOS Framework states feedback should be sent at the end of the procurement, due to the number of applications, PHE are following the correct procedures. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | May | Advantage South West | Procurement Process | Evaluation | Advantage South West (ASW) is a procurement consortium for social housing providers based in the South West of England. The supplier was concerned that three non-compliant bids were accepted and additional bid information was sought from these bidders, after the time for tender submissions had closed. As price comprised 60% of the contract assessment they felt that all bidders had not been treated equally and that the procurement was not transparent. | Mystery Shopper Service had a discussion with ASW about the evaluation process. ASW explained they work on the basis that if a tenderer misses a multi-supplier framework by less than 1% the preference would be to provide them with a place on the Framework. Whilst there were a small number of gaps in some of the extensive pricing schedules, it was accepted that this issue was consistently addressed across all tenderers. ASW will put in place a new strategy to ensure they apply a consistent approach to the evaluations in future. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | May | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Process | Framework Ordering Procedures | A supplier contacted us regarding CCS Framework RM 3820 - Spend Analysis and Recovery Services 2. They believe that the direct award criteria are incorrect and that the wrong table was imported into the Framework Agreement. They also raised concerns that when a prospective customer seeks to assess the quality of the framework suppliers, CCS sends out the completed description for all suppliers on the relevant Lot. If a supplier has submitted bids and were successful on all 7 Lots, their description is generic to 7 lots (7 different services) whereas a competitor who is focused on a single Lot will have a specific description to just one service - they feel that this puts them at a disadvantage. | CCS confirmed the Direct Award criteria set out in the table found in Part A of Framework Schedule 6: Award Criteria was incorrect and will send out a variation to all suppliers reflecting the correct criteria (70% Quality and 30% Price). CCS is also intending to circulate a request for 'Service Summary' to all suppliers on the Framework in order to overcome the confusion over the single answer to cover more multiple lots, compared to some suppliers submitting detailed responses to individual lot, thus disadvantaging some suppliers. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | May | NHS Business Services Authority | Procurement Process | Tender Requirement | A supplier raised concerns over a Digital Outcomes and Specialists (DOS) opportunity with NHS Business Services Authority (NHS BSA). The supplier was concerned that the requirement was for supplying people and not delivering outcomes. With no clear indication given on how many people were required or for how long, the supplier felt this was not SME friendly. | The DOS team reviewed the requirement and spoke with NHS BSA. They advised that had suppliers been made aware of the outcomes documents there would have been greater clarity, which could have resulted in more SME participation. NHS BSA were offered help and support when drafting their future requirements to make their opportunities more SMEs friendly. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | May | Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) | Procurement Process | Tender Requirement | A supplier raised a concern with a DOS procurement. The requirement stated the department was seeking to procure contingent labour to work on unspecified future projects rather than procuring actual outcomes. | The DOS team spoke with the Authority regarding the procurement and after their discussion decided to withdraw the opportunity from the Digital Marketplace and re-publish. The Authority advised that they were not looking to procure contingent labour to work on unspecified future projects and would refine their requirement before publication. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | May | Devon County Council | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier contacted us with concerns that a DOS procurement that appeared to be a bespoke development requirement and therefore something better suited to the G-Cloud framework. | After highlighting the concern to the DOS Commercial Agreement team, they contacted the Authority to discuss their requirement. The DOS team suggested cancelling this opportunity as their requirement may be better suited for suppliers under G-Cloud 9 which provide 'robotic process automation'. They also offered help to ensure the opportunity was compliant with DOS if they felt that they required a bespoke solution. Subsequently the buyer has decided to withdraw the opportunity from Digital Marketplace and procure their requirement from G Cloud. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | June | Bedford Hospital NHS Trust | Procurement Strategy | Advertisement | A supplier contacted us regarding a procurement launched by Bedford NHS Trust. The Trust had stated in the OJEU notice that they would be limiting the number of bidders shortlisted to tender to a maximum of 5 but only 4 were shortlisted. The supplier challenged that the Trust did not make any public notice that they changed the number of the bidders they will take to the tendering stage. | The Authority confirmed that the OJEU advert stated that candidates would be limited to 5 maximum. Having evaluated the responses, the Trust’s panel took the view that the gap between the top 4 scores and 5th was so large that they would only shortlist the top 4. Authorities are required by legislation not to exceed 5 bidders, however, legislation does not prevent the Trust from appointing less than 5 bidders. In the context of this tender 4 bids scored higher than the other 10. The Authority confirmed that by reducing to 4 bidders the required level of commercial tension would be retained to ensure the taxpayer would get value for money. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | June | Nottingham University Hospital Trust | Procurement Process | Evaluation | We have been contacted by a supplier who responded twice to the same opportunity for Nottingham University Hospital. The first opportunity was withdrawn due to issues with an existing contract, it was re-published and the supplier submitted another bid that was also withdrawn, each bid has a cost to the supplier and they consider the reasons for withdrawal were unusual. | The Authority confirmed that the first opportunity had to be cancelled due to an error in the current contract end date. It was re-published with the view that all suppliers on the framework would be given another opportunity to bid for the requirement based on the correct contract information. The republished opportunity was cancelled due to a number of suppliers on the Network Services framework not having accepted the proposed CCS contract changes in relation to the new GDPR legislation. The Trust were advised by CCS that any suppliers not accepting the changes may be terminated from the framework agreement. As a consequence the Trust felt that they were not in a position to conclude the award of the contract. The Trust will be running a further competition from this framework at the end of 2018 in order to award the contract. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | June | National Crime Agency | Payment | Payment | We were contacted by a supplier who advised that they have done work through the G-Cloud 9 Framework for the National Crime Agency. The work has been completed, but payment for approx £14,500 was outstanding. | The Authority confirmed the outstanding payment has been made. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | June | Isle of Wight Council | Procurement Process | Advertisement | Following a previous investigation, a supplier contacted us to express further concerns about the procurement for the Provision of Community Occupational Therapy (OT) Services with the Isle of Wight Council. There have been a number of delays and further extensions to the procurement timetable. The supplier was unsuccessful on both Lots and was requesting their scores, ranking, the notes and evidence behind each score. | The Authority confirmed that the notification of intent to award has now been issued. Each of the bidders have been advised of the outcome of the tender process with supporting evidence. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | June | Derbyshire County Council | Procurement Process | Feedback | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team with a concern around lack of feedback on two tender quotations provided to Derbyshire County Council. | The Corporate Procurement Team at Derbyshire County Council apologised for the delay and advised that on one procurement they were seeking approval of the costs and on the other they were awaiting approval of the requested goods. The Corporate Procurement team requested that should the supplier have any future issues that they contact them directly, so they could expedite the query. They provided contact details for future reference. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | June | Places for People | Procurement Process | Transparency | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team to raise concerns over a Places for People procurement being advertised on Tenders Electronic Daily (TED) but not Contracts Finder. | Places for People investigated the concern and reported that the procurement portal used had a broken link to Contracts Finder which had subsequently been remedied by an updated version. Places for People provided evidence that they were complying with the Public Contracts Regulations of advertising contract notices on both TED and Contracts Finder. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | June | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Process | Transparency | A supplier contacted us regarding the Fuel Cards and Associated Services Framework (RM6000) that was recently awarded by the CCS. The short description in the contract notice states that the framework agreement is to be in place for an initial 3 years with an option to extend for up to 1 further year (a total duration of 4 years). The framework duration is stated as 36 months and the awarded suppliers were not listed in the contract award notice. | CCS confirmed that the framework agreement is to be in place for an initial 3 years with an option to extend for up to 1 further year (a total duration of 4 years) and without foresight CCS is unable to say whether the 12 month extension option will be taken. CCS have completed a change on the eSourcing suite to add a link on TED to Contracts Finder to list the awarded suppliers. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | June | Department of Health and Social Care | Procurement Process | Changing Approach | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team to advise that a Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) opportunity for End to End Service Management listed on Digital Outcomes Specialist (DOS) was requesting responses to be sent via an external tender management portal known as Delta portal. The Delta portal asked a different set of evidence questions to those listed in the DOS portal. As an SME the supplier felt that they had wasted a considerable amount of time in preparing their response and subsequently could miss the deadline. | A member of the Crown Commercial Service DOS Commercial Agreement team spoke with the buyer and explained they should only expect suppliers to respond to the essential and ‘nice to have’ criteria on the Digital Marketplace. They are not to include extra questions on their own e-sourcing portal at the shortlisting stage as this doesn't follow the tendering process. The Authority made the appropriate change to the opportunity and communicated this to the suppliers. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | June | Worcestershire County Council | Technology/Systems | Technical issue with e-portal | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding the advertisement of a Digital Outcomes Specialist (DOS) opportunity. The supplier was concerned that they had not been alerted to the opportunity and that they could not find it advertised on Contracts Finder. | The contracting authority provided evidence that it was advertised on the In-tend procurement portal and Contracts Finder. The supplier was given additional information to register their details and how to opt in, to be notified of appropriate future tender opportunities. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | June | Agriculture & Horticulture Development Board | Procurement Strategy | Advertisement | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team raising concerns over a Wide Area Network (WAN) procurement for Agriculture & Horticulture Development Board (AHDB). The supplier was concerned that the incumbent had been awarded the contract following a further competition run under Crown Commercial Service framework RM1045. The incumbent was not a supplier under the framework. | AHDB advised that they compared the tenders submitted under RM1045 with the incumbent’s new proposal (factoring in cost of change) and found that the most economical offering was the incumbent’s. To avoid future challenge Mystery Shopper advised AHDB to build more time into the procurement schedule. This would allow for readvertisement, a standstill period and demonstrated procurement best practice. AHDB confirmed that they have reviewed their processes and will look to follow best practice in the future. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | June | The Corporate Officer of the House of Lords and the Corporate Officer of the House of Commons | Procurement Strategy | Financial Requirement | A supplier contacted us regarding a current opportunity published by The Corporate Officer of the House of Lords and The Corporate Officer of the House of Commons, for a Framework Agreement for Building Surveying Services. The Selection Questionnaire (SQ) includes guidance for Economic and Financial Standing, including a minimal required annual financial of £1.7 million. Suppliers not reaching this level will fail the assessment. The supplier was concerned that this is not in line with PPN 8/16 Point 47, which states “you should not deselect potential suppliers on the basis of turnover or a credit check alone”. | The Authority wanted to promote SME involvement but was also required to balance the risk associated with performance of the services. The minimum turnover was proposed to protect the Authority and any potential Supplier who may be required to subcontract for specialist service provision (which is an important feature of the framework). They confirmed that the rationale behind the establishment of a minimum turnover cap is in line with the CCS document “Guidance on provisions that support market access for small businesses” (updated October 2016). There also was opportunity potential Suppliers to compete as a group or consortia. The Authority intends to proceed with the selection process to the time noted within the Contract Notice. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | July | Ministry of Defence (MOD) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us about an outstanding invoice for £360, relating to a job that was completed on 28th March 2018 working as a technician for a Reserve Forces & Cadets conference. | The Authority paid the invoice and subsequently paid late payment fees and interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | July | Northern Lincolnshire and Goole NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us about 2 outstanding invoices (one for March (£354.60) and the other for May (£747.60)), as they had been advised the payment would be delayed. | We were advised by the Trust that the outstanding amount was placed on the payment run for payment release on Friday 22 June 2018. The supplier confirmed that payment has been received. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | July | Countess of Chester Hospital | Transparency | Transparency | A supplier contacted us regarding two procurements run by Countess of Chester Hospital for the Supply of Electricity (Framework OJEU: 2015/S 229-416547) and the Supply of Natural Gas (Framework OJEU: 2014/S 086-149404). The supplier queried whether the advisory role for these Frameworks had been competed. | The Authority confirmed that the Gas and Electricity framework agreements were awarded through a fully compliant OJEU process. The award notices can be found on Tenders Electronic Daily. As the appointment of the advisory role was not required to be competed through the EU process, the supplier was advised to submit an FOI enquiry if they required more information. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | July | Suffolk County Council | Transparency | Insufficient Detail | The supplier’s complaint related to the refusal of Suffolk County Council to provide sufficient Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) (TUPE) information in commissioning the domestic violence outreach service for the county of Suffolk. As a result the supplier was not able to complete a TUPE analysis, or assess the risk and withdraw from the opportunity. They stated that a number of other organisations also asked for TUPE information using the clarification process and were also told that this could not be provided. As a consequence they believe that this meant that the incumbent provider was the only provider who could submit a meaningful, properly costed bid. | The Authority uses a standard template to gather staff data under TUPE and had successfully used this approach for a range of tenders over several years. They confirmed they were unable to provide data which might potentially make any individual staff member identifiable, and this was the reason data was grouped together by job role rather than broken down individually by staff member. It was confirmed that this procurement falls under the ‘Light Touch Regime’ and was undertaken as per the standard principles of the EU Procurement Regulations. The Authority confirmed that they continuously review documentation used in the tender process and considering bidder feedback. They have recently updated their standard TUPE template and this has incorporated information which has been requested during previous tendering processes. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | July | Foreign & Commonwealth Office (FCO) | Procurement Process | Communication | A supplier raised concerns over two Foreign & Commonwealth Office (FCO) Digital Outcome Specialist (DOS) opportunities with regards to (1) Curriculum Vitaes (CV) being requested for shortlisting, and (2) a Question & Answer session that was displayed being removed from view and (3) stating IR35 information which was contradictory to HMRC rules. | (1) FCO advised that CVs were requested as they had been working to a tight timescale and therefore requested them in advance of the evaluation stage. There was no suggestion that they would be used for shortlisting in the tender document and they were not used for this purpose. We recommended to make this clear when requesting suppliers submit information, to avoid any confusion as to the purpose of a request. (2) The Digital Marketplace team also advised that any published posts on the clarifications section cannot be deleted, there was no explanation given for the deleted Q&A session. It was identified that the link to allow suppliers to ask questions on a live opportunity automatically disappears after the deadline for asking questions has passed. However, any link to an optional Q&A session via webinar or conference call that is published within the requirement or on the clarifications section does not automatically get deleted. (3) FCO were advised that specialists provided by suppliers under the DOS2 framework must be outside the scope of IR35. It is the Buyer's responsibility to ensure that the HMRC test is applied correctly. The supplier must take full contractual responsibility and accountability for delivery of the service by the specialist provided. To enter into and deliver under each Call-Off Contract they must confirm full capacity and all necessary licences and permissions, this includes where a supplier’s procedures require the consent of its parent company. Suppliers under the DOS2 framework are registered with Companies House and can be presumed as a limited liability company for the purpose of the HMRC test on IR35. The FCO buyer appreciated the feedback and confirmed that the information will be taken on board. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | July | Public Health England | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier expressed concern over the lack of information provided to tender for the Public Health England (PHE) - Porton Down Online Project Management Tool. | PHE provided a document to potential bidders that contained adequate information about the general requirement. They stated the value of the requirement (£20K-£30K) and therefore did not need to provide anything more than a basic requirement document. They also had allowed time for interested suppliers to ask further questions. We recommend in future that they publish more details, including the selection and evaluation criteria upfront. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | July | Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) | Procurement Process | Previous Experience | A supplier raised concerns that a BEIS mini competition issued under the Management Consultancy Framework (RM3745) was asking past experience questions at award stage when selection criteria should be sought. They were concerned that it appeared to show a lack of understanding of the difference between selection criteria and award criteria and as many large consultancies would have a lot of relevant experience, they would inevitably score more highly than smaller firms with limited experience. | Following a review, BEIS agreed that this was a valid challenge, that the evaluation approach proposed was using selection criteria rather than award criteria. This oversight occurred due to an unfortunate combination of resource pressures and urgency to deliver the procurement. Once advised of this, BEIS promptly amended the procurement documentation to properly reflect award criteria, which enabled the procurement to continue as planned. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | July | Exeter City Council | Procurement Process | Award | This supplier contacted us regarding Exeter City Council's Arboricultural Contract regarding an alleged breach of confidentiality. | The Authority provided the supplier with the result of the internal investigation and advised that with regard to the alleged breach of confidentiality, whilst unfortunate, the individual concerned was not someone involved in the tender assessment or with any influence upon the decision. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | July | North East Universities Purchasing Consortium | Procurement Process | Evaluation | The supplier’s submission was rejected on the basis of a pass/fail question relating to a requirement to serve sites within 2 hours of a client request. They have not seen this requirement before and believe it prevents a large number of architects in the UK from applying. | The Authority confirmed that the 2-hour response was included as a service level requirement following past experience on previous schemes where appointed design teams failed to provide the level of service required. The majority of the schemes that will be called off from this framework will be major projects, with tight programmes. It is essential that the project teams are able to provide the required level of service, hence making this a pass/fail question. This was made clear in the tender documentation that was published and to bidders that there was no restriction on them collaborating/partnering with established firms in the area so they could meet this requirement. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | July | Highways England | Procurement Process | Complexity | A supplier raised concerns over the complexity of an Invitation to Tender issued by Highways England for a Recruitment Framework. | Highways England confirmed that they had used the NEC3 Professional Services Contract form, which is specifically designed to be written in plain English. Whilst there is inevitably a degree of complexity within the overall requirement for a framework of this magnitude, the Scope, Instructions for Tenderers, and Framework Information documents outline the requirements of the contract, and supported the information originally published in the Prior Information Notice and OJEU Notice. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | July | Orbit Housing | Procurement Strategy | Lotting | A supplier complained about a Legal Services Framework opportunity with the Orbit Group (a housing association) which they felt was not SME friendly due to there being no lotting structure. The supplier said the structure of the framework - asking bidders to provide a wide range of legal services meant that only a few large legal firms would be able to bid. | The Authority confirmed that they will continue to consider lotting on a case by case basis for future procurements to ensure SME involvement remains at a high level, as is the case currently. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | July | L & Q Group | Procurement Strategy | Transparency | A supplier contacted us to complain that a recent procurement favoured incumbent providers. The supplier uploaded their bid to the portal on 28th February 2018 and followed up with the procurement team who told them that was all they needed to do. They discovered on 3rd May 2018 that they were not awarded the contract. They received a reply a week later explaining that their application wasn't entered into the bidding process and therefore they had missed the appeal deadline. As a result, they are now effectively locked out of an opportunity for 5 years and this will have a huge impact on their company. | The system's audit trail shows no evidence that a bid was uploaded. The supplier would have seen on screen, a printable receipt when submitting a tender to evidence their submission. As a bid was not made by the supplier they would not have been directly informed of the standstill period, as the proposed award would have been announced to the participating bidders. This was not a public procurement although L&Q ran the process in compliance with the PCR regulations. The Authority confirmed that 39 suppliers expressed interest in the opportunity. Of those, 17 suppliers did submit a tender (9 of which are SMEs); and after evaluations 9 suppliers were awarded contract (3 of which are SMEs.) | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | July | Norfolk County Council | Procurement Strategy | Transparency | The supplier is concerned that the Norfolk County Adult Social Services Framework Agreement will see framework providers paid a disproportionate set of fees, compared to non-framework providers. As a result, they are concerned that this will lead to non-framework providers making a net loss per hour and this in turn will have a serious impact on the service provision to a vulnerable user group. This is contradictory to the Care Act that requires local authorities to help develop a market that delivers a wide range of sustainable high-quality care and support services, that will be available to their communities. | There has been a series of communications between the complainant, Mystery Shopper Service and the Norfolk County Council Adult Social Services. The Authority confirmed the current contracts will run their course and NCC have confirmed their framework provider pricing. They are proposing to discuss a number of ways in which increases in the amount they pay to providers would be justified. In particular focusing on ad hoc providers to reflect amongst other things: the higher cost of shorter visit times, compensating providers for keeping placements open during short hospital stays, premium payments to support hospital discharge 7 day working and possibly paying a workforce premium linked to reductions in staff turnover rates. They also want to explore ways in which smaller providers can remain in the market by reducing overheads through sharing resources. If they can reach agreement then any changes can take place in-year subject to affordability. NCC have met with providers twice and are planning one or more workshops to look at a number of ideas to tackle unmet need and ensure a sustainable market. These workshops will take place as soon as possible with a view to reaching conclusions by the end of October. Proposals about inflationary uplifts and the consequential effect of prices paid to providers are in the public domain about a week before the January Adult Social Care Committee meeting which is open to the public. Mystery Shopper recommended that these are communicated at the earliest opportunity, whilst the Council is not obliged to consult the market prior to these recommendations or after in the case of home care, consistent and timely communications would improve the current process. We acknowledge that the Council was willing to listen and act to better support and with the adhoc provider market in principle. Mystery Shopper has now referred this through the SME Champion to the Local Government Association to help inject some sense of urgency in proceedings and reinforce concerns expressed regarding the Care Act (Part 1 ss5 ) and promoting diversity and quality in provision of services. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | July | Ministry of Defence (MOD) | Procurement Strategy | Transparency | This supplier has several G-Cloud 8 contracts with MOD but that they’ve been told that MOD would like to replace them all with a single all-encompassing order. The company are concerned that this exposes them to a single termination risk, rather than the risk being spread over several deals. The supplier provided a copy of a proposed new contract condition to be added to the proposed bundled call-off and they are concerned that it would allow MOD and other departments to use any service improvements the company introduced within the context of that deal, free of charge, which goes against the G-Cloud ethos of consumption of a fixed-price, off-the-shelf service. Finally the supplier is concerned that they have been told that the relevant services will be subject to an open tender in 18 months’ time. They are concerned that their competitive position will be prejudiced by transparency of their commercial information via the G-Cloud Digital Marketplace coverage. | While Mystery Shopper was investigating, an 18 month Call-Off agreement under G-Cloud 8 between MOD and the supplier commenced and as such the case was overtaken by events. MOD stressed it understood Government policy - that large requirements are broken up, where appropriate and to allow smaller businesses to compete for different elements of a contract. However, in this case MOD determined that it had the same requirement from the same provider in 15 separate business areas and the Authority needed to manage these requirements consistently across it’s business. At the time there was no other supplier offering such services / able to meet the requirement and it was therefore not possible to evaluate the services based upon best fit and/ or price. The decision in this particular case to ‘bundle’ the requirement into a single agreement was taken in coordination with advice from the Cabinet Office and in future it would be highly unlikely for procurements to be direct award to a single supplier via G-Cloud. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | July | NEPO | Procurement Strategy | Transparency | A supplier representative raised concerns about the North East Procurement Organisation's (NEPO) Neutral Vendor Framework for Specialist Professional Services. They alleged overuse of single supplier engagement, questioned the transparency of competitive engagement process and the suitability of the framework for construction procurement. | NEPO undertook a sample analysis and explained that direct award is by exception and mini competition is the default route – at the time of investigation this figure stood at 70% in terms of value of procurements through mini competition. They also monitor the balance of competed for and non competed for work to ensure work is not just going to a single supplier each time. For construction related procurement they said they will issue further guidance and that they have a solution aimed squarely at construction consultancy. Mystery Shopper recommended the construction guidance was developed and made available soon. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | July | Food Standards Agency | Procurement Strategy | Establishment of Framework | A supplier contacted us to complain that the Food Standards Agency (FSA) is using the Digital Outcomes & Specialists (DOS) Framework to set up what they considered to be a framework within a framework rather than procuring an outcome. They were concerned the opportunity is to create a roster of preferred suppliers to then complete mini procurements of future potential opportunities. They wanted the opportunity withdrawn as they considered it is not what DOS was designed for and believes that the FSA should procure each opportunity as it arises. | The FSA posted a clarification question and response on the DOS Portal which confirms that the contract will be awarded to a single supplier and that they will not be operating a roster system. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | July | NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) | Procurement Strategy | Accreditation | A supplier contacted us about procurement ref NHSBT1173/S/SP - Provision of Film, Animation and Post-Production Services. The supplier queried why the Invitation To Tender (ITT) states that in order to be considered, a company must be a member of the Events & Visual Communication Association (EVCOM). The supplier has been unable to access information on how to join the Association and whether there were any associated membership costs. | The Authority confirmed that the reason behind the requirement is that EVCOM Association promotes best practice within the industry and has a forum promoting good advice and education.They believe being a member of EVCOM is evidence of a supplier being professionally engaged. Mystery Shopper would recommend that in the future the Authority considers whether alternative evidence could be provided, particularly those that do not have a cost implication. The reason the supplier was unable to access joining instructions was due to EVCOM updating their website at the time the supplier was trying to access. The Authority provided alternative contact details so anyone can contact them to find out about membership. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | August | East West Railway Company | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier raised a concern over a live procurement under the Management Consultancy Framework (RM3745) by the East West Railway Company. The supplier was concerned that the evaluation criteria for the mini competition allocated 20% of the score to a presentation stage. All bidders within 20% of the top scoring supplier would be invited. The bidders would be invited to a 15 minute presentation to address two specific questions, followed by a 45 minute question and answer session. The supplier felt that this multi stage process was not in scope under the framework and that scoring could be biased. | The framework agreement and regulations allow appropriate selection criteria to be applied, which may include presentations. This was selected to ensure that key members of the proposed teams had the required skills, knowledge and expertise - as opposed to corporate knowledge and/or an excellent bid writing team. The 20% weighting for the presentation is in line with similar professional services procurements, and provides a good balance between the written responses (50%) and pricing (30%). The Mystery Shopper team recommended that any questions and answers arising from presentations should be circulated to all participating suppliers through their portal, ensuring all suppliers will receive the same response at the same time. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | August | Central Bedfordshire Council | Procurement Process | Award | A supplier contacted us regarding Central Bedfordshire Council - The Repairs Maintenance and Capital Works Programme. The supplier wanted to understand the rationale for the contracting model, in particular the £25m minimum turnover requirement, and specifying the contractor has capability to cover all 12 of the core services. | Central Bedfordshire Council has made the decision to move from a position of multiple contracts being centrally managed and controlled by the Council, to having a main contractor managing requirements on its behalf with multiple sub-contracts. The Authority confirmed as this is a circa £190m project over a 15 year term, with an estimated annual value of £12.5m, they had set the turnover requirement at not less than £25m. The reason for this approach being taken is to create efficiency in the Council’s contract administration and order process by the creation of one asset management solution. This new contract will allow most Tier 1 SMEs to quote for some of the Council’s requirements via the main Contractor, therefore will not exclude small to mid sized organisations tendering and providing services to the Council, albeit indirectly. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | August | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team raising concerns around payment terms under the new Public Sector Resourcing (PSR) Framework. | The Crown Commercial Service advised under Contingent Labour 1 (CL1) Capita paid the agencies within 5 days of receipt of invoice, who in turn paid the contingent worker on similar terms. These were extremely good payment terms and based on the fact that Capita are a strategic supplier to government and voluntarily agreed to pay all invoices within 5 days. Under PSR, the awarded contractors are not a strategic supplier and contractually have 30 days to make payment from date of invoice. This is in line with the Public Contracts Regulations. They also added that agencies following the correct process will be paid weekly, 30 days in arrears. They appreciate the initial period may cause some cash flow issues but it should soon settle into a weekly flow of payments. To ease the burden for agencies who have expressed particular difficulties, the contractor has a 14 day payment term process (for an extended 3 month period). The Authority confirmed that standard payment terms were outlined in the Framework Agreement within the published Invitation To Tender pack. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | August | Folkestone and Hythe District Council | Procurement Strategy | Tender Requirement | A supplier contacted us regarding the use of Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Framework RM1045 - Network Services for a project run by Folkestone and Hythe District Council for Hosted Skype for Business Unified Communications, Contact Centre and SIP Trunks. The supplier brought this to our attention because the procurement seems focussed on technology rather than outcomes and they believe that they could do the same thing for a lower cost with parallel technology. | The Authority confirmed that the reason for the tender being so specific was that they are in the process of moving their information technology (IT) to a cloud based solution in line with their IT strategy. Their IT is outsourced and they need to ensure compatibility and are attempting to leverage value for money through combining their licences. We reminded them about the importance of the SME agenda and the advantages of using SMEs. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | August | Ordnance Survey | Procurement Strategy | Advertisement | A supplier contacted us regarding the Technology Platform and Production Development Framework opportunity advertised by Ordnance Survey. The supplier questioned why the Authority has not competed this requirement through G-Cloud. They believe their service offering could have fulfilled this requirement at better value. | The Authority confirmed that they are embarking on an ambitious technical programme of work of which some of the product outputs will have niche and leading-edge requirements. There is a need for the delivery timescales to be agile with the flexibility to onboard suppliers within 10 days. There was also a requirement to be able to deliver a consistent service and ensure a robust knowledge management process is maintained. These were essential to meet complex business requirements against very aggressive timescales. Whilst Ordnance Survey has used and will continue to use G-Cloud where appropriate, for this technical programme of work G-Cloud would not meet some of the requirements detailed above. The implementation of an Ordnance Survey Technology Platform and Production Development Framework would best suit Ordnance Survey’s requirements for this delivery. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team about outstanding invoices from December 2017 to March 2018 totalling £3,152.36. | The Trust advised that invoices were received and the supplier's payment was released. The supplier has confirmed that payment had been received. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | Walsall Healthcare NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding a number of outstanding invoices totalling £4,500. | The Trust settled the account and the Supplier was paid in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | NHS Property Services | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding a number of outstanding invoices. | The supplier received a part payment from NHS Property Services. This cleared some of the old invoices and they were assigned a new contact to work on the remainder of the queries. A further payment was made leaving 2 invoices outstanding for which the supplier was confident they would receive payment in due course. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | North West Anglia Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding a number of outstanding invoices totalling £4,200. | The supplier received full payment and the case was closed. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | NHS England - Midlands and East | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team providing details of two unpaid invoices with NHS England - Midlands and East with a total value of £1,316.12 plus £98.78 interest and late fees. | The Mystery Shopper team liaised with their NHS contacts which resulted in the supplier receiving full payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | Princess Alexandra Hospital | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding a number of outstanding invoices totalling £69,500. | The supplier received full payment and the case was closed. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding a number of outstanding invoices totalling £32,700. | The supplier received a partial payment of £11.3k. The trust have also confirmed that a further 4 invoices will be processed for payment. The Trust highlighted that invoices must be supplied to their organisation with a valid purchase order. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | KCH Interventional Facilities Mangement LLP | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding a number of outstanding invoices totalling £11,300. | The supplier received payment and the case was closed. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | Ministry of Justice (MOJ) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices totalling £275,000. Invoices had been unpaid from 2016. | The supplier had issued an invoice but had quoted the wrong purchase number, the invoice was rejected. The supplier issued a credit note and new invoice quoting the correct purchase order number leading to the invoices not being associated with each other. In 2018 the supplier raised the issue amongst other mis – matches, this led to going through both old and new financial system, records and emails over a two years period, to get the full picture. The Authority paid the outstanding invoices however they incorrectly deducted £93.6k. This has now been rectified by MoJ Project Finance team and full payment made. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | Kings Healthcare NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding a number of outstanding invoices totalling £66,000. | The supplier received full payment from Kings Healthcare NHS Trust. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | Secretary of State for Justice | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding outstanding invoices totalling £166,000. | The Authority rejected one invoice for not having a Purchase Order number, and one Invoice had not been processed despite the supplier receiving email acknowledgement of receipt. Both issues were resolved and the supplier received full payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | Ministry of Defence (MOD) | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding the Defence Statistics Department, Ministry of Defence tender reference CCSO18A00. The supplier was concerned that they were not given an opportunity to quote, as there was already a partner in place, therefore excluding other parties from the tender process. | The Authority was not able to provide a detailed response without more information about the supplier given that the competition was already closed. The supplier wished to remain anonymous and declined to provide further details. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | Hyde Housing Association | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding a framework tender for Construction Consultancy Services being procured by Hyde Housing Group. The framework notice was advertised on Contracts Finder as Construction Project Management Services with one access code - 71541000, however the Framework included three Lots with two additional codes. The supplier disregarded this opportunity based on the information that was published to Contracts Finder. | The Authority confirmed that the procurement was run through their Delta system and covered 3 Lots. Unfortunately the Delta system only allowed for one access code although the Lotting structure was visible when the opportunity was investigated further. The Authority is aware of the problem with the Delta system and is working to resolve it. The Authority had addressed the problem and extra codes were provided during clarification but only to those who were already involved in the tender process. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | NHS Canterbury & Coastal/Ashford CCG | Technology/Systems | Technical issue with e-portal | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding NHS Canterbury & Coastal/ Ashford CCG Improving Access to GP’s, Arden and GEN CSU. The supplier was concerned that the procurement documentation were not available via the published link on Contracts Finder | The Authority advised that the procurement documentation were available via the Bravo system as detailed on Contracts Finder under other information/attachments. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | Wolverhampton City Council | Procurement Strategy | Accreditation | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding Wolverhampton City Council’s PP18171 - Content Management System procurement. The supplier was concerned that there was a requirement for ISO 27001 accreditation and a minimum turnover of £200,000 that would preclude them from applying. | The Authority cooperated fully with our investigation and issued a clarification to all bidders explaining that the turnover requirement was based on not only hosting but included development costs too. With regards to the requirement for ISO 27001, the Authority stated that it would offer them various benefits such as international recognition, comprehensive approach and position to ensure cyber resilience. The Authority agreed to extend the clarification window so bidders could suggest an alternative solution to the requirement for ISO 27001 but declined to withdraw the requirement. Mystery Shopper recommends, that where appropriate, a specification should focus on the required end result, rather than how to achieve that result. This would give suppliers the chance to offer innovative solutions that may result in better value for money. Thought should be given to the way specifications are written in the future to encourage SME entry into the market. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | HM Land Registry | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding HM Land Registry’s “G-Cloud opportunity for dataset publishing”. The supplier was concerned that they supplied G-Cloud rate card pricing but were unsure if the tender was being run outside of G-Cloud. | The Authority confirmed that they utilised the G-Cloud procurement process from start to finish and provided evidence of the rate card pricing used. Due to some new, less experienced staff being in place the feedback provided inadvertently and mistakenly referred to a Tender Exercise. This led to the confusion regarding the process used. Mystery Shopper reminded HM Land Registry of the importance of accurate communications to ensure that this does not happen in future procurements. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | Northampton Partnership Homes | Technology/Systems | Technical issue with e-portal | A supplier contacted us about procurement ref GB003ZM267175 UK-Bolton: Supply of Non Half Hourly Electricity, Half Hourly Electricity and Gas. The Contracting Authority appeared to be a private company. The supplier wanted to check that the procurement through which Utilities Procurement Group (UPG) Ltd were appointed as agents, that Northampton Partnership Homes (NPH) were aware of their liabilities under this arrangement and that NPH’s constitution allows them to act as a central purchasing body for the purposes of this framework. | NPH confirmed that the process to recruit UPG Ltd as its managing agent for the current utilities procurement exercise was compliant and in keeping with its internal procurement rules , the commercial arrangements were a matter of commercial confidentiality. NPH also confirmed as stated within the Contract Notice, NPH is the Contracting Authority and UPG are NPH’s managing agent responsible for undertaking the framework procurement and contract managing the resulting framework throughout its contract term. NPH did recognise that there may have been an element of confusion as the Contracts Finder advert for this procurement inadvertently and in error, implied that UPG was the lead organisation. This was a software system error not within their control. The links contained within the Contracts Finder advert, when followed, stated NPH as the Contracting Authority. They have taken professional legal procurement advice and have been advised to continue with the procurement process. Mystery Shopper have reinforced the importance of accuracy when placing adverts to ensure this does not reoccur in the future. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | Hertfordshire County Council | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team about an advert placed for Hertfordshire County Council Highways Network Management : Open Data, Data Marketplace that included spelling mistakes, no requirements, no rates and no timescales. | The Authority agreed to cancel the opportunity on Digital Marketplace. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | Hackney Council | Procurement Strategy | Transparency | A supplier contacted us about an Invitation to Tender from Hackney Borough Council for an Education Management Information System (EMIS). The Supplier was concerned that there was a lack of transparency in evaluating whether an essential requirement has passed or failed. They did not feel it was clear how the Council would take into consideration the status indication and qualitative response from each bidder. They expressed further concern about an essential requirement: “must be in use and demonstrated with PAN London in a minimum of two London Boroughs”, as this could exclude new entrants. | The Council confirmed that the system being procured contains at least 10 modules used across 5 different service areas and the Pan London admission module is essential for performing their admission function. This module needs to be connected to all other London boroughs. Over the years, the PAN London Admission module has caused a lot of challenges to providers and they were not prepared to take any risk in procuring a solution that may put the admission process in jeopardy or have negative impact on the whole Pan London Admission connectivity. They require a provider with a proven solution that was working in at least two London authorities. Mystery Shopper emphasised that thought should be given to the current spend targets government departments have with Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) and whether requirements can be written in such a way as to encourage their entry into the market. The Council extended both the deadline for clarification to enable suppliers to raise any further issues and also the tender submission date. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | Bristol City Council | Procurement Strategy | SME Exclusion | The supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding Bristol City Council - Case Management System, Complaints & Feedback, Freedom of Information Requests (FOIs), Subject Access Requests (SARs) and Councillor/MP Enquiries. The Supplier is confident they could deliver a suitable solution for this with the resources they have available and have asked us to seek clarification as to why SMEs were excluded. | The Authority checked the Pro-contract portal and updated the advert to reflect that this tender opportunity is SME ‘friendly’. The SME selection box had not been left ‘unticked’ in error. The Council had not received any clarifications regarding this point; which is encouraged and would have highlighted this oversight sooner. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust | Procurement Process | Tender Requirement | The supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding the Standard Selection Questionnaire (SSQ) published by Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust for Southern Counties Pathology. They questioned why it does not follow the standard format and goes against guidance quoted in Procurement policy note 8/16: Standard Selection Questionnaire (SQ) template: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/procurement-policy-note-816-standard-selection-questionnaire-sq-template 32. | The Trust confirmed that this is a consortium approach for 8 Trusts with one central external Legal Counsel. The Trust considered this to be a high value and complex procurement containing multiple lots for the provision of a Managed Laboratory Service. Working within this environment it is essential that the suppliers not only have the capability and capacity to meet the requirements, but also demonstrate they have successfully undertaken contracts of similar size and complexity. The Trust felt more detail was needed than was present in the SSQ template. The absolute compliance with the templates is not mandatory and therefore the consortium was within its right to vary the template in a situation where it is seeking greater clarification than the template provides. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | Oxfordshire County Council | Procurement Process | Advertisement | The supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding a live procurement exercise being undertaken by Oxfordshire County Council - Concessionary Fare Consultancy, CPU2037. The supplier had expressed concern that one of the requirements of the tender is that the supplier must have in place Professional Indemnity (PI) insurance cover of £10m. They regarded this as excessive for the type and value of services that would be provided under this contract. They asked for this to be reduced to £5m but this was declined during the tender clarification process. | The Council agreed to extend the tender deadline and following a detailed risk assessment they confirmed they would accept a £2m cap on PI, which they hope will considerably help SMEs applying. The Council highlighted that there is a ‘question and answer’ facility for suppliers to use on their portal. This is a ‘fully auditable’ process and they have encouraged suppliers to use this rather than sending emails to raise questions. This process enables all parties to obtain a satisfactory outcome quickly. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | NHS Supply Chain | Procurement Strategy | Changing approach | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team about a procurement for the NHS Supply Chain: ITMC Electrodes, Gels and Related Consumables to question why the opportunity was withdrawn at short notice. | NHS Supply chain took the decision not to progress with the mini competition as it was not in the best interest of the NHS to continue at that time. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | September | Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) | Procurement Strategy | Lotting | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding the Crown Prosecution Service: Courier Services opportunity. The Supplier highlighted that the requirement asked for a contractor to cover the UK as a whole. They felt that this requirement excludes 95% of courier companies who are regionalised and not nationally based. | This competition was competed under the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Framework Agreement RM 3798 Courier Services. Prior to release of the OJEU, supplier market engagement was conducted by the Courier Strategic Category Team. This included various supplier days and one to one sessions. It was made clear to all suppliers from the outset that this framework would be a National framework agreement. Crown Prosecution Service stated that their organisational structure is based on a centralised corporate services function and regional frontline teams. Contract management was controlled centrally and therefore it would be administratively undesirable to maintain a large number of regional supplier contracts, consequently their procurement strategy focused on organisation wide delivery. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | October | Manchester City Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding two outstanding invoices totally £972.00. | The Authority paid the invoices and subsequently made a further payment for late payment interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | October | Royal Stoke on Trent University Hospital | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding outstanding invoices totalling £52,464.61. | The Authority has paid all outstanding invoices in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | October | Portsmouth Hospital | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team about outstanding invoices in excess of £52,000.00. | The trust settled the account and the supplier was paid in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | October | George Eliot Hospital | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team about outstanding invoices in excess of £41,000.00. | The trust settled the account and the supplier was paid in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | October | Lambeth Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding an outstanding invoice for £681.60 with London Borough of Lambeth. | The Mystery Shopper team contacted the Authority who advised the wrong order number was quoted on the invoice. The supplier provided a new invoice and the Authority paid in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | October | Essex County Council | Transparency | Competition | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team with regards to Essex Domestic Abuse Services tender (Essex Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner & Essex County Council). The supplier raised concerns over the lack of detail in the specification for the requirement and was concerned this gave the incumbent supplier an advantage in the tender process. | The Authority confirmed that this procurement was not an exact like-for-like re-procurement of an existing service. The procurement combined some previously separate elements and divided the service into geographical lots. To support this approach providers had been supplied with copies of the local domestic abuse strategies, and a copy of the Authority’s needs analysis which identified the numbers and types of victims across the county, as well as identifying hotspots for service delivery. The service specification was deliberately outcomes focussed in order to avoid inhibiting providers’ approaches and encourage innovation. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | October | Ofgem | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding an opportunity on the Digital Marketplace advertised by Ofgem for a "Delivery partner for the development of the Energy Customer Database". Ofgem told the supplier they had shortlisted six suppliers following the proposal stage, subsequent to which the supplier was notified they were deselected and that Ofgem had taken the final suppliers through to a 'final evaluation' presentation stage. The original advert did not mention a proposal stage and the supplier considered this was a deviation from the normal process. The supplier considered this change gave other suppliers an unfair chance to put forward their proposals. Despite repeated requests for a follow up meeting to discuss this issue and to get more detailed feedback from the bid team, Ofgem have consistently not responded to their requests. | Ofgem issued its opportunity on 2 March 2018, inviting Applications from suppliers by the closing date of 16 March. 15 responses were received, which were shortlisted to 6, though the initial advertisement stated 5. The requirement for written proposals (as stated in the published advertisement) was issued on 29 March with a deadline of 13 April. 6 written proposals were received and evaluated. Ofgem stated that all 6 suppliers were then invited to present their proposals (via Conference calls) and respond to a standard set of questions. The complainant did not receive an invitation to present. After presentations, the scores were re-evaluated. The Crown Commercial Service Digital Commercial Agreement Team confirmed that Authorities must notify and provide feedback to unsuccessful and successful suppliers at both shortlisting stages and after evaluation. Suppliers can request detailed feedback, but it is at the discretion of the Authority whether they supply a more detailed response. Ofgem acknowledged that their capacity sometimes restricts the amount of time they can spend handling supplier feedback. This has been highlighted in their proposals for re-structuring Procurement currently underway. Ofgem stated that they always strive to ensure a fully compliant process is conducted and where complaints are made, aim to ensure they are adequately dealt with. In this case, they acknowledge there was a long delay in responding, for which they apologised. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | October | Rail Safety Standards Board | Procurement Process | Feedback | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team with regards to lack of feedback on a Digital Outcomes and Specialists (DOS) procurement run by the Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) and its subsidiaries. | The Mystery Shopper team obtained the Authority’s contact details from the DOS framework manager and spoke to them. The Authority apologised for the delay in providing feedback and gave assurance that it was imminent. The Authority advised that they were happy for their contact details to be shared with the supplier so they could liaise directly. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | October | Merton London Borough Council | Procurement Process | Competition | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team with concerns over a procurement for a training contract on Systemic Theory & Practice for London Borough of Merton. The supplier was concerned that the contract was awarded to another council and questioned how taxpayers’ money could be used to fund competitive quotation process and bidding against small organisations in the private sector. | The Mystery Shopper team advised the supplier that under the Local Authorities (Goods and Services) Act 1970 councils were given powers to enter into agreements with each other and with a long list of other designated public bodies. The Local Government Act 2003 added further possibilities. This and a Trading Order in force since October 2009 enables councils in England to trade in activities related to their ordinary functions on a commercial basis with a view to profit through a company. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | October | Metropolitan Police | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding an opportunity on the Digital Marketplace advertised by the Metropolitan Police Service for an Information Systems Architecture Managed Service. Despite the supplier being notified that they were unsuccessful in shortlisting, they have not received any feedback and the portal had not been updated. | Metropolitan Police advised that the competition has been completed and a contract awarded. The Authority was advised to update the opportunity page published on the Digital Marketplace to show the award details. Step-by-step guidance was also provided to the Authority on how to complete this activity on their account. All first round bidders were given their score relative to the highest ranked bidder. All shortlisted bidders were given more detailed feedback on their submissions and presentations. The Crown Commercial Service Digital Commercial Agreements Team confirmed that authorities must notify and provide feedback to unsuccessful and successful suppliers at both shortlisting stage and after evaluation about the outcome. Suppliers can request more detailed feedback, but it is at the discretion of the Authority whether they supply a more detailed response. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | October | University of Northampton | Procurement Process | SME Exclusion | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team raising concerns over a tender to supply fuel in the form of wood chips in bulk to the University of Northampton. In particular the supplier was unclear if the procurement was over or under threshold, if the Authority had used a Pre Qualification Questionnaire and if there were General Data Protection Regulation implications in providing evidence of previous supply, which could include details of customers and contracts. | The Mystery Shopper team liaised with the Authority and were able to confirm that the procurement was above threshold, the Authority used the government recommended Supplier Selection Questionnaire and they also sought legal advice to ensure compliance with GDPR. The supplier was provided with the Crown Commercial Service GDPR Policy lead contact details, to further discuss GDPR requirements and application. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | October | University of Hull | Procurement Strategy | Evaluation | A supplier raised concerns about a Hull University procurement for cleaning consumables and chemicals. They were unsure why the competitive dialogue procedure was being used and were also concerned that the scoring criteria and procurement timetable beyond Pre Qualification Question stage did not seem to have been published. | Hull University immediately looked into the issues raised and have decided to withdraw the Competition as Competitive Dialogue may not achieve the desired outcome. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | Swindon Borough Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding an outstanding invoice for translation services totalling £9,700. | The Authority made full payment and the case was closed. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | Great Ormond Street Hospital | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding outstanding invoices totalling £10,817.83. | The Authority has now paid all outstanding invoices in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | East Suffolk and North Essex NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding outstanding invoices totalling £248,358.34. | The Authority has now paid all outstanding invoices in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding outstanding invoices totalling £17,297.33. | The Authority has now paid all outstanding invoices in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | Ministry of Defence (MOD) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding an outstanding invoice for £277. The invoice was undisputed. | The MOD advised there had been a delay through the system by their budget managers, this had been resolved and the invoice was paid in full. Mystery Shopper Team made them aware of the Public Contracts Regulation http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2015/102/regulation/113/made and guidance for central government departments https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/procurement-policy-note-0515-prompt-payment-and-performance-reporting. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | London Ambulance Service (LAS) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding 69 outstanding invoices totalling £20,200. | London Ambulance Service (LAS) advised that there were delays in the approval process due to verification of the supplier’s rates. Once this was resolved, LAS paid the invoices that were undisputed. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | London Borough of Hounslow | Procurement Process | Evaluation | We were contacted by a supplier regarding the London Borough of Hounslow LIFE Projects: Learning Disabilities and Autism Supported Accommodation Invitation to Tender (ITT). The Supplier expressed concern relating to the Solution Workshop part of the procurement process. The supplier believed that the workshops could have the potential to distort the competition in favour of one supplier, as the Council provided advice as to how a tender should be amended in order to achieve a higher score in stage 3. | The requirement was being procured using the Light Touch Regime (LTR) where Authorities have the flexibility to use any process or procedure they choose to run the procurement, as long as it respects the EU treaty principles. There was no requirement to use the standard EU procurement procedures that are available for other non-LTR contracts. Authorities can use those procedures if helpful, or tailor those procedures according to their own needs, or design their own procedures altogether, this has proven to be very popular with the market and the Authority have used the method previously on several occasions. The Authority confirmed that the procurement process was in 3 stages, the first being the tender submission which was evaluated in terms of quality and price by 6 individual evaluators. The top 3 scoring bidders were invited to Stage 2 which was a workshop where bidders received constructive feedback regarding their bids. Stage 3 was the final submission where the top 3 bidders amend their quality submissions only in accordance with the feedback provided. All stages were recorded for audit purposes and the ITT document provided a detailed explanation of how the process was run in the interest of being transparent. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | NHS Supply Chain | Procurement Process | Costing in bids | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding Heat and Moisture Exchanger Products procured by NHS Supply Chain (NHS SC) and a price ranking sheet they have received. The supplier expressed concern that the price ranking sheet appears to show competitors’ prices and invites suppliers to review their own pricing. They objected to the fact that they have already gone through a formal tender process with NHS SC for these items and that their confidential prices are in the public domain. | NHS SC confirmed that the information contained in the price ranking sheet was the catalogue price and was password protected, this was previously available in the public domain as a paper version (i.e. through the NHS SC Catalogue) and would not be classed as commercially sensitive information. The Authority stated that price ranking is an initiative which NHS SC has been running for many years to provide suppliers visibility of their pricing position, this allows suppliers to adjust their prices accordingly if they wanted to obtain a more competitive position. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | Wolverhampton City Council | Procurement Process | Feedback | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team having completed a tender under RM1045 Network Services on the Crown Commercial Services (CCS) Emptoris portal in April 2018, since then they have received no feedback or update. | Wolverhampton City Council advised that due to capacity they have not been able to award yet. They confirmed that an email should have been sent to all suppliers to notify them of the delay. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | Hull City Council | Procurement Process | Financial Assessment | A supplier was concerned about how the pricing element of a Hull City Council procurement (Lot 2 Broker services via RM37152) was being evaluated. The supplier felt an average price model was not open and transparent, could be affected by abnormally low bids and was not as fair as individual bids being assessed. | Hull City Council explained that the price evaluated was based on tender price but the quality element of the evaluation was worth significantly more than price. Hull City Council stressed that the model had been clearly communicated to all suppliers at the start of the process and it had been made clear that they were not just looking for lowest price. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust | Procurement Process | Feedback | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team having tendered under RM1045 Network Services on the Crown Commercial Services (CCS) Emptoris portal in July 2018, since then they have received no feedback or update. | The Trust advised that the evaluation had been delayed. The CCS Networks Services Team have requested that the Authority send a message to all suppliers and advise them of the delay, via Emptoris. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | NHS Supply Chain | Procurement Process | Clarification | The Mystery Shopper team were contacted by a supplier raising concerns over the Supply, Repair and Maintenance of Wigs and Accessories framework, issued by Collaborative Procurement Partnership LLP on behalf of NHS Supply Chain. In their opinion the framework had no indication of the potential framework users (NHS bodies), no information how call-offs will be run, location and how to respond to one element. The supplier raised several clarifications that didn't offer a satisfactory response. The consequence of which could impact a bidder's ability to determine if the framework will be of value to them, and did not allow bidders to understand how they should respond with the best chance of winning a position on the framework. | The contracting authority advised that initially the supplier would be referred back to the Invitation to Tender (ITT) document as the queries raised would be answered in this document. Bidders were also referred to the section that the query relates to. The Authority advised that this is a Framework Agreement that covers all of NHS in England, so there is no volume commitment as the requirements are typically based on customer demand and sourcing choices by local NHS trusts. The call off terms were set out in the framework agreement. This is a National Framework and can be accessed by all trusts, due to the nature of the products trusts make local choices on products they wish to procure. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | Hackney Council | Procurement Process | SME Exclusion | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team with regard to the procurement of the Corporate Framework for Construction Management services being carried out by Hackney Council. The supplier was concerned that the procurement had been amended to cancel a specific lot aimed at SME businesses. This was two months after the Pre Qualification Questionnaire stage had been submitted, but before a tender shortlist was announced. | The Authority advised that the timing of the cancellation of Lot 17 meant that they had already started evaluation of the Supplier Questionnaire submissions for the other lots, therefore it would not have been possible to give suppliers more time to apply. Lot 17 was initially included in the tender because of concerns that the suppliers in this market (small architectural firms) would not have been able to meet the criteria and compete successfully for the other two lots that have an architectural design element. The Mystery Shopper team recommended that best practice would discourage withdrawal of lots once an evaluation has started and to add additional time to allow suppliers time to apply for other appropriate lots. The authority also advised that they did have a varied response to the multi disciplinary architectural lot. Of the 98 suppliers identified as applying for Lot 17, 51 of them also applied for Lots 4 & 5, just over 50% of the applicants for Lot 17 (which was suitable for SME suppliers) have an interest in the Framework through the remaining Lots. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Process | SME Exclusion | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team to raise concerns on the procurement of Permanent Recruitment Framework (RM6002) being undertaken by Crown Commercial Service (CCS). The supplier advised that the requirement to provide two examples of 50 placements within the past twelve months for lots 2 and 5 were not SME friendly. | The Authority explained the lot structure had been split by recruitment model (general recruitment or executive search), then by role type. This was to take account of the different supply markets for general recruitment versus executive search and the specialist providers for particular role types. To support the SME agenda the Authority stated that it would accept bids from suppliers who bid as a consortium or as part of the supply chain of another bidder. Once the Framework was live the Authority advised that CCS received bids from 138 agencies, with 110 of these suppliers having SME status. The framework was awarded on the 13th November, 31 out of the successful 51 suppliers have SME status accounting for 60% of suppliers. There are a further 8 SMEs in the supply chains of the framework agencies. Under Lot 2, 12 of the 22 successful suppliers have SME status. Under Lot 5, 2 of the 7 successful suppliers have SME Status. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) | Procurement Strategy | Social Value | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team with regards to a recent Public Relations tender for the BBC. The supplier was concerned that there was no score given for having a social impact and therefore believed it should be investigated as it was not compliant given the Social Value Act. | The contracting authority advised that although the Social Value Act was not specifically scored separately, it had been carefully considered and documented in internal ‘green light’ documents before they published the OJEU notice. The procurement was split into regionally focused lots to make it more accessible to SMEs. It was always the intention to assess a bidder’s demonstrable capability to meet the obligations of the Social Value Act in relation to the services, as part of the evaluation of their final tender responses. Mystery Shopper would recommend that this detail be included in future Invitation To Tender documentation. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Strategy | Evaluation | A supplier contested the decision that they had not submitted a bid for a Crown Commercial Service Framework opportunity - RM3826 - Supply Teachers and Temporary Staff. The supplier had submitted a bid via the Bravo system ahead of the closure date. Five days before the deadline the supplier received emails saying that changes had been made on the system, but they thought these were just clarifications as the email was not marked as action required or urgent. After the deadline had passed, the supplier discovered their bid had not been considered as submitted as they had not made the requested changes and re-submitted their bid as the emails had instructed. | Mystery Shopper met with the Category Team who advised that the 'How to bid' document advises that bidders must regularly check for messages in the eSourcing suite throughout the competition. Before the deadline, all bidders were notified via the eSourcing suite what they needed to do to make sure their bid was submitted. The award had been made, the category team provided contact details to the supplier to give the supplier the opportunity to sub contract on this framework. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | Home Office | Procurement Strategy | VCSE Exclusion | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team concerning a Home Office early engagement notice for Youth Endowment Fund. The notice stated that this opportunity was not suitable for the voluntary, community and social enterprise (VCSE). | The Authority confirmed that the notice had been published incorrectly and despite obtaining some assistance from Crown Commercial Service helpdesk, not all queries raised were addressed and as such the notice remained on Contracts Finder. Communications were issued separately by Home Office to make interested parties aware of the publication error. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | East Sussex Procurement Hub | Procurement Strategy | Award | A supplier raised concerns about an East Sussex Procurement Hub (ESPH) award for an insurance brokerage services contract. They were concerned the winning bidder had submitted a very low tender price. They also felt there was a conflict of interest issue due to there being an incumbent insurance provider to the councils on lot 1 who the winning broker could not enter into a contract with if they wished to gain the brokerage fee. Instead they would need to seek other insurance companies to work with to ensure they received their fee. | ESPH confirmed they had treated the low bid in line with EU Procurement rules on handling abnormally low tenders. A clarification meeting had been held with the supplier which satisfied the evaluation panel that the contract could be fulfilled within the budget provided, references requested showed that the supplier had a track record of providing similar services for these fees. On the conflict of interest issue, ESPH explained they had identified this risk when accessing the framework and therefore the lot 1 procurement exercise would be managed by ESPH rather than the broker. The broker would effectively be treated as an external consultant. The supplier accepted this explanation. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | Enterprise Enfield | Procurement Strategy | Tender Requirement | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team regarding an Invitation to Tender (ITT) for Inspiring Women – Specialist Business Advisor. They provided a copy of the ITT requirements along with their response that listed all the evidence required. The supplier was notified that their bid was unsuccessful due to the omission of documents which rendered the application invalid. | Enterprise Enfield cooperated fully with our investigation. The Authority shared The Procurement Evaluation Summary which provided an overview of the procurement process and also confirmed that Enterprise Enfield had an audit in March 2018 by the European Project Management Unit at the Greater London Authority. This was an on the spot verification where they sampled a check on Enterprise Enfield Procurement of Specialist Business Advisers and the report received by them stated that “Two procurement exercises selected were for the Specialist Business Advisers (Sub OJEU) and Compliance Manager. A separate procurement check record has been completed for both exercises and there were no issues found” | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | Ministry of Defence (MOD) | Procurement Strategy | Tender requirement | A supplier contacted the Mystery Shopper team after reading about the government's ‘Open Standards’ policy. The supplier provided an example whereby a manufacturer is named within a specification, giving no room for an alternative manufacturer to be used. The supplier was concerned that certain products could be supplied with an alternative of equal quality that would match all of the requirements needed. The supplier queried if there was a reason that equal and approved alternatives are not included. | The MOD confirmed that this subcontract opportunity was being let by the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) contractor rather than MOD. The Authority confirmed that it is the contractor’s decision on how it meets the requirement and the contractor holds the risk in meeting this requirement. If MOD influence how the contractor provided the contracted requirement then an element of that risk is imported back into the Department. If the PFI contractor was specifying a certain manufacturer or model this is because they have the maintenance and through life responsibility. Although MOD may be the ultimate customer, the PFI contractor operates its own supply chain to fulfil the contract requirements. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | November | Royal Free London NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding late payment of an invoice by the Royal Free London NHS Trust for a 1 year annual inspection and report. | We contacted the NHS Trust to remind them of the public sector's prompt payment policy and how difficult it can be for small businesses when they are not paid on time. The Trust arranged for the outstanding invoice to be paid. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | December | Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the team regarding outstanding invoices totalling £62,216. | The Authority has now paid all outstanding invoices in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | December | Bridgewater Community Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us following their original invoice being delayed over 688 days. The supplier issued a Statutory Demand for interest and charges and the sum of £53 remained unpaid. | The Trust cooperated fully with this case and advised us that the invoice had not been received until 519 days after the invoice date. Following the correct calculation of interest and charges due, the supplier received payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | December | Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | We were contacted by a supplier who had outstanding invoices totalling £11,175. | The trust settled the account and the supplier was paid in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | December | Medway NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding overdue payments in excess of £65,000. | The supplier has now been paid in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | December | Stockport NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | We were contacted by a supplier regarding overdue payments of £55,000. | The Authority has now paid all overdue invoices in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | December | London Ambulance Service (LAS) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding 15 outstanding invoices totalling £5,300. | The Authority advised that there were delays in the approval process. Once this was resolved, LAS paid all the outstanding undisputed invoices. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | December | Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust | Contract Management | Use of Existing Contracts | A supplier contacted the Public Procurement Review Service raising concerns regarding the provision of Taxi Services under contract reference BTH109. The supplier was concerned that the contract had been extended rather than re-tendered. | The Authority advised that there had been operational issues delaying the issue of the taxi and shuttle service tender, these issues had been addressed and a timetable for delivery was now in place. In regards to the contractual position, they have used all permissible extensions under the original contract and in order to continue the service, they awarded the current provider a further 6 month contract (which is below threshold). This was in accordance with the Trust’s Standing Financial Instructions. The Authority expects to have completed the new tender by the expiry of this 6 month contract. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | December | Department for Digital Culture Media and Sport | Procurement Process | SME Exclusion | A concern was raised regarding Department for Digital Culture Media and Sport (DCMS) Procurement Reference PR008713, 5G Urban and Rural Connected Communities Project Development. The supplier was concerned that the evaluation result appeared to be overly predicated on the fact that they are a small business. The supplier believed they were fully able to provide additional resources as required and were leading a consortium behind them that included large organisations. Furthermore they were seeking clarification on whether the contract had been agreed and when the outcome would be published. | The Authority advised that the procurement was carried out in a fair and transparent manner, and evaluated in accordance with the stated criteria in the ITT. The successful Tenderer had partnered with a SME organisation to deliver the required services. This partnership provided excellent confidence with evidence to support their technical response, skills, and experience across the smart city delivery, commercialisation, and 5G implementation. The Authority also advised that the contract was being finalised with the Framework Provider. Once the contract had been signed the department intended to publish a contract award notice on Contracts Finder. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | December | Kent County Council | Technology/Systems | Technical issue with e-portal | A supplier contacted us regarding an opportunity on the Digital Marketplace for a HeadStart Knowledge Hub Website advertised by Kent County Council as they were concerned the advert was not clear. The buyer wanted the site live by March 2019, but the latest start date was 31st March 2019. One question was difficult to answer as it asked suppliers to confirm they passed the quality threshold without stating what this was. | The Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Commercial Agreement Management Team contacted the Authority and the opportunity was withdrawn for correction. The buyer will be supported by the CCS Team in reviewing the draft requirements before they re-publish. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | December | University College London | Procurement Strategy | Advertisement | A supplier contacted us regarding an Invitation to Tender for a Wi-Fi Refresh of Bloomsbury Campus. The supplier felt that the University College London (UCL) website information contradicted the tender information. The tender stated UCL was not a "contracting authority" or a "body governed by public law" as defined by the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. | The Authority confirmed around three years ago after taking legal advice, UCL declared itself to not be a Contracting Authority by virtue of majority private funding and this was stated on the home page of their website. UCL calculate their private/public funding split every year just after the start of their new financial year in August. When they advertise in OJEU, UCL do so on a voluntary basis and a statement to this effect is provided into every advertisement. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | December | ESPO | Procurement Strategy | Tender Requirement | A supplier contacted the Public Procurement Review Service raising concerns over a tender for the ESPO replacement website - catalogue and frameworks being advertised on the Digital Marketplace under DOS2. The supplier advised that the ESPO stated requirement had software incompatibility issues and although they raised these concerns through clarification, the responses did not address the issue. | The Crown Commercial Service Commercial Agreement Manager discussed the requirement and compatibility issues with the Authority who have subsequently taken the decision to reconsider their requirements for a replacement website. No award will be made as a result of this procurement. The Authority will ensure that the points raised are considered for the future. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | December | Ministry Of Defence (MOD) | Procurement Strategy | Use of Framework | A supplier contacted us about an advertised opportunity with concerns that the advert did not fit with the scope of the Digital Outcomes and Specialist (DOS) Framework contract. | The DOS team reviewed the requirement and found it did not fit within the scope of the the framework and recommended a more suitable framework. The buyer is now considering if DOS is the correct procurement route or if Public Sector Resourcing is a more appropriate framework to suit their needs. The opportunity was withdrawn. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | December | Department of Health and Social Care | Procurement Strategy | Advertisement | A supplier contacted us regarding the selection of flooring manufacturers by one of the Principal Supply Chain Partners to the Department of Health under the ProCure22 framework. The supplier expressed concern that the three current subcontractors of the required flooring contractor were found to be in breach of the Commercial Code and Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the supplier considered these subcontractors should have been excluded from the competition. | Whilst the Department of Health and Social Care does have some influence over the subcontractors used on the ProCure22 framework this only relates to certain tier one subcontractors, which are Primary Supply Chain Members. The Primary Supply Chain Members are required to ‘pass’ a series of checks with the Authority before they can be registered. However, these checks are limited to organisations undertaking certain roles and does not extend to suppliers of flooring products. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2018 | December | Kent County Council | Procurement Strategy | Insufficient Detail | A concern was raised regarding Kent County Council live procurement reference SC18024 – Community Navigation. The supplier was concerned that the TUPE information provided was partial and omitted information from some providers. It was not sufficient to enable suppliers to make an assessment of viability, particularly in the timescale required (some providers omitted, no job titles, no employers pension contribution rates, not always confirmation of amount of time spent on each lot, etc). The supplier requested the tender date be extended to allow time for full TUPE information to be provided so there was an equal playing field for all tenderers. | The Authority advised that following market engagement and publishing a draft version of the specification for comment some months in advance, the tender opportunity was published via the Kent Business Portal. Requests were made and provided in the standard format on TUPE however consideration had to be given to complying with GDPR regulations, regarding the sharing of personal identifiable information about current employees. The information shared contained summarised, anonymised data such as the number of current employees and the salary range of those staff (lowest to highest) according to geographic lots. Further information had been requested and the Authority sought legal advice on how to proceed and supplemental information was provided to all suppliers where individuals had given consent for their data to be shared. The request to extend the tender timetable was declined by the Authority, because the supplemental information did not constitute a substantial addition that it required an extension to the tender timeline. The contract tender evaluation was based 100% on quality. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | Ministry of Justice (MOJ) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for translation services totalling £48,000. | The Authority made full payment and the case was closed. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | Northern Lincolnshire and Goole NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for translation services totalling £2,760.60. | The Authority made full payment and the case was closed. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding payments totalling £1,493.60. | All outstanding invoices have now been paid. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | South Warwickshire NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us with outstanding invoices totalling £7,832.70. | All outstanding payments have now been made by the trust. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | London Ambulance Service (LAS) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices totalling £14,977.38. | The Authority made full payment and the case was closed. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contact us with unpaid invoices of £4,942.17. | The authority has now paid the outstanding amount in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | London Ambulance Service (LAS) | Payment | Payment | A supplier had not been paid by the London Ambulance Service for work carried out at ambulance stations across South London. Six invoices totalling over £41,000 had not been paid and the supplier could not find anyone able to help them. | PPRS contacted London Ambulance and the 6 invoices were paid. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | University of Bristol | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £879. | The University advised that they had put in place a new finance system. The delay occurred because of a discrepancy between the invoice and purchase order. Once resolved, the invoice was paid in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices totalling £19,200. | Once approved the Trust paid all the outstanding invoices. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | Croydon Health Services NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for translation services totalling £1,177.80 | The Authority made full payment and the case was closed. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | West Yorkshire Police | Payment | Payment | A supplier of translation services to West Yorkshire Police had not been paid for their services two months after their invoice was submitted. | The PPRS contacted West Yorkshire reminding them of government's payment policy and they explained that there had been an administrative error which had led to late payment. They apologised to the supplier and made the payment and provided the associated interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | Food Standards Agency | Payment | Payment | A supplier of IT services had not been paid by the Prime Contractor for work on an FSA contract and was not able to contact the right people to help with payment being made. | The Public Procurement Review Service made FSA and Prime Contractor aware of the situation, reminded them of the payment obligations and government's SME agenda. The outstanding invoices were paid. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | Central Bedfordshire Council | Procurement Process | Accreditation | The PPRS team received a complaint regarding a Central Bedfordshire Council procurement - Lot 1 of CCS RM3731 Framework - Insurance Services II (Proc Ref CBC- 0928-T-KH). The supplier was concerned that the Invitation To Tender documentation limited the procurement exercise to A+ rated insurers. | The Council advised that the procurement is being run under an open procedure and as such is not governed by the CCS RM3731 Framework. This decision was already taken to open up competition as it was appreciated that not all potential insurers are listed on the current framework. The security level (which is part of insurance) was requested in the ITT is a minimum of A-. The financial security of an insurer is fundamental to the security of the placement of long tail liability policies and the Council confirmed that this was not an attempt to limit competition based on anything other than the financial security of an insurer and their ability to pay claims. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | Southwark Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted us regarding an opportunity advertised on the Digital Marketplace for "Discovery on housing repairs and defining a common service pattern" advertised by Southwark Council. Shortlisting had been completed and the supplier was excluded. The supplier felt that the scoring and evaluation had not been conducted fairly. | The Crown Commercial Service Commercial Agreement team referred this matter to the buyer. The overall view was that the marking of the criteria and responses was appropriate but in some cases the approach could have been made clearer. The final score seemed reasonable based on the supplier’s responses on demonstrating evidence of designing services but not specifically addressing the range of skills and confidence. The buyer is responsible for fairly assessing the responses as given, along with the other supplier responses. The complaint was not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | Merton London Borough Council | Procurement Process | Feedback | A supplier contacted us regarding a Lot ‘leadership & management apprenticeships’ from London Borough of Merton, under a framework operated by ESPO. The supplier had requested feedback but had received no response. | The authority provided detailed feedback and the supplier was satisfied with the content. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | NHS Business Services Authority | Procurement Process | Scoring | A supplier raised concerns about an NHS Business Services Authority (NHS BSA) contract for IT IS Network Service Telephony on the CCS framework RM1045. The supplier questioned whether a procurement could be considered fair if mistakes had been made regarding scoring at the evaluation stage resulting in three standstill periods. | PPRS found that NHS BSA had reviewed the scoring process and ensured there was a standstill period after scoring revisions were made. They also commissioned an independent organisation to conduct the evaluation following the complaint. The PPRS recommended that for future evaluations NHS BSA consider implementing quality gates once evaluation is finalised to ensure the methodology has been applied correctly. The NHS BSA has confirmed it is implementing this into its standard processes and has also appointed specialist Project Accountants who will be specifically supporting procurement activity going forward. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | Hillingdon Council | Procurement Strategy | Financial Requirement | A supplier raised a concern over an unlimited liability for insurance on the London Borough of Hillingdon: CDM Support Services for Low and Medium Size Projects View Full Contract Reference TKR-20181127-OJ-13621938. | The contracting authority advised that they had stipulated values on the Invitation To Tender for the insurance level required. The PPRS team shared the detail of the level of insurance with the supplier as clarification of the requirement. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | Oxfordshire County Council | Procurement Strategy | Clarification | A supplier contacted PPRS with regards to Oxfordshire County Council - Adults Advocacy Service Tender - Lot 2. The Supplier raised concerns regarding specification extract "The Individual Case Advocacy Services described below are required to be provided by the Service Provider as part of the Independent Care Act Advocacy Services but at no additional cost to the Council." The supplier sought reassurance that the Council understood that this element of the service would be costed by providers from the specific contract funding in exactly the same way as other elements of the tender requirement. | The Authority responded promptly stating that they understood and expected the costing of this service to be included in the Price Schedule and confirmed that they would publish the response via their Portal for all potential suppliers to view. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | Braintree District Council | Procurement Strategy | Financial Requirement | A supplier complained about a framework run by Braintree Council for Website Design and Associated Services because they felt the turnover requirements for lots excluded SMEs. They also felt the fact the number of suppliers per lot was restricted, affected SME participation and value for money for other authorities using the framework. | Braintree explained the turnover requirements were in line with the public procurement rules and that they used several financial assessments, not just turnover to evaluate supplier capability. PPRS consider that Braintree had complied with the procurement rules and had increased the number of suppliers allowed per lot. However, in line with government's commitment to helping SMEs better access to public procurement opportunities, PPRS recommended that Braintree Council ensure in future that there is significant pre-market engagement, this is to ensure the number of potential suppliers in the market is understood. PPRS also recommends that Braintree Council considers via peer review and through consultation with Authorities using the framework, whether there could be another potential increase in the number of suppliers per lot to ensure it is competitive and therefore provides value for money. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | NHS Leadership Academy | Procurement Strategy | SME Exclusion | A concern was raised by a supplier in relation to the levels of insurance set within the Invitation to Tender (ITT) for the Provision of a Faculty Framework being run by NHS Leadership Academy. The supplier felt that the requirement was contrary to PPN 02/13 and that a one size fits all approach had been used. | The authority provided a thorough response explaining the consideration given to insurances during the design process for the development of the tender which complies with the Public Contracts Regulations. They also advised that their approach had been developed with a view to be inclusive and that the Academy was seeking to work with all sizes and types of suppliers as part of this Framework. Clear examples of all types of suppliers that were welcome to tender was provided in the ITT. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust | Procurement Strategy | Tender Requirement | A supplier raised concerns over a requirement being too generic on Greater Manchester Mental Health Primary Care Psychological Therapies - e-CBT Service - Waiting List Initiative procurement under the DOS3 framework. | The Digital Commercial Agreements Specialist contacted the Authority to explain the appropriateness of the DOS3 framework for digital outcomes and specialist requirements, as well as the benefits to writing a clear and concise requirement. The buyer was made aware of the challenges of listing too vague or generic skills and experience: 1) both for the buyer achieving value for money and limiting their competition, 2) the difficulty for suppliers to understand the requirement and apply to the opportunity. The buyer insisted they had used the right platform for their requirement and that they were comfortable with the outcome. The buyer proceeded with the procurement. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | Kent County Council | Procurement Strategy | Tender Requirement | A supplier raised concerns over the requirement on Kent County Council Headstart Kent Knowledge Hub Website procurement under the DOS3 framework. | The Digital Commercial Agreements Specialist contacted the Authority who explained that the buyer was new to DOS and had limited experience on how to go about drafting their requirement. Advice and guidance were provided to the buyer for future procurements. The buyer insisted they had been very transparent about combining the shortlisting and further evaluation stage via the link provided. Although this is not compliant with DOS guidelines, the buyer did not believe that this approach disadvantaged any suppliers in any way and would take the risk of proceeding with the requirement. The buyer acknowledged how to draft compliant requirements for DOS. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | HM Revenue & Customs | Procurement Strategy | Evaluation | A supplier raised concerns about an HMRC Hard Facilities Management Services contract on the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) RM 3830 Framework. They felt the information provided in the tender documentation and clarification responses had been vague and limited, this made it difficult to accurately price the required work. The supplier wanted assurance that the evaluation process was thorough and sufficiently allowed for cost estimates. | The CCS Category team met with HMRC and raised the concerns. HMRC were confident with the development and management of the procurement. The CCS category team offered to meet with the supplier to discuss the framework and evaluation further and hear any concerns. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | Eastleigh Borough Council | Procurement Strategy | Financial Requirement | A supplier raised concerns about a procurement by Eastleigh Council for architectural services. They were unhappy with the level of indemnity insurance which they felt would prevent SMEs applying. The supplier also queried the evaluation weighting being in favour of price and only 20% on quality when the main contract was about design. | The Council explained that the supplier was talking about the feasibility scheme, which could become a larger scheme and that there would be selection via formal interview and assessment which would further cover the quality elements of the procurement. PPRS reminded the Council of the advice set out in PPN 02/13 about the range of ways to assess capability. PPRS recommended that for future procurements the Council consider financial assessment on a case by case basis and do not set blanket financial requirements that could inadvertently affect SMEs. PPRS explained this to the supplier; the supplier did not formally respond after receiving this information. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | January | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Strategy | Lotting and financial requirements | Seven suppliers raised issues about the Management Consultancy Framework 2. They all felt it favoured larger businesses and that the lotting structure prevented SMEs from participating. In particular, they felt the minimum values for previous work were set too high for SMEs and the fact the work had to have been completed in the past 18 months also favoured larger businesses. Four of the suppliers were unhappy with responses to clarification questions raised and one supplier felt the scoring on quality and price in lot 1 was not appropriate for a large framework. Six suppliers also felt that SMEs had not been listened to when establishing the framework. | Public Procurement Review Service met with the Crown Commercial Service Category Team and the SME Crown Representative to discuss the issues raised. CCS stressed there had been extensive consultation with contracting authority customers and the market, both with large firms and SMEs. The lots in size and scope reflected the range of consultancy services needed from niche engagements to large complex transformations, Lot 1 was aimed at all businesses. CCS confirmed it had also used the new simplified bid pack to help SMEs and had clearly answered questions raised at clarification. On the issue of experience, specifically minimum contract values and the 18 month timescale, CCS said the 18 month timeframe was to ensure relevance of capability. They also stressed they had reduced the threshold on lot 2 following engagement with the SME community. PPRS recognised CCS had tried to be consider all suppliers, but felt there was scope to do more. PPRS recommended there was greater SME engagement for future so SMEs could help shape future strategy. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | February | North Cumbria University Hospital NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices totalling £29,986. | The Authority made full payment and the case was closed. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | February | Department for Education (DfE) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us as they were owed over £400,000 for a DfE contract via the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Tech Products 2 framework. Despite DfE authorising payments and keeping in contact with the supplier, the payment had not been made. It was 90 days overdue and the supplier felt the documentation had been lost in the Shared Services payment system. | DfE made this case a priority, ensured the payment was authorised and the supplier was paid as quickly as possible. DfE confirmed this was a Shared Services financial system error and that the Shared Services Team were aware of what had happened. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | February | London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £7,265. | The Trust paid the invoice in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | February | Heart of England NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding a number of outstanding invoices totalling £23,024. | The Trust made payment and is working with the supplier to ensure nothing is delayed in the future. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | February | North West Anglia Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices totalling £10,274. | The Trust paid all the overdue undisputed invoices. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | February | City Hospitals Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices totalling £90,174. | The Trust paid all the overdue undisputed invoices. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | February | East Suffolk and North Essex NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices totalling £25,108. | The Trust paid all the overdue undisputed invoices. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | February | Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding a number of outstanding invoices totalling £45,319. | Copy Invoices were sent to the Trust and payment was made for all undisputed invoices. The Trust is working directly with the supplier to improve the process in the future. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | February | Croydon Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £200. | The Council paid the invoice along with £41 late payment interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | February | Herefordshire County Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier providing adult education services to the Council had not been paid for an invoice and this was now more than 30 days late. The supplier had been promised an update on the situation but had not heard again, so contacted us for help. | The Council contacted the supplier and paid the late invoice. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | February | Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) | Procurement Process | Financial Requirement | A supplier contacted us regarding an opportunity advertised by the FCA for Cloud and Technology Resourcing and Outcomes Framework. The supplier considered that the turnover test for Lot 1 would prevent SMEs being able to compete. | The FCA IT department is preparing to exit its data centre in 2022 and they are aware of a very high upcoming demand for certain professional services over the next 4 years. The Authority advised that this is a multi-lot framework for technology professional services, which aimed to award a small number of suppliers for one or more of three Lots. The total maximum value of the procurement is £150m over 4 years. Lot 1 – Design, Build and Run is the largest Lot with a maximum value of £100m. The awarded partners must be able to provide a high number of engineers, architects and other technical specialists, able to work both onsite or offshore. FCA have set minimum revenue thresholds, based on an average estimated project size for each Lot. For Lot 1, £3.6m was the lowest value in the range. The FCA have consciously lowered this value as much as possible to enable as many suppliers to participate. They hosted an introductory supplier engagement day in November 2018, where they explained to organisations that partnership arrangements will also be allowed. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | February | Portsmouth City Council | Procurement Process | Scoring | A supplier raised concerns about a Portsmouth City Council procurement for Adult Mental Health Supported Living Services (Ref P00003023). The supplier felt that the evaluation process had not been clearly communicated to bidders and was concerned that the actual evaluation process was different to what had been published in the tender documentation. The supplier queried the fact that bidders had been set into two groups following the first stage of evaluation and that it was possible for scores to change at the second stage of evaluation. | This was a fully compliant procurement. Portsmouth City Council extended the standstill period whilst dealing with the issue (even though this was a procurement under the light touch regime). The Authority explained the process; there was the bid evaluation and then a site visit to verify bid content, if there were issues the scores could be lowered, this meant other bidders who had scored slightly lower on bids could then potentially have a site visit. The supplier was happy with the clarification. PPRS recommended for future that the Authority ensures the wording explaining the evaluation process is clear and to ensure suppliers understand how scoring can be adjusted if a site visit does not verify the information provided in initial bids. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | February | Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) | Procurement Process | Communication | A supplier raised concerns regarding the tender evaluation and award on a procurement undertaken by DEFRA, ITT 4906 Research on improving access to Air Quality Data and Information. | DEFRA explained on 28 November, the DEFRA buyer sent a message on Bravo to say “We are in the process of finalising your evaluation scores, however due to annual leave commitments this process has been delayed.” This wording was misleading as scores and comments had been finalised and scores entered into Bravo. However, the final detailed comments, agreed and recorded at the consensus meeting, were still being uploaded into Bravo and this was delayed by high workload pressures and annual leave. The evaluation and award has been carried out in an open, fair and transparent manner. DEFRA promptly provided a full explanation and apologised for the wrong message being issued. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | February | Ministry of Defence (MOD) | Procurement Process | Feedback | A supplier raised a concern regarding lack of feedback from the MOD on a Digital Outcomes and Specialists (DOS) procurement. | The MOD acknowledged that there had been a delay in issuing feedback due to a shortage of resources in the project team and other work areas had to be prioritised. PPRS recommended that suppliers are notified of potential delays and kept informed to avoid concerns being raised. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | February | Ministry of Defence (MOD) | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier contacted us regarding the Royal Air Force (RAF) providing equestrian high visibility products, via the British Horse Society Trade Stands. They were of the opinion that no other equestrian manufacturing company was given the opportunity to tender to manufacture these products for the RAF. | At the outset of these requirements, the teams involved were advised that given the relatively low level of annual expenditure, contract action by MOD commercial staff was not required and that ‘Local Procurement’ procedures were appropriate. As such, they carried out their own on-line market testing and value for money exercises and then separately selected the same supplier. MOD accept that no tendering process was offered in subsequent years. With recent improvements to MOD procurement processes and procedures, and the improved education of non-commercial staff; this procurement method would no longer be undertaken in this manner. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | February | Clarion Housing | Procurement Strategy | Financial Requirement | A supplier contacted us regarding an opportunity to join the Authority’s Dynamic Purchasing System - Development 2019 Lot No. 1. The issue focused on the requirement for bidders need to provide a credit reference that would entail registering for an annual membership at a cost of £195. Although the supplier provided their accounts as an alternative they were advised that they will not be considered and that they must have a credit report. | Due to technical issues with their procurement platform the Authority confirmed that incorrect information had been released in the OJEU notice. Clarion Housing confirmed they had made amendments to the Selection Questionnaire process because it was incorrect and not compliant with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. The Authority confirmed that bidders were requested to upload a credit reference but if they are unable to provide this or they feel their credit reference does not reflect current position the Authority would review the bidder’s accounts using a template they had provided. Once identified, amendments were issued via a corrigendum, and the correct information uploaded. Clarion also confirmed that all correspondence rights will only be managed by the Group’s procurement manager for this project to ensure no similar issues occur. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | March | Hull & East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices totalling £91,800. | The Trust paid all the overdue undisputed invoices. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | March | London Ambulance Service (LAS) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices totalling £1,900. | LAS advised the supplier of their new process to enable payment to be made. Public Procurement Review Service reminded LAS of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. LAS paid the invoices and late interest charges in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | March | Barnet Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier entered into a building contract with the London Borough of Lambeth to construct three new houses and convert an existing property into six flats. The works were completed and handed over in January 2017. The final account was agreed and signed-off by all parties in November 2017. A partial payment was made two months later, a balance of £30,000 was left unpaid due to the need for an internal sign-off within Lambeth. The Council were also required to make a payment of £31,600, which was held as retention for a period of 1 year. As such, a total of £61,360.00 was outstanding to the supplier. | The Council reviewed the invoices that the supplier had submitted and worked to resolve the matter as quickly as possible. Internal sign-off was approved and full payment of £61,360.00 was subsequently issued to the supplier. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | March | London Ambulance Service (LAS) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices totalling £15,000. | LAS paid all the outstanding and undisputed invoices. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | March | Sovereign Housing Association | Procurement Process | Feedback | A supplier contacted us regarding a Supplier Selection Questionnaire (SSQ) for the project “Planned Gas Boiler and Heating Installations.” The supplier raised that the amount of information required for specific questions was excessive. The supplier felt that they had produced a relevant and high scoring submission, this subsequently failed to progress past the SSQ stage as it was scored low across the range of questions. The supplier has received very limited feedback regarding their submission and despite requesting more meaningful feedback this was refused. | The contract value for Heating Installations is cira £64m over the 5+5 years term. Sovereign confirmed it had used the standard Crown Commercial Services Templates as a basis for the SSQ. Sovereign had provided an overall score compared to the highest score, although the Authority is not legally obligated to provide feedback at SSQ stage . After the Authority had independently reviewed this tender they identified that more information could have been given to the unsuccessful bidders, this will be developed in the future. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | March | Bury Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier raised concerns around irregularities in the formal tendering processes for provision of Neighbourhood Support Housing Services. The process to be followed has been defined as the Open Procedure as detailed in the Contract Notice 2018/S 213-488582. The supplier was concerned that the Invitation to Tender describes a process on due diligence. They were concerned that the addition of this stage is in conflict with the Open Procedure as described in the Public Contracts Regulations. | The Council confirmed that the reference to due diligence was related to the process of confirming that the highest scoring tenderer was fully able to meet the requirements of the contract. In accordance with the Open Procedure, any interested economic operator was able to submit a tender in response to the contract notice. All economic operators were treated equally, with tenders evaluated in accordance with the stated evaluation criteria. Following evaluation of tenders, due diligence was conducted on the highest scoring tender only, this was to verify compliance with selection criteria and to ensure that no contract is awarded to a tenderer that does not meet the selection criteria as set out, in accordance with Provision 56.3 of The Public Contracts Regulations 2015. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | March | Kent County Council | Procurement Process | Tender Process | A supplier raised concerns about a Kent Community Housing Tender. In particular they felt there was not enough information provided about the Transfer of Undertakings Protection of Employment (TUPE) provisions to help with costing the bid, they had not seen the terms and conditions for the contract and felt there was a conflict of interest issue regarding one of Kent's partners for the procurement. | The Contracting Authority explained that TUPE information had been available on the release of the Invitation to Tender. At clarification, bidders had requested additional information on TUPE and this was collected from incumbent suppliers. The updated information was shared with bidders who had submitted a confidentiality agreement. Kent recognised that two organisations leading the procurement on behalf of Kent Council were strategic suppliers and to ensure there were no conflict of interest issues, they were both prohibited from bidding for the service. No recommendations were made by PPRS. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | March | Care Quality Commission (CQC) | Procurement Strategy | Financial Assessment | A supplier contacted us to question why the CQC Quality Improvement Programme was using scoring from Dunn & Bradstreet (D&B) to assess financial standing and not considering alternative financial statements. | CQC advised that they had requested a copy of the supplier’s last two-year accounts which were evaluated along with the D&B report. The credit score derived from both examination of the supplier’s accounts and the D&B assessment was below the required credit score and resulted in their elimination from the procurement process at that point. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | March | Marine Management Organisation | Procurement Strategy | Financial Assessment | A supplier raised concerns regarding financial stability checks regarding companies/suppliers providing Inshore-Vessel Monitoring Systems (I-VMS) products to UK fishing vessels in English waters on behalf of Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA) Marine Management Organisation. | DEFRA provided a thorough response confirming that in the first instance of any procurement financial checks are carried out. On this occasion the procurement has not yet taken place but DEFRA provided reassurance that when it does said checks and processes will take place to understand any commercial risks associated with potential suppliers. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | March | Defence Infrastructure Organisation (DIO) | Procurement Strategy | Advertisement | A supplier contacted us regarding the DIO Future Defence Infrastructure Services (FDIS) programme. The supplier was concerned that this contract was awarded without a competition and is contrary to OJEU regulations. | DIO confirmed that they have not awarded any contract for this work. DIO published a Voluntary Ex-Ante Notice (transparency notice) and having received feedback from the market on this, they are currently putting together a plan. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | March | Northern Lincolnshire and Goole NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for translation services totalling £711. | The Authority made full payment and the case was closed. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | March | London Ambulance Service (LAS) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices totalling £33,000. | The Authority made full payment and the case was closed. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | March | Durham County Council | Procurement Process | Not set | A supplier raised concerns regarding a contract awarded by Durham County Council on 01/03/2019, ‘Framework Agreement for the Provision of Domiciliary Care Services’. They were concerned that their bids were disadvantaged as a result of not being currently based in the locality. In the outcome notification letters the supplier noted similarities in the themes of the successful responses across all of the Lots, despite different providers being successful. | The Council confirmed that this contract covered support for vulnerable users across a wide geographical area and therefore the opportunity was split into geographical lots. The procurement generated more interest than was expected. Given the number of bidders the Council standardised the feedback letters provided to bidders. Whilst suppliers could submit for multiple Lots the feedback provided included their overall combined feedback score along with their ranking compared against the successful providers. In some cases this resulted in the duplication of feedback where some providers won 5 Lots. The feedback was in accordance with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. The Council awarded to 10 providers, 20% have a national presence. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | March | St Helens & Knowsley Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices totalling £445. | The Authority made full payment and the case was closed. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | March | Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) | Procurement Strategy | Tender Requirement | A supplier raised concerns over a live procurement being run by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) for a contract for the provision of Rational Dynamic Object Oriented Requirements System (DOORS) Management Software, which is a requirement management system. The supplier advised that alternative software could adequately meet the requirement. | PPRS contacted MCA who responded promptly and sought further technical advice and as a result the tender was withdrawn. MCA advised that they would review their requirements to ensure that it covers equivalents. A new tender will be openly advertised on Contracts Finder with reasonable time frames for all suppliers to submit bids. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | March | NHS Southend Clinical Commissioning Group | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £645. | NHS Southend Clinical Commissioning Group paid the invoice in full. PPRS reminded the Trust of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | March | Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us concerning a late payment that was beyond 30 days late, breaching Government's payment policy. | PPRS reminded the Trust of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are undisputed. Interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The payment was made in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | March | Northern Lincolnshire and Goole NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices totalling £13,000. | The Authority made full payment and the case was closed. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | March | University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices totalling £59,000. | PPRS reminded the Trust of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The Trust made full payment for invoices received. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | April | East Suffolk and North Essex NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding 4 invoices that remained outstanding totalling £81,000. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Trust of their obligations. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations (2015), public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The Trust advised that one invoice had a pricing query but paid the remaining outstanding invoices. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | April | Bank of England | Procurement Strategy | Tender Requirement | A supplier raised concerns over the RTGS (Real Time Gross Settlement) Renewal Tender procurement by the Bank of England. They felt that the contract duration was exceptionally long and that the minimum yearly turnover threshold excluded not only Small & Medium Enterprises but United Kingdom technology PLCs. Reassurance was sought that consideration had been given to all sizes of suppliers to ensure an open, fair and transparent process had been followed. | The Bank of England provided a prompt and thorough response confirming the minimum turnover threshold was in line with the Public Contracts Regulations (2015), and in particular, Regulation 58.9. As set out in section II.2.7 of the Bank’s Contract Notice, the proposed duration of the contract is for an initial term of 84 months (7 years), with 3 options to extend by up to 36 months (3 years) for each extension. Given the extent and complexity of the build, the Bank envisaged that the initial build stage will take a minimum of 5 years. To ensure continuity of service, the Bank was also seeking a stability period of a minimum of one year prior to full acceptance. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | April | Milton Keynes Hospital NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice to Milton Keynes University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust for £33,400. | The supplier received payment. Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Trust of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | April | University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding a number of outstanding invoices totalling £10,400k with the University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Trust of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The Trust had not received some of the outstanding invoices and we asked the supplier to resubmit these. Payment was made for the remaining invoices. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | April | Ministry of Defence (MOD) | Procurement Process | Tender Process | A supplier contacted PPRS having missed the Expression of Interest (EOI) deadline for an MOD procurement on Defence Contracts online. As the procurement process was delayed, the supplier asked why more expressions of interest could not be considered now. | MOD explained that the supplier had missed the EOI deadline by 6 weeks and that the procurement had started to progress with suppliers that had met the deadline. They confirmed the delay was due to the tendered solutions being trialled. The procurement rules would have been breached if one supplier was allowed to join the process having missed the published deadline. The supplier was content with the explanation. The complaint was not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | April | Barnet Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £481. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Council of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The Council paid the invoice and late payment interest in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | April | London Ambulance Service (LAS) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices totalling over £7,000. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded LAS of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. LAS paid the outstanding invoices. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | May | Bristol Community Health Community Interest Company (CIC) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding 4 invoices totalling £2,300. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded the CIC of their obligations: where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The Trust paid the outstanding invoices. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | May | University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding 4 invoices totalling £10,500. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Trust of their obligations: where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The Trust advised us that 3 invoices had Proof of Delivery queries. We recommended the supplier contact the Trusts Accounts Payable provider for resolution. The remaining invoice was paid. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | May | York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices totalling £10,900. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Trust of their obligations: where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The Trust paid the outstanding invoices they had received and requested copies for the remaining ones outstanding. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | May | Royal Papworth Hospital NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding payment for £792. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Hospital of their obligations: where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The invoice was not receipted correctly, once resolved it was paid in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | May | Central Housing Investment Consortium | Procurement Strategy | Establishment of framework | PPRS was contacted by a supplier regarding a contract notice advertised by CHIC for Plumbing, Electrical & General Building Goods & Materials Suppliers. The supplier was concerned that the Framework duration was set at 8 years. | CHIC stated that the total Framework Agreement term of 8 years (including extensions) would allow for the supply of materials to be effective and efficient. In most cases the Framework user and supplier would need integrated information technology systems set at a strategic level. This will require significant time and resources (including financial expenditure by way of capital and revenue investment) for both the framework user and supplier to implement integrated systems effectively and to develop comprehensive supply catalogues. The return on the investment to achieve this cannot be recovered in a short term framework and call off contract. The Authority further confirmed that the procurement was undertaken through the OJEU Open Procedure, allowing all interested parties to raise clarification questions. The Authority confirmed that they had not received any challenges regarding the Term of the contract. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | May | York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding 5 overdue invoices totalling £1,200. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Hospital of their obligations: where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. All the outstanding invoices were paid in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | May | Sutton Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier was unhappy with the final score they received in a tender evaluation for a procurement by Sutton Council for a new customer platform. This was lower than they had anticipated and did not match the outcome of the evaluation meeting they had attended. The supplier believed that a member of the evaluation panel had not seemed to fully understand the IT product being discussed and the score awarded reflected this. | Sutton Council confirmed the evaluation panel included members of their ICT team and system users, all of which possessed the technical expertise necessary to evaluate the full scope of the bids for this procurement. Due to the challenge, the council extended the standstill period, reviewed the scoring and the process and concluded that they had complied with EU procurement rules. The Council maintained the evaluation and scoring of all the bids was in accordance with the evaluation criteria, including the marking matrix that was published at the start of the procurement process. This included the methodology for scoring the price element of bids. The Public Procurement Review Service recommended that Sutton Council reviews documentation for future procurements to ensure it is clear to suppliers how the process and scoring at shortlisting and evaluation will happen. The Authority accepted the recommendation. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | May | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Strategy | Establishment of framework | A supplier contacted us regarding the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) framework opportunity for Non Clinical Temporary and Fixed Term Staff. The supplier was concerned that the pass/fail evaluation regarding minimum hours supplied over a 12 month period within the past 3 years discriminates against SMEs. | CCS confirmed that the technical and professional selection criteria in this competition were compliant with Public Contracts Regulations 2015. The thresholds were calculated using supply data taken from the existing framework and had been set to ensure that successful suppliers have the capacity to deliver the demand requirements of each Lot within this framework. In terms of SME participation, the supplier profile of the existing framework (RM971) currently consists of 81% SMEs and this replacement framework should continue to support the use of SMEs. CCS confirmed that if a supplier was unable to demonstrate the criteria on their own, the supplier would be able to consider bidding as part of a consortium or acting as a subcontractor. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | May | Croydon Health Services NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £479. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Trust of their obligations: where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The invoice was paid in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | May | North Bristol NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding 7 invoices totalling £4,500. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Trust of their obligations: where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. One invoice had a pricing enquiry and will be resolved directly with the supplier, the remaining outstanding invoices were paid. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | June | Walsall Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | Public Procurement Review Service was contacted by a supplier regarding Walsall Council's Energy Bureau and Brokerage. The supplier was dissatisfied with the procurement process, specifically they believed that there had been an error in the evaluation criteria and that the outcome letter failed to comply with Regulation 86 of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. They stated that the Council had failed to disclose the evaluation criteria and had altered the criteria for the award of the contract set out in the OJEU contract notice. | Public Procurement Review Service could not see that there had been a breach of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 but offered the Council recommendations to improve their procurement practices in the future. Walsall Council have revised their procurement processes by reminding staff of the need to fully check the Invitation to Tender documents prior to publication – including a review of their internal checking and quality assurance processes. The Council are also reviewing their Intention to Award letter templates in line with best practice from other Councils to allow bidders to improve their tender submissions for future projects, rather than meeting the minimum requirement of the Regulations. PPRS will follow up with the Authority to ensure our recommendations are being followed. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | June | Southwark Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier raised a concern over an outstanding payment from Southwark Borough Council. | The Council advised that Independent social workers needed to register on their PAYE system in order for their invoices to be processed. In this instance the authority had advised the supplier to this effect and offered further assistance to remedy the issue. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | June | Bridgewater Community Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices totalling £4,403. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Trust of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. All the outstanding invoices were paid in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | June | Bradford Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding late payment interest totalling £42. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded Bradford Council of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The Council paid the outstanding amount in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | June | North East London NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding two outstanding invoices totalling £1,986. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded North East London NHS Foundation Trust of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The Trust paid one invoice and requested that the Supplier resubmit the last invoice outstanding, as the invoice had quoted the wrong Purchase Order number. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | June | Merton London Borough Council | Procurement Strategy | Financial Requirement | A supplier contacted us regarding procurement ref DN414726 for the provision of training for London Borough of Merton. The supplier was concerned that the procurement did not specify the contract value and felt that the requirement for £5 million Professional Indemnity Insurance could discourage SMEs from applying. | The Council advised us that they do not know the contract value as this was the first time they had run this course and that is why they decided to use a Request for Quotation (RFQ) for suppliers to submit quotes. The Council used the standard default of £5m for the Professional Indemnity Insurance forms, as this forms part of their standard Terms & Conditions and they were not prepared to revise this. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | June | Northern Lincolnshire and Goole NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | Two suppliers contacted us about late payment by Northern Lincolnshire and Goole NHS Foundation Trust. | Public Procurement Review Service contacted the Trust and they arranged for the payments to be made. The Trust said it was aware of Government's 30 day payment terms. Public Procurement Review Service reminded them of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | June | NHS Property Services | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding a large number of outstanding invoices. The debt owed by NHS Property Services was currently £87,062 of which £48,336 is over 120 days overdue and £22,198 is between 90 and 120 days overdue. There were no queries on any of the invoices and the situation was making it virtually untenable for them to continue to supply. | NHS Property Service advised us that they have liaised with the supplier to obtain a full statement of account. Following our involvement they paid £10,025 and was working to get the correct Purchase Orders raised to make further payment. Public Procurement Review Service reminded them of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | June | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Process | Scoring | A supplier contacted Public Procurement Review Service with concerns about the scoring of their tender in a mini competition on CCS Framework RM3800 - Utility Management Software. The supplier felt the scoring did not match what had been said at the presentation and they did not understand the scores that had been applied. The supplier also felt that some questions asked at the meeting by the panel had shown a lack of understanding about the product and service, and that this had led to lower scores being given. | Public Procurement Review Service met with the CCS category team who explained that another supplier had performed better at evaluation but that due to the challenge from the supplier, the final stage of the process had been re-run with a new panel. This led to the same result and CCS was confident that it had been a fair process. A new scoring system had been used but this had been communicated to bidders in advance and it was stressed that members of the evaluation panel were fully able to assess the technical aspects of the bids. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | June | Royal Bournemouth and Christchurch Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding two outstanding invoices totalling £593. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded Royal Bournemouth and Christchurch Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. Both invoices were paid in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | June | NHS Stockport Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) | Payment | Payment | A small supplier contacted PPRS regarding late payment by NHS Stockport Clinical Commissioning Group. | Public Procurement Review Service contacted NHS Stockport CCG about the late payment and payment was made to the supplier. PPRS also reminded the Authority of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | June | London Ambulance Service (LAS) | Payment | Payment | Two suppliers contacted PPRS regarding late payment for services by London Ambulance Service. Both suppliers had been told there was a procurement review taking place which had led to the payments not being approved. The suppliers were having difficulty communicating with London Ambulance. | Public Procurement Review Service held a meeting with London Ambulance Service and explained the suppliers' concerns. London Ambulance explained they were changing their procurement processes, that they had communicated this to existing suppliers but acknowledged that there were payments being approved late as a result. PPRS stressed that all undisputed invoices should be paid within 30 days even if a review is taking place. London Ambulance arranged for outstanding payments to the two suppliers to be paid. PPRS recommended that going forward, the new processes should be made clear to all existing and potential suppliers and there should be key contacts in procurement that suppliers could contact with any questions or concerns. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | July | Torbay Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding outstanding invoices totalling £4,883. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded Torbay Council Public sector buyers must pay prime contractors (Tier 1 suppliers) within 30 days and must ensure that their prime contractor includes equivalent 30 day payment terms in any subcontracts through the supply chain. They were also reminded of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. Torbay Council paid the outstanding invoices in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | July | York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | York Teaching Hospital placed an advert on Contracts Finder for Print Related Services. The advert stated that the notice was published on 27 June 2019 but also closed on the same date and the status now shows as Awarded. | The Hospital advised that this call-off contract was awarded using one of the Crescent Purchasing Consortium (CPC) frameworks and as such was not published as an opportunity. The complaint was not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | July | University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding two outstanding invoices totalling £9,470.32. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier received part payment and the trust is now working directly with the supplier to resolve. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | July | Staffordshire Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) | Procurement Strategy | Establishment of framework | PPRS was contacted by a supplier regarding the purchase of Festo (German) equipment for the South Staffordshire College Rodbaston Campus. The supplier had not been able to find this opportunity advertised. | The College confirmed that in 2016 a new engineering centre was developed at a cost of £282k excl. VAT. Due to the specialist nature of the equipment and the timescales, the College’s Buying Club concluded that single supplier purchasing was the only procurement option available to the College. In March 2019 a further order was placed for the purchase of supporting equipment to enhance the facilities. The equipment is considered complex and specialist and required the continuity of the existing supplier. The college is looking to further expand the provision with further investment expected in the next 6 months. This investment will be into more general equipment and will be open to other providers to tender. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | July | Enfield Council | Procurement Process | Advertisement | PPRS was contacted by a supplier regarding a Contracts Finder Opportunity for Mobile Endpoint Security placed by Enfield Council. The supplier raised concerns that this opportunity had been posted on 5 July, with a closing date of 27 July, although the supplier was advised by the Authority that this opportunity had already been awarded. | Enfield Council confirmed that they had made a direct award for this opportunity and the advertisement was placed in error. PPRS recommended that they update the advert to ensure that this was accurately reflected. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | July | North Somerset Council | Procurement Process | Award | PPRS was contacted by a supplier regarding a procurement for an Adult Social Care training programme awarded by North Somerset Council. The supplier was concerned to discover that the contract was awarded to a supplier which they believed was also an advertised ‘partner’ of North Somerset Council. | The Council confirmed to us that, in excess of the requirements of their corporate standing orders, the commissioning team ran this as an open tender to allow maximum access for providers and achieve best value for money. The opportunity was advertised via The Supplying (the South West portal) and Contracts Finder. Submissions were received electronically and evaluated on the cost and quality. Of the 10 submissions received, 3 passed all pass/fail elements, of which the winning supplier came top in their combined quality/cost score. The commissioning team were aware of the winning supplier’s link to the perceived ‘partner’ supplier however this was not considered a concern, nor a reason to exclude them. The Council acknowledged that the way the winning supplier referred to the Council as a ‘partner’ on their website could be misleading and PPRS recommended that the Council approach the supplier to review this to avoid future misunderstandings. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | July | University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding a number of outstanding invoices totalling £105,000. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The Trust made a payment of £83k for the invoices that were older than 30 days. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | July | Stockport NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding four outstanding invoices totalling £14,000. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded Stockport NHS Foundation Trust of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The Trust advised that one invoice was disputed but made payment for two invoices and will work to resolve the fourth for approval. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | July | South Yorkshire Fire & Rescue Authority | Procurement Strategy | Use of Existing Contracts | A supplier raised concerns that South Yorkshire Fire & Rescue Service (SYFR) have not tendered their internal auditing works to allow for open fair and transparent competition. | PPRS liaised with SYFR who advised that the Internal Audit Services operates through a Service Level Agreement, which complements the basic principles enshrined in the 1986 Joint Agreement for the governance and corporate support functions. This request to undertake a ‘lead authority’ role for supporting the South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Authority had been in place from 2015. Since that period the SLA has been reviewed annually. As this is a provision for three years’ internal audit valued at approximately £60k per annum the cumulative value would be £180k and therefore above threshold and as such would usually be required to be advertised in OJEU. However, SYFR assert that they fall outside of the scope of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 as it is between public sector entities. PPRS recommended SYFR formally review the appropriateness of the arrangements and, in particular, SYFR's status under the current PCR in a formal way to ensure the exemptions apply. PPRS additionally recommended that SYFR review and follow the guidance in Procurement Policy Note 02/17 publishing contract information. In light of the PRRS concerns SYFR have committed to further transparency in their audit arrangements and following on from discussions with SYFR they confirmed that this provision would be tendered going forward. The PPRS team will carry out spot checks to ensure compliance. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | July | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the CCS Education Technology Framework (RM6103). The complaint was with regards to Lot 4 – Hardware. The supplier passed all the tests but was unaware that CCS would only award to the top 20 scorers. The supplier also queried that their scores did not reflect the feedback and there was no appeals process stated. | CCS published all tender documents on 5 December 2018. Bidders were given a clarification period from 21 December 2018 until 14 January 2019 to ask questions about the procurement process and the Invitation to Tender (ITT) documentation. CCS highlighted paragraph 11 of Attachment 2 (How to Bid) that explained to bidders how the pricing score was calculated and paragraph 12 that explained how CCS would calculate the final score. CCS reviewed the supplier’s responses and confirmed that they were evaluated using the published marking scheme and evaluation criteria, and their bid was evaluated in accordance with the evaluation process set out in the ITT documentation. The rationale for the score awarded to the supplier by the evaluators was provided to them in their debrief report. The supplier was notified about the appeals process through clarification and they were referred to paragraph 12.3 of Attachment 2 (How to Bid) of the ITT that stated suppliers could ask questions that relate to the decision to award during the standstill period. PPRS shared guidance about how to become a supplier of goods and services to the public sector through the Crown Commercial Service: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/become-a-crown-commercial-service-supplier | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | July | Bedford Hospital NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding two outstanding invoices totalling £ 3,658.08. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded Bedford Hospital NHS Trust of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The Trust confirmed that staff had been reminded of the correct payment processes and the invoices were paid. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | July | Crewe Town Council | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier raised concerns over Crewe Town Council's illumination contract for the Christmas and events programme. They felt that the opportunity had not been advertised in an open, fair and transparent manner. | Crewe Town Council advertised this opportunity via The Chest (an e-portal) and social media and have pointed out that the complainant was aware of the opportunity from this advertising. PPRS recommended to the Council that future tender opportunities be advertised on Contracts Finder, as described in Procurement Policy Note – Legal requirement to publish on Contracts Finder Action Note 07/16. There is a legal requirement for the wider public sector to advertise opportunities and awards on Contracts Finder for contracts of the value of £25,000 and over, however it is advisory for best practice to advertise all opportunities. The Council has accepted our recommendation and provided evidence of an opportunity they intend to advertise. We will undertake a spot check to ensure these procedures have been adopted. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | August | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Technology/Systems | Technical issue with e-portal | A supplier contacted PPRS following their application to join the CCS G-Cloud 11 Framework. They believed that their submission for eight services was complete. After receiving confirmation that their application was successful, they were notified that only one service had been added which was a new one (rather than the other seven services being migrated from G-Cloud 10). | The CCS Digital Marketplace Team investigated the complaint and confirmed that they found no errors with the system. The audit trail shows that seven Cloud Software services were copied from GCloud 10, but had not been marked as complete on the application. CCS confirmed that the supplier had added one new service, which was accepted. CCS advised that the application dashboard would state the number of services that are being submitted for each lot. The complaint was not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | August | Buckinghamshire County Council | Procurement Process | Award | A supplier raised a concern over Buckinghamshire County Council’s “Making Information About Being An Employee Accessible, Searchable and Understandable” opportunity advertised on the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace. The supplier was concerned that the buyer clearly stated that there was no incumbent, yet they believed the incumbent was then awarded the contract. | PPRS contacted the CCS Digital Framework Commercial Agreement Manager who advised that a scoping study may be considered as a discovery. To ensure transparency and fairness any outputs from that work should be made available to all suppliers by mentioning them in the published opportunity for the next stage of work. The response from the Authority confirmed the information was published with the opportunity, in the 'About the Work' section, making it compliant with the Framework requirement. The Authority confirmed the supplier awarded the contract had completed the discovery stage months prior to the contract being advertised and therefore was not an incumbent. Additional work had been completed by the Authority to confirm the supplier had an ethical wall procedure in place. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | August | Tate Gallery | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an opportunity for High Value Digital Asset Storage advertised by the Tate Gallery. The supplier was concerned that the timescales between publishing and closing only appeared to be four days. | The Authority confirmed that the opportunity was fully available with no restrictions from 12 July 2019. The published date was showing as 8 August 2019 because the notice was updated to amend the extension of the deadline for responses to 19 August 2019. The complaint was not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | August | Epsom and Ewell Borough Council | Procurement Process | Short deadlines | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the short deadlines for submission, for an opportunity advertised for the Epsom and Ewell Borough Council - Rent Review - Wilsons. | PPRS contacted the contracting authority who confirmed that the advertised opportunity stated Open early engagement - This means that a procurement idea is currently active, it is in the early stage of development and judging interest from potential suppliers. The closing date was for suppliers to register their interest by, and not the actual tender, so that further information could be sent subject to meeting minimum requirements. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | August | Ministry of Defence (MOD) | Procurement Strategy | Procurement procedure used | A supplier queried a high value procurement by the Ministry of Defence for Royal Navy Training. In particular the supplier requested PPRS to find out why 80% of training was being outsourced and why the competitive dialogue procedure was being used for this procurement rather than the competitive dialogue procedure with negotiation. | MOD explained that almost all Royal Navy training is outsourced (except the Royal Marines) and that this particular training programme is aggregating the services provided into a single contract. With such a large and high value requirement, and to complement an existing modernisation and transformation agenda, MOD is seeking a holistic programme, not individualised and piecemeal. On the choice of procedure, the complexity of the procurement and the need for bidders to develop modernisation plans, meant Competitive Dialogue was selected as the most appropriate procurement route. This procurement route would enable the bidders to discuss their plans with the Authority prior to submission. The procurement plan was assessed and approved by the Cabinet Office and the review team confirmed this to PPRS. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | September | British Transport Police (BTP) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £1,387.60. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded BTP of their obligations. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. BTP paid the outstanding invoice and late payment interest in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | September | NHS England and NHS Improvement | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding two outstanding invoices totalling £899.56. | Public sector buyers should pay prime contractors (Tier 1 suppliers) within 30 days and must ensure that their prime contractor includes equivalent 30 day payment terms in any subcontracts through the supply chain. Public sector buyers must publish annual payment performance data. Public Procurement Review Service also reminded the Authority of their obligations. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. Following our involvement NHS England made full payment to the supplier. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | September | East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £8,276.40. | Public sector buyers should pay prime contractors (Tier 1 suppliers) within 30 days and must ensure that their prime contractor includes equivalent 30 day payment terms in any subcontracts through the supply chain. Public sector buyers must publish annual payment performance data. Public Procurement Review Service reminded East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust of their obligations. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The Trust paid the invoice in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | September | Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £420. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded CPS of their obligations. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. CPS paid the invoice in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | September | Swindon Borough Council | Procurement Strategy | Lotting | We were contacted by a supplier about the opportunity for Lot 4: Minibus Social Care and Community Transport advertised by Swindon Borough Council. The supplier was concerned that in the service specification there was a reference that stated “A fare chart will be issued prior to the commencement date in agreement with the new Supplier.” They believed that this indicated the Council had already decided that they will have a different (new) supplier. They were also concerned that they were unable to bid for part of the Lot. | Swindon Borough Council confirmed that the reference to a ‘new supplier’ was not intended to convey that the existing suppliers for these services would be disadvantaged in the procurement exercise. The further competition for Lot 4 Minibus Social Care and Community Transport using the Council’s Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) was combining services that had previously been delivered by different suppliers, therefore it was inevitable that some element of the combined provision would be considered as a new supplier for the services. The Council considered that combining these services would allow opportunities for the successful supplier to work more efficiently and effectively to deliver qualitative and economic benefits. Lot 4 was intended to be awarded as a single contract when the DPS was established." All bidders in the relevant lot were invited to participate and providers were given the opportunity to raise questions through the clarification process. The financial standing tests were deliberately relaxed to ensure SMEs have access to the opportunities on this DPS. The Council advised that all of the suppliers that have been approved onto Lot 4 Minibus Social Care and Community Transport via the DPS fulfil the criteria of a SMEs. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | September | Dorset Healthcare University NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £1,368.18. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded Dorset Healthcare University NHS Foundation Trust of their obligations. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The Trust paid the outstanding invoice and late payment interest in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | September | Merseyside Police | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £443. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded Merseyside Police of their obligations. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The Authority paid the outstanding invoice and late payment interest in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | September | Police and Crime Commissioner for Gloucestershire | Procurement Strategy | Tender requirement | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding a tender requirement for Support Services for Adults & Young Victims of Crime for the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Gloucestershire. The supplier felt it would be reasonable for more information to be shared around the existing volumes of caseload responsibilities for staff and particularly the number of direct referrals and cases handled by the service. | PPRS liaised with the authority who confirmed that due to commercial sensitivity reasons expressed by an incumbent provider this information would not be shared and all bidders were notified via the e-tendering system to that effect providing justification. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | September | Tate Gallery | Procurement Process | Award | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an opportunity for High Value Digital Asset Storage advertised by the Tate Gallery. The supplier was concerned that no award notice has been published and questioned what the status of the procurement was. | The Tate advised that suppliers would receive an email confirming that this procurement is delayed. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | October | Rochdale Borough Council | Procurement Process | Clarification | PPRS were contacted by a supplier about the opportunity for the provision and support and maintenance of Content Management System (CMS) for Rochdale Council website and associated sub-sites and domains. The supplier advised us that within a week of the submission deadline, they began a series of clarification questions, the answers to which remained sufficiently unclear for the supplier to confidently offer an equivalent solution. The supplier was unable to comply with a mandatory requirement. The day before the deadline, the council agreed to withdraw the mandatory status. The supplier requested an extension but this was denied. | Rochdale Borough Council confirmed they could not extend the tender process further due to operational risks. In terms of their tendering process, the Council both acknowledge and apologise that there were some late responses to clarification questions. The Council confirmed the tender specification had offered assurance that they would accept equivalent solutions. PPRS reminded the Authority to allow sufficient time between clarification and tender submission deadline. PPRS is conducting a spot check into the way that tender requirements are written and following this complaint PPRS will follow up with the Authority to check on how requirements are specified on future procurements. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | October | St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding two outstanding invoices totalling £42,058.32. | Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Authority of their obligations. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. Following our involvement St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust made full payment to the supplier. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | October | Coventry City Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier raised concerns over tender evaluator selection criteria and the final review process for contract award on Coventry City Council's Invitation To Tender, for the appointment of Planning and Architectural (Lead Designer) services for the delivery of New Social and Emotional Mental Health (SEMH) primary and secondary school featuring sports complex at Woodlands Academy, Coventry. | The authority confirmed that the evaluators had appropriate qualifications and experience in the works they were evaluating. They also confirmed that the scores of the top 2 responses, were deemed by the project manager to be so close they were considered as a potential tie-break situation. The final two bids went to a board member for final review before award. The board member was not given the option to change the outcome. The final award was based on quality and not cost. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | October | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Strategy | SME Exclusion | A supplier contacted us with concerns over CCS Framework RM6059 for Office Supplies. They felt that the proposed structure would disadvantage new SMEs. | CCS advised that pre-market engagement for this Framework was carried out recently in August/Sept 2019 and previously in 2018 with both stakeholders and potential bidders invited to webinar sessions where the proposed new structure for RM6059 were outlined. SMEs will be able to bid through a number of ways: as part of a consortium, joint venture, or as a subcontractor to a larger organisation. All bidders will be required to supply and deliver a comprehensive range of products to a large number of Public Sector organisations including central government departments, their arm’s length bodies, and a large number of wider public sector organisations nationally. There are no regional lots within this Framework Contract and suppliers would need to consider whether they had the overall capability and capacity to provide this requirement. The complaint was not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | October | Northamptonshire County Council | Procurement Process | Tender Requirement | A supplier raised a concern over the costing requirements and subsequent potential exclusion for SMEs on Northamptonshire Independent Supported Accommodation and Support Services for Young People tender opportunity. | The Authority confirmed that the pricing schedule included total costs and a breakdown, which contains accommodation, staffing and overhead costs. The breakdown of costs would not be scored but has been designed to enable Northamptonshire County Council to have a better understanding of costs charged by providers and to carry out due diligence before acceptance onto the framework agreement, this was clear in the pricing schedule. The complaint was not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | October | Milton Keynes Council | Procurement Strategy | SME exclusion | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Milton Keynes Council Framework for Supported Accommodation. The complainant was concerned that those suppliers awarded a place on the Framework were large companies and they were unable to compete with them on cost despite being able to deliver on quality. | Milton Keynes Council advised that the Supported Accommodation Framework was run in accordance with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 74 to 77 (Light Touch Regime). There was no upper limit in terms of the number of providers that could be admitted on to the Framework. All bidders that achieved a mark of 60% or more against the Quality Criteria were awarded a place on the Framework. Milton Keynes Council carried out Quality and Compliance visits to all accommodation being offered to ensure that it was to a suitable standard. Whilst their main focus is quality, the Council did take price into account to ensure overall Value for Money for the local authority. Overall ranking on the Framework is based on the combined Most Economically Advantageous Tender score which is based 60% on quality and 40% on price. A supplier’s ranking is used to call off placements where immediate placements are required. The Council reserved the right to re-open the Framework once a year or as required to allow for additional provision and has the intention of re-opening within the next few months. There will still be opportunity for additional providers to join the Framework. Prior to re-opening the framework they will hold a market engagement event which will go through the tender process and quality criteria which should be of particular value to SME organisations. The complaint was not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | October | Brent Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding three outstanding invoices totalling £1,435. | Brent Council paid the outstanding invoices in full. Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Authority of their obligations. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier declined to claim £125 late payment interest following the Council’s prompt payment resolution. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | November | Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £348. | Crown Prosecution Service paid the outstanding invoice in full. Public Procurement Review Service also reminded the Authority of their obligations. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim the interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | November | Bridgewater Community Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices totalling £4,300. | Bridgewater Community Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust paid the outstanding invoices in full. Public Procurement Review Service also reminded the Authority of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | November | University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding two outstanding invoices totalling £915.84 | Public sector buyers should pay prime contractors (Tier 1 suppliers) within 30 days and must ensure that their prime contractor includes equivalent 30 day payment terms in any subcontracts through the supply chain. Public sector buyers must publish annual payment performance data. Public Procurement Review Service also reminded the Authority of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. Following our involvement University Hospital Southampton NHS FT made full payment to the supplier. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | November | London North West University | Procurement Process | Costing in bids | PPRS was contacted by a supplier regarding the contract for the provision Hybrid Mail Fulfilment Services, Bowel Cancer Screening as awarded by LNWUH. The supplier was concerned that the winning bid was abnormally low. | LNWUH consulted with both the service managers and the Trust’s legal advisors regarding the purported breach of regulation 69 of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015). Regulation 69(1) of the PCR 2015 imposes an obligation on contracting authorities to "require tenderers to explain the price or costs proposed in the tender where tenders appear to be abnormally low in relation to the works, supplies or services." Regulation 69(4) of the PRC 2015 provides that the contracting authority: "may only reject the tender where the evidence supplied does not satisfactorily account for the low level of price or costs proposed". The Trust confirmed they rigorously tested the pricing proposed by the successful supplier and have verified all submitted prices. The winning supplier used an innovative solution to provide the best pricing, to disclose this solution would compromise their competitive advantage and be prejudicial. The Trust is confident the submission is sustainable and will meet the needs of the services as specified. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | November | Worcestershire County Council | Procurement Process | Clarification | PPRS was contacted by a supplier regarding the opportunity for the provision of Health and Social Work Services advertised by Worcestershire County Council. The supplier stated that the clarification questions were responded to on 07/11/19, after the window for further questions closed on 05/11/19, therefore this did not allow for them to seek further clarification based on the new information provided. | PPRS made the Authority aware of the Public Contracts Regulation 2015 18 (1-3) regarding the principles of procurement. Worcestershire County Council agreed to reopen clarification. All potential bidders were advised that there was a further opportunity to ask questions on this tender for a period of 24 hours. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | November | Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier raised concerns that the contract value published for BHFT 0274 Interactive Online Autism Assessments on Contracts Finder was £13.7 million, however the OJEU value was £1.37 million. The supplier was concerned that this could exclude potential suppliers from joining this opportunity. | PPRS liaised with the Authority who agreed that they would cancel the existing procurement and start a new process with the correct value. This opportunity has been re-advertised and published in OJEU (TED). The Authority confirmed they will follow up with advertising on Contract Finder as soon as they receive OJEU confirmation. They agreed to publish a corrigendum for the tender that has expired in OJEU and Contract Finder (BHFT 0274) specifying the reason for its abandonment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | November | Lewisham Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £358. | London Borough of Lewisham paid the outstanding invoice in full. Public Procurement Review Service also reminded the Authority of their obligations. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier declined to claim late payment interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | November | Hampshire County Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding four outstanding invoices for £5,900. | Hampshire County Council paid the outstanding invoice in full. Public Procurement Review Service also reminded the Authority of their obligations. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim the interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | November | National Institute for Health and Care Excellence | Procurement Process | Feedback | PPRS was contacted by a supplier regarding the opportunity for Microsoft Dynamics Specialist advertised on the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace place the National Institute for Health & Care Excellence (NICE). The supplier queried whether shortlisting has been completed and had unsuccessful bidders been informed. | The shortlisting had been completed and the supplier was subsequently notified of the outcome of this stage. PPRS provided the Authority with the CCS Digital Marketplace Buyers Guidance (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/digital-outcomes-and-specialists-buyers-guide) highlighting their obligations regarding feedback. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | December | Ministry of Defence (MOD) | Procurement Strategy | Vetting | A supplier contacted us regarding a Ministry of Defence (MOD) advertisement on the Digital Marketplace (DOS 4 framework) for a Digital Services Partner to develop digital and data products and UCD services. The opportunity appears to be contrary to government policy regarding United Kingdom Security Vetting: Referees, Hiring Managers, Contractors and Consultants (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/united-kingdom-security-vettingreferees-hiring-managers-contractors-and-consultants). | MOD stated that the Security Check clearance is required as a minimum. Developed Vetting clearance would be an advantage in certain roles. At the supplier Question & Answer session, MOD clarified that this should have stated that Security Check clearance would need to be in place at Contract Start date, costs would not be provided by the Authority but that they would sponsor the clearance. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | December | Brent Council | Procurement Process | Communication | A supplier raised a concern that after experiencing problems with Brent Council Accommodation Plus Dynamic Purchasing System and despite many attempts to raise the concerns directly with Brent Council they had not replied to the supplier’s concerns. | The council provided a thorough response apologising for the miscommunication and advised that no further tender opportunities will be advertised via this route, and instead they will advertise all tenders via the London Tenders Portal and that these will be visible on Contracts Finder. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | December | Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council | Procurement Strategy | Advertisement | PPRS was contacted about the opportunity for The Supply of CCTV equipment, associated infrastructure, installation and support to facilitate the relocation of the control room and system replacement 2019 - 2022 at Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council. The supplier was concerned that the decision to use an in house team meant that there was no competition process which removed the possibility of being able to accurately identify if the solution was suitable, adequate and technologically correct. | The Council confirmed that it has its own installation teams that are trained, capable and certified across the various disciplines appropriately to undertake the installation of CCTV, and the associated infrastructure, critically as well as holding the appropriate permits and licenses to work on the Highways; therefore a decision was taken to use in-house resources. This decision was not only the best use of their resources but also allowed the council to operate and purchase direct from the distributors rather than a reseller/integrator; therefore the council is operating as the installer and integrator. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | December | Foreign & Commonwealth Office (FCO) | Procurement Process | Clarification | PPRS was contacted about the Foreign & Commonwealth (FCO) opportunity: Cyber Security Capacity for Brazilian National School of Cyber Defence. The supplier was concerned that there contained very little information and no indication as to the bid requirements. | FCO advised the supplier to register with their tendering portal. Once registered, the supplier will be able to view all the bidding information for this tender. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | December | Thames Valley Police | Procurement Process | Timescales | A supplier raised concerns on a live procurement for Thames Valley Police Ref 37983- OP19004 Title: Public Order Personal Protective Equipment - YPO Framework Control & Restraint No. 798 on bluelight.eu-supply.com with regards to multiple extensions to the return date for sample products. | The authority confirmed that the procurement time frames allowed for the extensions to be granted and advised that the suppliers had found it difficult to obtain samples and more than one supplier had asked for a time extension. They noted that this was regrettable and would work with the Framework manager to ensure that suppliers would be able to provide samples in a more timely fashion going forwards. PPRS will review this process with the authority in the next six months. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | December | Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices for £8,400. | Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust advised one invoice was in dispute but paid the outstanding invoices in full. PPRS also reminded the Authority of their obligations. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim the interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2019 | December | Torbay Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £1,028. | Torbay Council paid the outstanding invoice in full. PPRS also reminded the Authority of their obligations. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim the interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | January | Health Education England (HEE) | Procurement Process | Award | Public Procurement Review Service was contacted by a supplier regarding the Health Education England (HEE) opportunity for a User Experience / User Interface (UX/UI) Designer as advertised on the Digital Marketplace. The complainant was concerned that the feedback they received was in contradiction to the project description and the project was awarded to an Information Technology (IT) solution as opposed to a design firm. | HEE confirmed that the procurement exercise was completed in accordance with the guidance published on the Digital Marketplace: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/digital-outcomes-and-specialists-buyers-guide. The Product Owner, Delivery Manager and the Lead Designer were involved in to ensure i) that they followed the correct process and ii) that they got the right supplier for the role. The Authority confirmed that there was a high level of interest from suppliers with competitive day rates, all who had extremely good experience. HEE received submissions from a range of organisations including recruitment agencies, design and IT companies. They scored each submission and provided feedback to each unsuccessful applicant. They further evaluated 3 suppliers and the winning supplier was selected as they were considered more experienced in pure UX/UI design and was under budget. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | January | Highways England | Procurement Strategy | Costing in bids | A supplier raised a concern that the Highways England tender ITT4780 – Information Security and Information Rights requested a price that was to include project mobilisation costs as part of the price assessment. However, these costs would not be incurred by the incumbent supplier and they believed that it gave the incumbent an unfair advantage. | Public Procurement Review Service contacted the Authority, the financial evaluation of the tender was re-calculated with mobilisation costs removed. The successful bidder had the lowest price. Highways England confirmed that without the inclusion of mobilisation costs the outcome would have been the same. The Authority provided their conflict of interest policy which was followed to ensure an open, fair and transparent procurement process. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | January | North East Procurement Organisation (NEPO) | Procurement Strategy | DPS Operation | The Supplier was concerned with a live procurement for a North East Procurement Organisation (NEPO) DPS (NEPO219 Building Materials), the procurement documentation stated that they would be charging suppliers on the dynamic purchasing system 1% of all spend that goes through it. | NEPO advised that this was a 1% rebate that would only apply in respect of individual call-off contracts awarded, these are separate legal agreements from the dynamic purchasing system. Payment obligation only arises where a supplier enters into said separate agreements. NEPO confirmed that they do not operate any charge for suppliers to be admitted onto the DPS, nor for its administration or use. To the extent a supplier was on the DPS and did not win any work, there would be no rebate payable. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | January | The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices totalling £35,839.28. | The trust confirmed that they were working to amend existing orders with pricing queries and payments were starting to be made. They will continue to work with the supplier to reconcile the account. Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Authority of their obligations. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | January | East Suffolk and North Essex NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding two outstanding invoices for £23,100. | East Suffolk and North Essex NHS Foundation Trust paid the outstanding invoices in full. Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Authority of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim the interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | January | Royal Free London NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding four outstanding invoices for £146.71. | Royal Free Hospital London paid the outstanding invoice in full. Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Authority of their obligations. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | January | Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £6,973. | Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust paid the outstanding invoice in full. Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Authority of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim the interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | January | NHS Supply Chain | Procurement Strategy | Tender Requirement | A supplier was concerned that the renewal of NHS Supply Chain Point of Care Framework was insisting on Professional Indemnity Insurance in addition to Product and Public Liability insurance when it was not required for the provision of goods only. | Public Procurement Review Service contacted the Authority and they confirmed that if the supplier is providing goods only rather than services, it is not necessary to have Professional Liability Insurance. The Authority had received a number of questions on this point which had been addressed through clarification. Complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | January | Medway NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding a number of outstanding invoices totalling £10,313. | Medway NHS Foundation Trust advised us that they had not received all of the invoices but those they had received were paid in full. Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Authority of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim the interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | January | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Strategy | Financial Requirement | Public Procurement Review Service was contacted by a supplier regarding the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Cyber Security Services 3 Framework (RM3764.3) opportunity. The supplier was concerned about an unlimited liability clause in relation to data breaches. | CCS advised that they would be willing to consider its position but they recommended that the supplier raise the issue as part of the formal clarification question process to enable a full response to be issued to all interested parties. The supplier raised the question through clarification and CCS confirmed that the unlimited liability clause has now been replaced with a £10m cap. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | January | East of England NHS Collaborative Hub | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier raised concerns that an East of England NHS Collaborative Hub framework procurement was not using the correct Common Procurement Vocabulary coding and therefore not being advertised correctly, meaning suitable bidders would not tender. | The authority advised that they reviewed the Common Procurement Vocabulary coding based on the concerns shared by Public Procurement Review Service. The Authority was content that the correct coding had been used for the focus on invoicing and payments made by a contracting authority to external entities. The Authority also provided evidence of supplier participation to support their statement. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | January | Ministry of Justice (MoJ) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding four outstanding invoices for £173,719 for the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) relating to the NDelius Replatforming project. | MoJ explained the delay had arisen following a purchase order error, once rectified they paid the outstanding invoice in full. Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Authority of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim the interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | January | UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) | Procurement Strategy | Vetting | A supplier contacted Public Procurement Review Service regarding UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) Invitation to Tender for PMO Service ref: T/RHH147/19. The supplier was concerned that failure to provide a reference within the required timescales would result in exclusion and that the authority’s request for suppliers to send out the reference questionnaires was an unusual practice. | The procurement regulations do not expressly state that if a bidder provides a reference and the referee does not respond within a certain time, the bidder will be automatically excluded. In this case, UKAEA has treated this as a compliance issue and has been transparent with all bidders that failure to provide a reference within the required timescales will result in exclusion. UKAEA is content that it has built adequate safeguards into the process to avoid this being disproportionate or resulting in unfair treatment. We consider it to be unusual and have encouraged UKAEA to consider adopting a more flexible approach in the future, whereby bidders are allowed to demonstrate their experience through other evidence where references may not be available. However, it is for UKAEA to decide to take this approach on particular procurements. We will review in 12 months to determine if our recommendations have been taken on board. For further guidance see Public Procurement Note 04/15 taking account of suppliers’ past performance. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | February | Ministry of Justice (MoJ) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding three outstanding invoices for £195,470 for Ministry of Justice (MoJ) Cloud Gateway. | Ministry of Justice explained that the delay had arisen following the suppliers name change, once rectified they paid the outstanding invoice in full. PPRS also reminded the Authority of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim the interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | February | Cambridge Community Services NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £3,128. | Cambridge Community Services NHS Trust paid the outstanding invoice in full. PPRS also reminded the Authority of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim the interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | February | Hertfordshire Community NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £587. | Hertfordshire Community NHS Trust confirmed that the invoice was on their system and sat with the budget holder for approval prior to being paid the following week. PPRS reminded the Authority of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim the interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | February | Lincolnshire County Council | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier contacted us regarding an opportunity advertised by Lincolnshire County Council (LCC) for Internationalisation Support Services for the Business Lincolnshire Growth Hub: China. The supplier visited the portal to submit their bid on the last day of the open period but found that the opportunity was closed prematurely - with the stated intention for the contract commencement date being almost immediate (seven days) after the published closing date. | Lincolnshire County Council confirmed to us that this procurement was managed through the Pro-Contract system which automatically closed the submission window at 17:00 on 27th January 2020, this was in line with the published timescales. The supplier confirmed that they had misunderstood the closing time. PPRS reminded the Authority of the importance of allowing sufficient time to generate market interest where procurement timetables allow. LCC confirmed that although the evaluation period had taken slightly longer than expected, it was detailed in the Request for Quotation that the timescale for evaluation was for indicative purposes only. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | February | UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS concerning the procurement for UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) opportunity for the Scope & Design of their Flexible Interchange Programme (FLIP). The supplier was concerned about how the evaluation had been undertaken and felt that the incumbent supplier could have an advantage when it comes to future opportunities. | Evaluators at UK Research and Innovation were provided with information on how they are to carry out procurement evaluations and UKRI confirmed they were confident that this was completed correctly. The previous programme was still live and therefore had not yet had an evaluation report. This requirement was a separate new standalone project therefore there was no incumbent supplier. UKRI confirmed it complies with the requirement to advertise contract opportunities via Contracts Finder or through the OJEU where the thresholds require this. This opportunity was advertised on Contracts Finder as required for public sector contract opportunities that are below the OJEU financial threshold. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | February | Surrey County Council | Technology/Systems | Technical issue with e-portal | A supplier raised concerns on Surrey County Council Digital Business Insights (Enterprise Resource Planning Solution) opportunity advertised on their e-portal. The supplier had experienced difficulty in the e-portal registration process. They received support from both the Authority and the e-portal provider however, the supplier felt that the delay had not left enough time to progress their submission. Despite asking for an extension, no response was given. | PPRS contacted the authority to request an extension on behalf of the supplier. The Authority considered the request and the impact it would have on project delivery before agreeing to grant a five day extension (three working days and a weekend) for submissions. The council has now escalated the issue to the e-portal provider to address the concerns. Complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | February | Kings College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding three outstanding invoices for £826. | Kings College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust requested one invoice be resubmitted as it contained a price error and paid the other two outstanding invoices in full. Public Procurement Review Service reminded the Authority of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim the interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | March | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Process | Use of framework | PPRS was made aware of a supplier tendering for a Software as a Service (SaaS) procurement through the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) G-Cloud procurement process. The supplier had not published a fixed price for their SaaS solution on the Framework. Another supplier contacted PPRS concerned that any SaaS solution procured through G-Cloud needed to be procured against a specified criteria and price. | PPRS contacted CCS to understand whether this was acceptable under the G-Cloud process and if not what rectification could be taken. CCS contacted the supplier to advise them that the SaaS solution the supplier had listed on had pricing that was not in scope. Under the terms of the G-Cloud framework customers should be able to use the pricing provided by suppliers without the need to contact them. The supplier was asked to revise their pricing document. PPRS followed up with CCS to ensure that this had happened and it was confirmed that the price listing had been correctly updated. Complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | March | Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust | Procurement Process | Use of framework | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding procurement activity conducted by Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust. The supplier was concerned that the Trust had improperly used an expired Crown Commercial Service (CCS) framework agreement and as a consequence, distorted competition. | The Trust advised that due to the urgency of the requirement the procurement had been run independently and outside of the CCS Framework using the light-touch regime (LTR) (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/560272/Guidance_on_Light_Touch_Regime_-_Oct_16.pdf). The Trust provided documentation, including the terms and conditions used for this procurement that supported their statement. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | March | British Army | Procurement Process | Use of framework | PPRS were contacted by a supplier regarding the procurement process for an opportunity advertised by British Army on the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace: https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/11806. The supplier completed their response but received no feedback. The supplier was also concerned that this procurement process was undertaken in a short time frame given the contract value of £350,000.00. | PPRS contacted CCS who confirmed that the buyer conducted the procurement correctly and had followed the guidance on when to issue feedback when buying through the Digital Marketplace. The buyer accepted that this could be considered a short time frame but was within the guidelines detailed in the Digital Marketplace Buyer Guidance. PPRS recommended that in the future the buyer allows sufficient time for suppliers to apply for future opportunities. Complaint not upheld. PPRS contacted CCS who confirmed that the buyer conducted the procurement correctly and had followed the guidance on when to issue feedback when buying through the Digital Marketplace. The buyer accepted that this could be considered a short time frame but was within the guidelines detailed in the Digital Marketplace Buyer Guidance. PPRS recommended that in the future the buyer allows sufficient time for suppliers to apply for future opportunities. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | March | UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) | Procurement Process | Clarification | A supplier raised concerns regarding an opportunity from UK Research & Innovation (UKRI) advertised on the CCS Digital Marketplace for UKRI-Spatio-temporal feature chain (STFC) Data Movement Framework for Scientific Analysis Service. The supplier expressed concerns that the written proposal and price schedule documents were not issued with the shortlisting letter, that the pricing schedule was incorrect, clarification questions had not been answered and that an essential technical document had not been issued within a reasonable time. | UKRI advised that due to an oversight the written proposal and price schedule documents were issued the day after the shortlisting letter. Due to a typographical error in the price schedule spreadsheet referred to the wrong cell to input the total, the authority advised that it was clear from reviewing the spreadsheet where the total should be input and all received bids had been submitted correctly. The clarification question received 11 December 2019 was not responded to, which was an oversight on the part of the authorities shared service provider, for which they have apologised. However on reviewing the questions raised the Authority confirmed that it does not consider the information was required by any supplier in order to submit a bid response and it had no bearing on the requirement or on the evaluation of the bids. The additional information issued on 16 December 2019 was confirmed as for information only and was not essential technical information or required by bidders in order to submit a response to the tender. PPRS advised the supplier of the shared service providers complaints procedure should they wish to pursue the matter further. The complaint was partially upheld. UKRI advised that due to an oversight the written proposal and price schedule documents were issued the day after the shortlisting letter. Due to a typographical error in the price schedule spreadsheet referred to the wrong cell to input the total, the authority advised that it was clear from reviewing the spreadsheet where the total should be input and all received bids had been submitted correctly. The clarification question received 11 December 2019 was not responded to, which was an oversight on the part of the authorities shared service provider, for which they have apologised. However on reviewing the questions raised the Authority confirmed that it does not consider the information was required by any supplier in order to submit a bid response and it had no bearing on the requirement or on the evaluation of the bids. The additional information issued on 16 December 2019 was confirmed as for information only and was not essential technical information or required by bidders in order to submit a response to the tender. PPRS advised the supplier of the shared service providers complaints procedure should they wish to pursue the matter further. The complaint was partially upheld. UKRI advised that due to an oversight the written proposal and price schedule documents were issued the day after the shortlisting letter. Due to a typographical error in the price schedule spreadsheet referred to the wrong cell to input the total, the authority advised that it was clear from reviewing the spreadsheet where the total should be input and all received bids had been submitted correctly. The clarification question received 11 December 2019 was not responded to, which was an oversight on the part of the authorities shared service provider, for which they have apologised. However on reviewing the questions raised the Authority confirmed that it does not consider the information was required by any supplier in order to submit a bid response and it had no bearing on the requirement or on the evaluation of the bids. The additional information issued on 16 December 2019 was confirmed as for information only and was not essential technical information or required by bidders in order to submit a response to the tender. PPRS advised the supplier of the shared service providers complaints procedure should they wish to pursue the matter further. The complaint was partially upheld. UKRI advised that due to an oversight the written proposal and price schedule documents were issued the day after the shortlisting letter. Due to a typographical error in the price schedule spreadsheet referred to the wrong cell to input the total, the authority advised that it was clear from reviewing the spreadsheet where the total should be input and all received bids had been submitted correctly. The clarification question received 11 December 2019 was not responded to, which was an oversight on the part of the authorities shared service provider, for which they have apologised. However on reviewing the questions raised the Authority confirmed that it does not consider the information was required by any supplier in order to submit a bid response and it had no bearing on the requirement or on the evaluation of the bids. The additional information issued on 16 December 2019 was confirmed as for information only and was not essential technical information or required by bidders in order to submit a response to the tender. PPRS advised the supplier of the shared service providers complaints procedure should they wish to pursue the matter further. The complaint was partially upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | March | Home Office - National Law Enforcement Data Programme | Procurement Process | Feedback | UKRI advised that due to an oversight the written proposal and price schedule documents were issued the day after the shortlisting letter. Due to a typographical error in the price schedule spreadsheet referred to the wrong cell to input the total, the authority advised that it was clear from reviewing the spreadsheet where the total should be input and all received bids had been submitted correctly. The clarification question received 11 December 2019 was not responded to, which was an oversight on the part of the authorities shared service provider, for which they have apologised. However on reviewing the questions raised the Authority confirmed that it does not consider the information was required by any supplier in order to submit a bid response and it had no bearing on the requirement or on the evaluation of the bids. The additional information issued on 16 December 2019 was confirmed as for information only and was not essential technical information or required by bidders in order to submit a response to the tender. PPRS advised the supplier of the shared service providers complaints procedure should they wish to pursue the matter further. The complaint was partially upheld. | PPRS contacted the CCS Digital Commercial Agreement Specialist who despite a lack of contact from the buyer was able to confirm the award details had been published, the process the buyer had followed was in line with Digital Marketplace Buyer Guidance. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | April | Ministry for Housing, Communities & Local Government (MHCLG) | Procurement Process | Feedback | A supplier requested a progress update on Ministry for Housing, Communities & Local Government (MHCLG) - Housing Complaints Resolution Service (Discovery) opportunity advertised on the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace. The supplier had not received any updates on the progress of the procurement. | MHCLG advised that the award had been made and that they had shortlisted and chosen the winning supplier. As the complainant was not shortlisted they did not receive further updates on the outcome, this is normal practice for the Digital Marketplace. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | April | Department for Education (DfE) | Procurement Process | Feedback | A supplier raised concerns on Department for Education (DfE) procurement for National Retraining Scheme Delivery of Digital Product Pipeline - Package 1 advertised on the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace. The supplier had not received any updates on the progress of the procurement. | DfE advised that the procurement for National Retraining Scheme Delivery of Digital Product Pipeline - Package 1 is paused for a number of reasons and this was updated on the Digital Marketplace. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | April | Nexus Rail | Procurement Strategy | SME exclusion - financial requirement | A supplier raised concerns on a Nexus Rail tender for the Wearside Metro and Local Rail Expansion Study with regards to the turnover requirement in the procurement. The supplier was concerned that the £25 million threshold was too high for SMEs to participate. | PPRS contacted Nexus who confirmed that this tender opportunity was to appoint a contract to carry out a technical study to examine the viability of introducing a new railway route. Nexus confirmed that all tender opportunities are undertaken in line with The Utilities Contracts Regulations 2016. The Supplier Questionnaire (SQ) template follows Government guidance on content and all thresholds are decided and applied on a project by project basis. Clear indications for the financial requirements were in the selection questionnaire guidance stating that the information provided would be used by Nexus to assess the Applicant’s financial standing to ensure they are able to deliver a project of this size and value. Key stakeholders within the organisation were involved in the review of financial thresholds and content of sections within the SQ document using a stage-gate approval process. Given the significant value and duration, Nexus explained they were keen to assure that the successful tenderer/s could demonstrate not only the knowledge to deliver the commission but also be financially sustainable. The value of £25 million was arrived at by consensus between the specialists and based on experiences of other procurements. It was also noted this would not preclude medium sized enterprises (a medium sized enterprise being defined as having a turnover of between £25 million and £500 million) or partnerships from bidding therefore would ensure a competitive process. Nexus has included consortia bidding, sub-contracting or most mechanisms that would allow SMEs to tender for this contract and was happy to receive such bids. PPRS recommends NEXUS takes into consideration Paragraph 80 of The Utilities Contracts Regulations 2016 which refers to paragraph 58.9 of The Public Contracts Regulations 2015 stating "The minimum yearly turnover that economic operators are required to have shall not exceed twice the estimated contract value, except in duly justified cases, such as by reference to special risks attached to the nature of the works, services or supplies, in which case the contracting authority shall indicate their main reasons in the procurement documents or in the report referred to in regulation 84(1)." (Regulation 99 in the Utilities Contract Regulations 2016) for future procurements. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | April | Waltham Forest Council | Procurement Strategy | SME exclusion - past experience | A supplier contacted PPRS with regards to London Borough of Waltham Forest Contract Notice for Mechanical & Electrical Maintenance Services - OJEU Ref 2020/S 027-063406. The supplier was concerned that the turnover requirement of £3.6 million and for an organisation to be able to demonstrate three contracts of £5 million or £1 million per annum based on a five year term excluded some SMEs from participating. | The authority provided their procurement strategy to disaggregate a single Total Facilities Management contract for all facilities management across over 100 sites of varying sizes. Part of the decision to award separate contracts was to encourage SME participation. The financial thresholds did not exceed the limits set within the Regulations 58 (9). The previous experience was set to provide the authority with the assurance that the suppliers could demonstrate equivalent critical services over a comparable sized property portfolio. Regulation 58 (Technical and professional ability (15) With regard to technical and professional ability, contracting authorities may impose requirements ensuring that economic operators possess the necessary human and technical resources and experience to perform the contract to an appropriate quality standard. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | April | Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £8608.80 for Guys’ & St Thomas’ NHS Trust. | Guys’ & St Thomas’ NHS Trust explained that the delay had arisen following the personnel who were meant to receipt the invoice was on long term leave. The outstanding invoice was paid in full. PPRS also reminded the Authority of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim the interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | May | Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £402.00. | Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust reviewed the suppliers account and confirmed payment of the outstanding invoice. PPRS made the Trust aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded the Trust of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. Public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier claimed £100.05 late payment interest. The Trust advised the supplier to contact the Trusts Accounts payable Team in the future to ensure no further delays occur. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | May | Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding two outstanding invoices for £3,483.60. | Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust had installed a brand new ledger system in the final month before their financial year end which caused a backlog on the system, that coupled with the current situation around COVID-19 had caused the delay in payment. The Trust paid the outstanding invoices in full. PPRS reminded the Authority of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | May | Hertfordshire Community NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding an outstanding invoice for £1,365.60. | Hertfordshire Community NHS Trust reviewed the suppliers account and confirmed payment of the outstanding invoice. PPRS made the Trust aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded the Trust of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. Public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | May | Department for Education (DfE) | Procurement Strategy | Use of Framework | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding four separate opportunities advertised by the Department for Education (DfE) using the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace. https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/12316 https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/12321 https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/12285 https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/12248 The supplier considered these opportunities to be examples of what appears to be buyers seeking specialists on an outcomes basis and was concerned it does not appear to be the correct use of the Framework. They were also concerned that the budget ranges covered the wider programme of work and could be misleading. | PPRS asked the CCS Digital Marketplace Team to review each of these opportunities. CCS confirmed that the listed opportunities were all from DfE who were using Lot 1 Digital Outcomes under the Digital Outcomes and Specialists 4 Framework (DOS 4) to procure teams of specialists to deliver outcomes for a specific programme of work (as defined in Statement of Works), in a specific location. DfE were looking for a delivery partner to provide teams of specialist skills across the DDaT (Digital, Data and Technology) range of roles/capabilities - such as Delivery Manager; Product Manager; Agile Coach. CCS confirmed Lot 1 of the Framework is appropriate, rather than Lot 2 Digital Specialists as this is for single specialist roles. The budget values quoted were indicative of the actual work required over the expected life of the contract. CCS confirmed that these requirements are an acceptable use of the DOS 4 framework. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | May | Bank of England | Procurement Strategy | SME exclusion - Financial requirement | PPRS was contacted about opportunity ID 451379: https://ted.europa.eu/udl?uri=TED:NOTICE:185492-2020:TEXT:EN:HTML&WT.mc_id=RSS-Feed&WT.rss_f=Research+and+Development&WT.rss_a=185492-2020&WT.rss_ev=a. The supplier was concerned that the budget was stated at £600,000.00 but without specifying the size of conferences, for instance and it would be impossible for them to bid on that part. The supplier also sought clarity about the potential number of winning suppliers. | Bank of England confirmed that this opportunity was a Request For Information; they were looking to gather information about capability in the marketplace prior to finalising their requirements and requesting proposals and welcome responses from a number of different potential providers. The £600,000.00 budget was indicative at this stage, and would be further refined as the process continues. There had not yet been a decision as to whether a single or multiple lot award would be made, but it was confirmed they would welcome responses from smaller companies. This opportunity will likely be refined if any competition is pursued after this RFI concludes. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | May | Bridgewater Community Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding two outstanding invoices for £1,446.12. | Bridgewater Community Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust reviewed the suppliers account and confirmed payment of the outstanding invoices. PPRS made the Trust aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded the Trust of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. Public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier claimed £138.22 late payment interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | May | Lewisham and Greenwich NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding four outstanding invoices for £52,167.00. | Lewisham and Greenwich NHS Trust reviewed the suppliers account and confirmed payment of the outstanding invoices. PPRS made the Trust aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded the Trust of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. Public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | June | Royal Free London NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding outstanding invoices for £22,679.52. | The hospital promptly reviewed the suppliers account and confirmed payment of all the invoices that were outstanding. PPRS made the Trust aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded the Trust of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. Public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim the interest. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | June | Boston College | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted us regarding a Boston College tender reference: CA7231 - Telephone System. The supplier had received notification that their tender had not been considered. They felt their bid was competitive and technically fully compliant, therefore they did not consider that it was evaluated fairly. The supplier was also concerned that the college had awarded the contract to a supplier who was more expensive. | Boston College provided PPRS with the original tender documents that stated all questions must be completed in full, and in the format requested. Failure to do so would result in a submission being disqualified. The college provided the scoring document that showed that the complainant failed to provide an answer for a mandatory question and therefore was not evaluated further. The College also provided PPRS with a costing comparison of complainant costs with the costs of the winning tender, in both scenarios the complainants costs were higher. The College was able to confirm that it had awarded the contract to a financially competitive supplier. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | June | Calderdale and Huddersfield NHS Foundation Trust | Procurement Strategy | Use of framework | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding a contract awarded on behalf of Calderdale and Huddersfield NHS Foundation Trust (CHFT) for clinical waste services. The supplier had initial discussions with the Trust but was later advised that a two year contract had been awarded via the NHS Shared Business Services Framework. | CHFT confirmed that they procured the contract as a direct award in line with the National Health Service Shared Business Services (NHS SBS) Waste Management and Minimisation Services Framework Agreement SBS/17/NH/MXR/9307 Lot 1 Clinical Healthcare Waste. The Trust had initially liaised with other Framework suppliers as part of their due diligence process but evidenced that the direct award followed 'best value’ provisions. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | June | Hillingdon Council | Procurement Strategy | SME exclusion - Financial requirement | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding London Borough of Hillingdon’s Selection questionnaire in relation to The Installation of New Domestic Gas Heating Systems and System Upgrades. The supplier was concerned that the turnover requirement was in breach of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR2015). | PPRS asked London Borough of Hillingdon to review their criteria as per PCR2015, Selection Criteria, General principles 58. - (9) 'The minimum yearly turnover that economic operators are required to have shall not exceed twice the estimated contract value. On the annual contract value of around £850,000.00 the requested permitted turnover requirement per annum should not be more than double without justification. London Borough of Hillingdon confirmed that in light of the guidance provided the pass / fail requirement on the turnover question will be removed on this and future procurements. Complaint Upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | June | NHS Improvement | Transparency | Transparency | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the NHS England and NHS Improvement Attend Anywhere system as they were unclear as to how the system was procured. | NHS England and NHS Improvement advised that the contract notice and associated documents were advertised through UK Contracts Finder. Search: ITQ-IMP-0219-358 Video Consulting Platform. A compliant process was run and a supplier selected for this trial. The service is available to Trusts in England and the selected supplier solution is not mandated. Trusts in England are free to engage with this solution, continue to use their existing solutions or make their own arrangements in accordance with their requirements. NHS England and NHS Improvement are currently prioritising this support to the NHS in England during the COVID pandemic. The current national contract ends on 16 March 2021 and early work has commenced to scope the future national strategy and requirements for video outpatient consultations. Any future video services to support improvement work around remote consultations in secondary care is anticipated to be procured through the OJEU process. Appropriate market engagement will take place as part of this work. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | June | Kings College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding two outstanding invoices totalling £555.40. | Kings College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust advised us that one invoice had already been paid and provided the Remittance Advice. The second invoice had not been received by the Trust but on receipt it has been paid. PPRS made the Trust aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded the Trust of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. Under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim the interest | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | June | Department for Education (DfE) | Procurement Process | Feedback | A supplier contacted us regarding two opportunities advertised by the Department for Education (DfE) on the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace. The supplier had not received notification as to the status of the awards. | CCS confirmed that both opportunities were now at Stage 2 and reminded DfE that feedback should be issued at Stage 1 as per the Buyers Guidance: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/how-to-shortlist-digital-outcomes-and-specialists-suppliers#how-to-notify-shortlisted-suppliers. CCS agreed to liaise with the supplier directly to obtain their feedback from DfE. Complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | June | Vehicle Certification Agency | Procurement Process | Previous Experience | A supplier raised concerns over a Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Outcome Specialists (DOS) procurement for the Vehicle Certification Agency for Programme Manager ICT Transformation. The supplier had been told that another supplier had submitted 11 Curriculum Vitaes (CVs) when all other bidders had been asked to submit one only. | PPRS liaised with the CCS DOS team who clarified with the buyer that no CVs had actually been requested, just evidence of certain skills required for the opportunity as per Public Contracts Regulations 2015, 58 (15-18). CCS confirmed that there was no evidence to support that another supplier had submitted 11 CVs to the buyer, although on the advert, the amount of evidence was not limited. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | June | Buckinghamshire County Council | Procurement Strategy | Use of framework | A supplier contacted us regarding Buckinghamshire County Council School Information Management System (SIMS) Software for Schools contract that was awarded 30 April 2020. The supplier was concerned that a Direct Award was not the most appropriate route to procure this product. | The Council confirmed they had considered various Frameworks in relation to the procurement of the SIMS Software for Schools. Due to a number of reasons, including: the relevance of the Framework, the ease of use, timescales and resources required, the Kent County Supplies Framework for Managed Services for Business Solutions was selected. The Framework permitted a Direct Award in certain circumstances and the council evidenced these were met. The winning supplier was deemed to be the only supplier on the Framework able to provide the service on the scale and within the timescales required by the Council. In deciding whether or not to proceed with a Direct Award in accordance with the Framework, the Council considered ‘best value’ provisions and the cost of change to a new supplier. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | June | Suffolk County Council | Procurement Process | Use of framework | A supplier contacted us regarding Suffolk County Council School Information Management System (SIMS) Software for Schools contract. The supplier was concerned that a Direct Award was not the most appropriate route to procure this product. | The Council confirmed that the School Information Management System (SIMS) contract was awarded 10 June 2020 as a Direct Award under the Managed Services for Business Framework Agreement – Y16018. The Framework permitted a Direct Award in certain circumstances and the council evidenced these were met. The Council already had a team of staff that were highly skilled in SIMS and any change in platform would have affected the capability of this service and impacted on the schools use of their information management system. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | July | UK Hydrographic Office | Procurement Process | Timescales | PPRS was contacted by a supplier regarding a live opportunity advertised by the UK Hydrographic Office for Website Development. Although the tender was advertised on the Delta eSourcing platform on 10 June 2020, it was only published on the OJEU platform on 6 July 2020. As the deadline for responses was 13 July 2020, the supplier was concerned that suppliers who had found the opportunity through the Delta eSourcing platform would have had extra time to prepare their responses. | The UK Hydrographic Office promptly addressed our enquiry and extended the closing date of the tender to 31 July 2020. This extension was communicated formerly through the platform to all interested suppliers. Complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | July | HM Revenue & Customs | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) late payment of an invoice totalling £27,630.00. | HMRC advised that the delay occurred following a changing in staffing and promptly confirmed payment had been made for the outstanding invoice. PPRS made the Authority aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20 and 04/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded the Trust and reminded the Authority of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | July | Central London Community Healthcare NHS | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding Central London Community Healthcare (CLCH) late payment of two invoices totalling £416.40. | CLCH promptly confirmed payment had been made for the outstanding invoices. PPRS made the Trust aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20 and 04/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded the Trust and reminded the Authority of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | July | Westminster City Council and Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea | Procurement Process | Clarification | PPRS was contacted by a supplier regarding the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace opportunity: https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/12619 advertised by Westminster City Council and Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. The supplier had asked two clarification questions but they remained unanswered after the deadline for responses had passed, which was one day before the tender submission deadline. | CCS advised that it is permissible under the Framework for Buyers to answer questions up until the day before the procurement closes and can choose to not answer all the questions if they have sought advice to ensure adherence to the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 and transparency laws. The Council declined to answer the questions raised by this Supplier as they were considered to be strategy related as opposed to the clarifying details regarding the opportunity. PPRS recommended for future opportunities that sufficient time be provided between responses and tender submission to allow suppliers to prepare their final submission. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | July | Surrey County Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the procurement for: Surrey County Council (SCC) – Early Help Mini Competition – July 2019 ref SCC - 026860. The supplier raised concerns over the scoring methodology of the Social Value element and how the delivery of that value would be monitored going forward. Furthermore they felt that the evaluation of one of the questions in the Selection Questionnaire was unfair. | The Social Value scoring was a mandatory requirement and was applied as per the Social Value Evaluation Guidance (included in the mini-competition instruction documents). The council clearly defined how Social Value will be monitored for the contractual period. PPRS reviewed one of the selection questions and considered it was ambiguous. PPRS recommended in future the Council considers the style of the questions and provides clear guidance on the way in which answers will be evaluated, to ensure all opportunities meet the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 section 18, Principles of Procurement. Complaint partially upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | July | UK Biobank | Procurement Process | Evaluation | PPRS were contacted regarding concerns about a potential conflict of interest and breaches of confidentiality regarding the award of the “Managed Informatics Platform for Research Access to Data” procurement by the UK Biobank Limited (Procurement Reference Number: UKBB009). In particular the complainant alleged that one of the evaluators on the procurement had a conflict of interest and the evaluator and the evaluator’s company were set to financially benefit from the outcome of the award. | PPRS contacted UK Biobank Limited who advised that they had been fully transparent and included the evaluator’s details in the Invitation to Tender. Furthermore both the evaluators had signed a conflict of interest declaration. UK Biobank also advised that at the conclusion of the evaluation process, all bidders were written to in a manner which set out comprehensively the scoring (and basis for the scoring) for their bid as compared to the winning bid. PPRS were satisfied with the explanation and that no further action was required. Some of the issues raised in the complaint were outside of the scope and remit of the PPRS and the complainant was advised to seek their own legal advice as to their options. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | July | Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust late payment of a number of invoices totalling £81,192.48. | The Trust advised that some of the invoices had not been received and would now work directly with the supplier to bring the account up to date. The Trust provided PPRS with a statement to show where invoices had been paid and advised where the remainder would be paid. PPRS made the Trust aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20 and 04/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded the Trust and reminded the Authority of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | July | Great Ormond Street Hospital | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) late payment of two invoices totalling £62,790.64. | GOSH confirmed payment had been made for £41,000.00 and that they are working with the supplier to ensure smooth payment practices going forwards. PPRS made GOSH aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20 and 04/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded the Trust and reminded the Authority of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | August | Foreign & Commonwealth Office (FCO) | Procurement Strategy | SME exclusion - accreditation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an opportunity advertised by Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) on the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace. https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/12757. They were concerned that the requirement for ISO 9001 and ISO 27001 certification was a barrier to small businesses applying for the opportunity and was contrary to the terms of the original Digital Outcomes and Specialists Framework. | CCS confirmed that the requirement was acceptable under the Framework. FCO had detailed this in the additional information field on the Digital Marketplace and had also given the suppliers time to ensure they had the certification in place before work commences. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | August | Hackney Council | Procurement Process | Establishment of framework | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Hackney Council’s Framework 2: Construction Based Consultancy, Building Surveying, Architectural, Employer's Agent, Planning, FM, Engineering, Daylight and Sunlight, Creative, Fire and Safety, Photographic specifically Lot 5 - Multi-Disciplinary Design Led Services (Architect-Led). The supplier was concerned that their Selection Questionnaire response had been marked incorrectly. | The council reviewed the submission and confirmed that the supplier had submitted a full response and unfortunately the assessor had missed their response in the e-portal. The council confirmed it had re-assessed the submission and provided a written response to the supplier informing them of the outcome, the reassessment had no impact on the award decision. Following our enquiry the council confirmed that they had reviewed all Selection Questionnaire submissions and they had been correctly assessed. Complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | August | Beyond housing | Procurement Strategy | SME exclusion - insurance requirement | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding a tender opportunity advertised by Beyond Housing, reference BH/2020/0044. The supplier was concerned that the minimum Professional Indemnity Insurance (PII) per claim of £5 million was excessively high and could prevent smaller enterprises from being able to compete. | Beyond Housing confirmed that interested suppliers could submit a bid and advise what level of PII they would suggest. Bids would not be rejected due to insurance levels not reaching £5 million. Beyond Housing advised all tenderers of this through clarification on their procurement portal. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | August | Ministry of Defence (MoD) | Procurement Process | Accreditation | Beyond Housing confirmed that interested suppliers could submit a bid and advise what level of PII they would suggest. Bids would not be rejected due to insurance levels not reaching £5 million. Beyond Housing advised all tenderers of this through clarification on their procurement portal. Complaint not upheld. | MoD confirmed that the original delivery date of October 2020 that was included in the tender documents was an error and has now been amended within Defence Contracts Online to January 2021. MoD considered this to be a reasonable timeframe for suppliers to be able to achieve the delivery milestones. The opportunity has been advertised openly for suppliers to apply within Defence Contracts Online. Complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | August | Hackney Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Hackney Council’s Framework 2: Construction Based Consultancy, Building Surveying, Architectural, Employer's Agent,Planning, FM, Engineering, Daylight and Sunlight, Creative, Fire and Safety, Photographic. The supplier was concerned that their Selection Questionnaire response had been marked and ranked incorrectly. | The council confirmed it has re-assessed the submission made on a previous tender. The council reviewed their e-portal and confirmed that the supplier had not submitted a response to the lot in question and as such had received a zero score. The zero score should not have been ranked and the notification letter was issued in error. Complaint partially upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | August | Bournemouth Christchurch & Poole Council | Procurement Strategy | SME exclusion - insurance requirement | PPRS was contacted by a supplier regarding an opportunity advertised by Bournemouth, Christchurch & Poole Council for the Concept Design for Sandbanks Pavilion reference: BOURN001-DN488110-50606882. The supplier was concerned that bidders are required to have £5 million Professional Indemnity Insurance (PII) and this could potentially exclude smaller enterprises from applying. | The Council advised PPRS that they had carried out a risk based approach, taking account of the individual proposed contractual arrangements in identifying the insurance requirements and setting the insurance limits. Factors such as public health and safety issues and the value of property were considered in this approach. The Council confirmed that the PII level was correct and not disproportionate to the scope of works. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | August | Burnley College | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier raised a concern that Burnley College had withdrawn as the contracting authority for the Procure Partnerships Minor Works Framework but the Framework operator, Procure Partnership, had not made this public knowledge and was still procuring public sector works. | PPRS contacted Burnley College who advised that the Procure Partnerships Minor Works Framework had been cancelled and they confirmed Burnley College was not the contracting authority for any Framework operated by Procure Partnerships. PPRS checked the Procure Partnerships website and the Minor Works Framework had been removed and was no longer procuring public sector works. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | August | Brent Council | Procurement Process | Feedback | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an opportunity advertised on the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace by Brent Council: Discovery, User Experience and Design for a new digital platform to better serve the residents of Brent. https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/11502. The opportunity had been awarded but the supplier had not received scoring feedback on their submission. | The Council offered an apology for the delay in providing feedback and assured the supplier that all feedback will be issued as a priority. Further improvements would be made to ensure that delays do not occur on future opportunities. Complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | August | Leicestershire Police | Procurement Process | SME exclusion - advertisement | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an opportunity advertised by Leicestershire Police for the UK Police Service Language Services Dynamic Purchasing Solution. The Contracts Finder notice stated that this contract was not suitable for SMEs. | Leicestershire Police confirmed that any supplier that wishes to bid to be part of the Language Services Dynamic Purchasing Solution is free to do so from 14 September 2020. They confirmed that they would not exclude any bids received from SMEs. Leicestershire Police advised that they would revise the detail on Contracts Finder following award, as the system limits the input of the change until the award notice is posted. Complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | August | Hackney Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an opportunity advertised by Hackney Council using the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace. https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/12355 The supplier was shortlisted on the first stage and submitted a full proposal towards a second stage evaluation. The supplier received no feedback and was not aware if the award had been made. The supplier had tried to contact the buyer but had not received a response. | CCS confirmed that the council had contacted all suppliers to advise that they had encountered an unexpected delay in the procurement. The supplier was asked to confirm that they had received this notification but has not responded to us. The council advised that they were now in the process of confirming the award and have updated the advert. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | September | Countess of Chester Hospital NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding Countess Of Chester Hospital NHS Foundation Trust late payment of an invoice totalling £1,600.00. | The Trust promptly confirmed payment had been made for the outstanding invoices. PPRS made the Trust aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20 and 04/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded the Trust of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | September | Enfield Council | Procurement Process | Advertisement | PPRS was contacted by a supplier regarding a live opportunity advertised by Enfield Council for the procurement of Extra Care Services: https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/Notice/75bf5c8b-b83e-4653-919e-7748761b19b0?origin=SearchResults&p=1. The Contracts Finder notice did not provide details on how to apply for the opportunity. | The Council apologised for the error and updated the notice on Contracts Finder to provide information on how to apply for the opportunity. As the omission was rectified promptly there was no need to adjust the submission deadline. Complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | September | NCG | Procurement Strategy | Tender requirement | A supplier contacted PPRS in relation to NCGs requirement for a Consultancy review in Equality & Diversity. The supplier was concerned over a potential conflict of interest, that the procurement design would artificially narrow competition and the level of transparency. | The Authority confirmed that the procurement team had highlighted a potential conflict of interest and had removed the individual from the procurement decision process. The procurement team independently evaluated all quotations received. NCG provided the requirement sent to suppliers that confirmed it was not biased or narrowed the competition and NCG confirmed it had approached 14 organisations with their requirement to provide quotations. As the procurement value was under the threshold as described in the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 there was no requirement for this to be advertised on contracts finder. Additionally NCG conducted an internal review of its procurement process in light of the concerns raised. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | September | Government Digital Service | Procurement Strategy | Use of framework | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding a Government Digital Service (GDS) Crown Commercial Service (CCS) G-cloud 11 requirement. They were concerned about incorrect use of the framework, conflict of interest and change in requirement during the procurement. | GDS confirmed the procedure they followed in requesting clarification and proposals from shortlisted suppliers, this was confirmed permissible under the G-Cloud Framework by Crown Commercial Service. With regards to the concern over conflict of interest GDS confirmed that the individual had no financial involvement with the supplier who was awarded the contract, nor was the individual a part of the award decision making process. GDS further confirmed that after seeking clarification from the suppliers the requirement had been amended and all interested suppliers were notified. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | October | Great Ormond Street Hospital | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding £32,420.96 owed by Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) for overdue invoices. | GOSH confirmed payment had been made for £15,927.77 and provided contact details to the supplier to resolve the outstanding issues on their account. PPRS made the Hospital aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20 and 04/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded them of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | October | The Walton Centre | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding £41,670.09 owed by the Walton Centre for overdue invoices. | The Walton Centre confirmed payment had been made for £40,951.66 and provided contact details to the supplier to resolve the outstanding issues on their account. PPRS made the Trust aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20 and 04/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded them of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | October | Devon and Cornwall Police | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding Devon and Cornwall Police late payment of a number of invoices totalling £318.00. | PPRS contacted Devon and Cornwall Police who subsequently made full payment to the supplier. PPRS made the Authority aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20 and 04/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded them of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | October | Ministry of Defence (MoD) | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Ministry of Defence (MoD) procurement of High Visibility Horse Riding Equipment. The supplier had submitted a tender but not received notification of the outcome. | MoD confirmed that the evaluation stage was ongoing; tenderers would be advised of the outcome once this stage was completed. While there is no set time limit for notifying tenderers of the outcome of a public procurement exercise, the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 Regulation 55(1) requires contracting authorities to inform each tenderer of its decision as soon as possible. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | October | Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) procurement for the ‘Survey on Attitudes to the Environment’ Tender. The supplier failed to complete one of the sections on their submission. They believed that this was an optional response and had not received notification to the contrary. | Defra provided evidence that the questions the supplier failed to respond to were not optional and the guidance notes for completion made this clear. The Public Contracts Regulations 2015 Regulation 56(4) provides authorities with the option to request incomplete or missing information. As all other interested suppliers had successfully completed their submissions, Defra decided not to pursue this option for a single supplier. In response to the concerns raised by a supplier, Defra extended the standstill period, however, no formal legal challenge was received and the contract was awarded to the winning supplier. Defra also asked senior members of their procurement team to review the decision to reject the supplier’s bid and they confirmed, in conjunction with their commissioning team, that the correct ation had been taken. Defra advised PPRS that their procurement portal is under constant review and agreed to ask their Systems Administration Team to look at the possibility of flagging any incomplete submissions for mandatory requirements. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | October | North West London Pathology | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding North West London Pathology late payment of an invoice totalling £987.05. | North West London Pathology payments are processed through ELFS Shared Services. Full payment was made to the supplier. PPRS made the authority aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20 and 04/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded them of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | October | West Sussex County Council | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier raised a concern that West Sussex County Council (WSCC) had not fulfilled its obligations to publish their opportunity for the WSCC Care & Support At Home Tender on Contracts Finder. | PPRS reviewed the published notices on Contracts Finder and Tenders Electronic Daily and confirmed that the Council had met their publishing requirements. Additional guidance on publication obligations can be found in Procurement Policy Note 02/17 - Promoting Greater Transparency. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | November | Ministry of Defence (MoD) | Procurement Process | Use of framework | PPRS was contacted by a supplier regarding an Army Digital Services (ADS) opportunity for "Provision of ADS Develop as a Service" advertised on the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace. The supplier was concerned that if the Authority is buying a team of contractors where they are responsible for the inputs (ie.provision of suitable staff) but not the outcomes, then the Authority should not use the CCS Digital Outcomes and Specialist (DOS 4) Framework. | The response from the Authority was reviewed by CCS who concurred that the requirement was an "outcome based" requirement based on a set of deliverables, provided by specialist technology service providers using their own expertise and knowledge. This is in accordance with the CCS DOS 4 Framework Terms & Conditions 2.5 and Call-Off Terms & Conditions, 2.1; 2.3 & 6.2 although the Authority has the ability to question the specific experience of the specialist that is provided and the supplier has the responsibility and liability for all of the work and its delivery. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | November | Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding £49,328.93 owed by Homerton University Hospital Foundation Trust for overdue invoices. | The Hospital provided evidence that payment had been made for the valid undisputed invoices and was working directly with the supplier to resolve the outstanding issues on their account. PPRS made the Hospital aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20 and 04/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded them of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | November | Warwickshire Council | Procurement Process | SME Exclusion - Financial requirement | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding North Warwickshire Borough Council’s Invitation To Tender (ITT) for Gas Programme. The supplier was concerned that the Local Labour Ambition and Turnover assessment was biased towards the incumbent and excluded SME participation. | The Council confirmed it covers a large geographical area and are keen to encourage local labour, the 30% ambition for local labour in the original tender was not intended as a pass/fail criteria. The Council has stated that the opportunity is likely to be subject to TUPE and has provided this data, therefore all bidders had been given equal information and the council confirmed suppliers were expected to make their own assumptions to the total number of staff required to be transferred depending on their operating model. This could have been clearer in the tender documentation and PPRS would recommend the council ensures this for future procurements. The Council advised the information on turnover would be used to ascertain whether a supplier can support the value of the contract and was not to be evaluated in isolation as in Procurement Policy Note: Standard Selection Questionnaire 8/16 Point 47. The Council shared the marking criteria with PPRS to demonstrate how they met with the requirements laid out in Procurement Policy Note: Supplier Financial Risk Issues 02/13. PPRS recommends that for future procurements turnover and economic assessment should not be used as a down-select in the technical and quality criteria but can be used in the Selection criteria as per PPN08/16 Part 3 Section 4.1. As the procurement process was amended we would recommend the Council should have reviewed the appropriateness of assessing turnover at the evaluation stage and the impact of changes made. Overall - PPRS recommends the Council better describe the evaluation criteria and may wish to consider allowing suppliers to compete as a group or consortia to ensure supplier participation and avoid challenge for future procurements. Complaint partially upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | December | Stratford upon Avon District Council | Procurement Process | Lack of feedback | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an opportunity advertised by Stratford on Avon District Council on the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace for "Validation of householder planning applications". The opportunity was awarded but the supplier was not provided with any feedback. | The Council advised that the lead buyer had been called away on urgent business and feedback was accidentally missed out of the process due to low staffing during this period of time. The Digital Marketplace Buyers Guidance (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/digital-outcomes-and-specialists-buyers-guide#give-feedback-to-suppliers-who-are-not-shortlisted) states that buyers must tell suppliers if they have not been shortlisted and explain why they did not meet the requirements. CCS provided the buyer with the feedback templates. The Council apologised for any inconvenience caused and issued feedback to the supplier. Complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | December | Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust late payment of a number of invoices totalling £27,805.60. | PPRS contacted Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust who subsequently made full payment to the supplier. The trust advised that there were issues in getting a Purchase Order raised originally due to requiring documents from the end user to ensure compliance with the Trust’s Standard Financial Instructions (SFI’s). PPRS made the Authority aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20 and 04/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded them of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. Complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2020 | December | Department of Health and Social Care | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier contacted PPRS concerning the contract award notice for “Supply of Hand Sanitiser for Healthcare Workers for the Care of Patients with Suspected or Confirmed Novel Coronavirus (Covid-19)”, Reference Number: NOV351017 published by DHSC. The supplier was keen to understand why the opportunity was not advertised enabling UK companies to tender. The supplier additionally queried the award date as they believed it to be outside of the pandemic urgent requirement period. | PPRS contacted DHSC who confirmed that the contract was awarded and signed on 18 May 2020 using Public Contract Regulation 32(2)(c) allowing DHSC to make a direct award. However, due to the administration pressures there was a delay in publishing the award notice until 11 November 2020. PPRS has recommended that DHSC ensures all award notices are published within 30 days in line with published guidance (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/873521/PPN_01-20_-_Responding_to_COVID19.v5__1_.pdf). Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | January | Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding £6,296.61 owed by Homerton University Hospital Foundation Trust for three overdue invoices. | The Trust had not received one invoice and the supplier resubmitted it. Full payment was then made for the three invoices once the Trust had resolved issues with the purchase orders. PPRS made the Trust aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20 and 04/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded them of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | January | Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) | Procurement Strategy | Equivalents | A supplier raised concern over an opportunity advertised by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) reference itt_8218 - Purchase of Three (3) Hettich Rotanta 460 Centrifuges and Accessories. The supplier believed that they could offer an equal alternative to the specified models but the opportunity to offer equivalents was not allowed. | The Public Contracts Regulations 2015 regulation 42.(10) states that technical specifications shall afford equal access of economic operators to the procurement procedure and shall not have the effect of creating unjustified obstacles to the opening up of public procurement to competition. Defra justified that the need for specific types of validated centrifuges were required to be consistent with their existing equipment. Their Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA) uses validated machinery to ensure resilience and standardisation across three laboratory locations. Using the same equipment would allow exchanges between the laboratories at any given time and also provide familiarisation between operatives which is safety critical. Defra recognised that the original clarification question response may not have been as clear in terms of detailing the reasons for the requirement and updated their clarification response to align with the information detailed above. Complaint partially upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | January | The Walton Centre NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding £14,844.51 owed by the Walton Centre for overdue invoices. | The Walton Centre resolved their internal purchase order issues and confirmed payment had been made for the invoices that were valid, undisputed and overdue. PPRS made the Trust aware of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | January | Mersey Care NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding £73,908.48 owed by Mersey Care NHS Trust for overdue invoices. | The Supplier confirmed payment had been made for the valid undisputed invoices. PPRS made the Trust aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20 and 04/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded them of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | January | Transport for London | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier raised concern over the Transport for London (TfL) opportunity: tfl_scp_002130 Temporary River Crossing at Hammersmith Bridge. Specifically, they felt one question regarding previous experience was too ambiguous, open to interpretation and inconsistencies in the clarification question responses led to a material disadvantage to them. | TfL confirmed that the Supplier Questionnaire (SQ) stated that suppliers needed to read the questions in the context of the "Description of information in support of response" column which set out further information about the requirements that candidates were required to address in their submission. The SQ documentation stated that the evidence in respect of each question had to be provided on a standalone basis and bidders could not cross refer to material provided elsewhere in their submission. Contracting Authorities should not use the clarification process to "coach" candidates on areas of their submissions that might be deficient. If a supplier considered a question too ambiguous or confusing, then they could seek clarification of the question prior to responding to it (as was permitted under the provisions of the SQ). A supplier could have also used the opportunity to submit two examples of supporting evidence to ensure that distinct evidence of the provision of services were provided. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | January | Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding overdue invoices for the Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Foundation Trust totalling £14,718.35. | The Trust had not received one invoice and one other was in dispute. The Hospital shared contact details for the supplier to resolve directly and full payment was made for the remaining invoices. PPRS made the Hospital aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20 and 04/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded them of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | February | Devon and Cornwall Police | Procurement Process | Advertisement | PPRS was contacted by a supplier regarding a live opportunity for "Strategic Partnership for the Delivery, Management and Development of a Victim Care Network" advertised by Devon and Cornwall Police (DCP). The supplier was concerned that both the contract value was unclear and that the contract term was misleading. There appeared to be no start or end dates provided for the different phases of the contract and some of the documentation contained typographical errors. Overall, the supplier felt that each small omission, error or inaccuracy compounded to reduce the ability of non-incumbent bidders to submit a bid. As a consequence, they questioned the fairness and transparency of the process. | Devon and Cornwall Police (DCP) confirmed that as this was a new requirement, there was no incumbent supplier. The contract was advertised for a 10 year term at £2 million per annum but acknowledged it was likely that the relevant break clauses caused the confusion over the contract term. In terms of the contract phases, DCP advised that the plan was to award the contract on 4 January 2021 so there will be a transition period from then until 31 March 2021. There had been an initial typographical error in the tender documentation regarding the duration of the transition period although DCP evidenced that this had been addressed and responded to through clarification. PPRS recommended to DCP that tender documents are fully reviewed prior to publication to ensure that any typographical errors do not cause delays to interested suppliers and allow suppliers to submit responsive, coherent and competitive bids. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | February | Great Ormond Street Hospital | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding £24,450.72 owed by Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) for overdue invoices. | GOSH resolved the issue of reconciling their purchase orders with the catalogue and confirmed payment had been made for all undisputed invoices. PPRS made the Hospital aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20 and 04/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded them of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | February | Waltham Forest Council | Procurement Process | Clarification | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the live procurement for Design and Print Services at London Borough of Waltham Forest. The supplier was concerned that the process was cancelled after bids were submitted, and suppliers were not provided with an acceptable reason. When the new documents were released they were made public as an open procedure, which forced bidders to undertake the entire process again. The supplier was also concerned that clarification questions were not being shared between bidders. | London Borough of Waltham Forest advised us that the previous print and design tender was cancelled in line with clause 22.2.6 of the Invitation to Tender providing the right to cancel or withdraw the procurement process. Due to the current climate their procurement strategy and requirements had changed from the original tender and therefore they started a new procurement rather than continuing an existing procurement that was likely to lead to suboptimal outcomes. The new procurement included, but was not limited to, modifications to the technical requirements. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | February | Ministry of Justice (MoJ) | Procurement Process | Use of framework | A supplier contacted us regarding an opportunity advertised on the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace. The supplier submitted a bid for the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) Cybersecurity Log Collection and Aggregation Platform but had not received any notification of the outcome. | The award of contracts and feedback is covered by the PCR 2015 Regulation 86 Notices of decisions to award a contract or conclude a framework agreement - although this Regulation does provide an exemption under (5)(c) where the buyer need not comply if they are awarding a contract under a Framework. However, the Digital Outcomes and Specialists Framework states in Framework Schedule 7 (Call-Off Award Procedure) under Clause 2.1.10 'The Buyer awarding a Call-Off Contract under this Contract through a Further Competition Procedure shall: provide unsuccessful Suppliers and those not shortlisted (if applicable) with written feedback in relation to the reasons why their tenders were unsuccessful, in line with the Regulations and the Buyers Guidance. Suppliers need to know if and why they weren’t successful so they can plan for other work and improve any future applications they make. MoJ did not provide feedback in this instance and PPRS recommended that, for future procurements, feedback is provided explaining why a supplier was unsuccessful, including the advantages of the successful bid compared to the unsuccessful bid and give positive feedback where appropriate. Complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | February | Highways England | Procurement Process | Transparency | A supplier raised concerns over a Highways England opportunity published on the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace. They were concerned that not all relevant documentation was being made available to all potential suppliers. | The CCS Commercial Agreement Manager reviewed the procurement and was satisfied that the buyer had made efforts to ensure the information was available to all suppliers and when challenged in the supplier questions had also created an additional way for suppliers to access the information demonstrating compliance with the published buyers' guidance. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | February | Sussex NHS Commissioners | Procurement Process | Timescales | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an opportunity advertised on the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace. In this opportunity Sussex NHS Commissioners stated that the mandatory deadline given by the Digital Marketplace was incorrect and that they would like the work to start sooner. | The CCS Digital Outcomes & Specialists Commercial Agreement Manager advised the contracting Authority that a different start date to the one advertised was not allowed under the framework and to avoid further legal challenge they recommended the buyer remove the opportunity and look for a more appropriate procurement vehicle. The buyer agreed and removed the opportunity in line with the guidance provided. Complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | February | Hertfordshire Community NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding Hertfordshire Community NHS Trust (HCT) late payment of an invoice totalling £215.40. | The Trust advised that the delay was due to the relevant HCT member of staff being redeployed as part of their operational response to the COVID Pandemic. The matter was resolved and the trust made full payment to the supplier. PPRS made the Authority aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20 and 04/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded them of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | February | University Hospital Coventry & Warwickshire | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding £40,285.19 owed by University Hospital Coventry & Warwickshire for overdue invoices. | The Hospital reviewed the supplier's account and utilised faster payment to resolve the outstanding invoices. PPRS made the Hospital aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20 and 04/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded them of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | February | Oxfordshire County Council | Procurement Strategy | Equivalents | A supplier raised a concern over a Oxfordshire County Council live procurement reference I-0593, Highway Electrical Assets, Maintenance, Replacement and LED Conversion Contract. The supplier was concerned that two lantern manufacturers and a specific lantern series for the capital works elements of the contract had been specified and there was not the option to submit an alternative. | PPRS contacted the Authority reminding them The Public Contracts Regulations 2015 regulation 42.(10) states that ‘Technical specifications shall afford equal access of economic operators to the procurement procedure and shall not have the effect of creating unjustified obstacles to the opening up of public procurement to competition’. The Authority advised that they had issued a clarification detailing how suppliers could submit pricing for alternatives and provided an extension for submissions to be made. The Authority received no supplier queries and did receive compliant bids. Complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | February | Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier raised a concern over a Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council (WHC) procurement reference: WHC - Demolition Works at 3 – 9 Town Centre, Hatfield. Project Reference: C890. The supplier was concerned that contract examples were requested while it appeared evaluation was carried out on case studies resulting in multiple suppliers being deselected. | The Authority advised that to pass the experience section, bidders had to provide three contract examples and were required to provide at least two examples of having undertaken similar demolition projects of a similar size and value. The contractor should also give examples of where they have acted as Construction (Design and Management) regulations 2015 Principal Contractor and also engaged and coordinated related builders work. The evaluation was carried out as described in the Invitation To Tender by their consultant and an in-house surveyor. All the responses were clear and therefore it was not necessary to seek clarification from bidders. Only bidders who did not meet the criteria were deselected. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | February | Ministry of Defence (MoD) | Procurement Process | Timescales | A supplier raised a concern over The Design, Production and Supply of Weather Covers procurement being run by the Ministry of Defence (MoD). The supplier was concerned that there was not a published timeline for the outcome of the Pre Qualification Questionnaire and for the contract to go live. | The MoD advised that the error was a result of technical issues with their e-tendering portal. They agreed to update all suppliers once consensus was completed on the Pre Qualification Questionnaire. The MoD advised that the contract should go live in July 2021. Complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | February | Home Office | Procurement Process | Feedback | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Home Office opportunity for a Technical Project Manager advertised on the Crown Commercial Services (CCS) Digital Marketplace. The supplier was concerned that the award was made prior to unsuccessful suppliers being provided feedback and that the scoring was not in line with the published guidance. | The Home Office confirmed that the award process was extended to allow an interview stage and interviews were organised for the successful shortlisted suppliers with the criteria being judged at interview based directly on the published requirements for Technical Competence. All suppliers scored equally during the interview and therefore there was no change to the overall order. Detailed feedback was sent to all suppliers who were shortlisted but not awarded the contract. The CCS Digital Outcomes & Specialists (DOS) Commercial Agreement Manager reviewed the case and deemed that although the Home Office’s process had been extended as a result of business needs, this was communicated to the shortlist and therefore did not favour a particular supplier. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | February | HM Revenue & Customs | Procurement Strategy | Use of framework | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding a cloud-based service support contract for HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) “Customs Declaration Service Transition Trade Tariff Online Tool". The supplier raised concern that they received no communication from HMRC that they were conducting the replacement support procurement nor did they receive a Request for Clarification which they believe would be typically sent to suppliers when procuring through the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) G-Cloud 12 Framework. The supplier believed the requirement should have been procured using the Digital Outcomes and Specialists framework and further expressed concern over the evaluation criteria and raised a potential conflict of interest within the Delivery Team. | HMRC considered that this requirement fell within a niche market place and were aware that the G-Cloud 12 Framework provided service offerings from the leading suppliers in this area, use of another CCS framework would not in their opinion have returned a greater number of suppliers. HMRC confirmed that all evaluators are required to complete conflict of interest declarations prior to involvement on any evaluation team. HMRC confirmed that standard G-Cloud award criteria and evaluation methodology were used. The use of a Request for Clarification is not mandatory and in this instance HMRC considered the technical solutions were clear therefore this was not deemed necessary. HMRC had written to the supplier to make them aware that the contract in place was due to expire. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | February | ELFS Shared Services | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding £987.05 owed by North West London Pathology for overdue invoices. | North West London Pathology resolved the issue of returning goods and raising a new order and confirmed payment had been made for all undisputed invoices. PPRS made the Authority aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20 and 04/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded them of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | February | NHS LPP | Procurement Process | Transparency | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding NHS London Procurement Partnership's Provision of Clinical Healthcare Staffing Framework procurement. It appeared that there were a number of amendments to submission documents that could have caused confusion and delays. Furthermore the supplier was concerned that not all suppliers had been treated equally during the process by allowing submission extensions at some stages of the process and not at others. | The Authority advised that amendments to Schedule 3 Commercials were necessary, as per points raised in the clarification process early on in the Invitation To Tender (ITT) stage. Without exception, all amendments were communicated via the Due North procurement portal, as stipulated in the ITT pack. It was the responsibility of all bidders to ensure they monitored and responded to any communications issued via the portal in an accurate and timely manner. Each stage of the process had separate deadlines and extensions. The Authority has confirmed that all suppliers were treated identically and transparently at each stage, in line with public procurement regulations, including any extensions granted at each stage. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | March | Ministry of Defence (MoD) | Procurement Strategy | Use of framework | PPRS was contacted by a supplier concerning a Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace opportunity for Army Digital Service: https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/13409. The contract award value was listed as £4 million but in the Budget Range section stated there will be a non-guaranteed Limit of Liability of c£22 million which the supplier considered to be misleading. | The buyer confirmed that they awarded the contract based on the core requirement of £4 million. The budget ceiling of c£22 million is not guaranteed and would be dependent on future business case approval. PPRS cross-referenced this with the CCS Commercial Agreement Specialise who confirmed that on this basis the information was included in the advertised opportunity, the contract award notification was compliant. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | March | Central Bedfordshire College | Procurement Process | Award | A supplier, who wished to remain anonymous, contacted PPRS regarding the Central Bedfordshire College (CBC) Provision of Cleaning Services Tender. The supplier was informed that they had not made the shortlist, they were unclear of the evaluation criteria or submission requirements and queried what assessment was made on which to base the shortlisted companies. | Without being able to confirm the suppliers identity CBC were unable to confirm precisely why the bidder was excluded. CBC provided a copy of the Invitation to Tender (ITT) that detailed the mandatory prerequisites. CBC stated in the ITT they would notify the outcome of tender submissions at the earliest possible time in adherence of Regulation 55 of the Public Contracts Regulations. To that end, they have concluded their correspondence with those tenderers who did not make it onto the shortlist. In addition, CBC advised that they are currently undertaking a review of procurement processes/ITT/evaluation criteria in order to fully embrace the importance of involving SMEs in the supply chain. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | March | Southend University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding £1,422.03 owed by Southend University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust for overdue invoices. | The Trust reviewed the supplier's account and utilised faster payment to resolve the outstanding invoices. PPRS made the Trust aware of Procurement Policy Note 02/20 and 04/20: Supplier relief due to COVID-19 and also reminded them of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | March | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding a Crown Commercial Service (CCS) procurement for the Provision of Survey Software reference number: CCSO20A99. The supplier was concerned that they were unfairly scored and disqualified even though they believed that they were the most economically advantageous tender (MEAT). | CCS provided PPRS with the evaluation spreadsheet detailing the marking scheme used. The supplier did not achieve the minimum pass score for three questions. The scoring was reviewed again during the Consensus Evaluation meeting. CCS further advised that even using MEAT, it is ultimately up to the buyer what scoring and weighting they apply. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | March | Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding five overdue invoices for the Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Foundation Trust totalling £6,304.87. | The Trust promptly reviewed the account and all invoices were paid on the next payment run. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | March | North Bristol NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding £2,072.07 owed by North Bristol NHS Trust for overdue invoices. | The Trust promptly reviewed the account and all valid invoices were paid on the next payment run. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | March | Westminster City Council | Transparency | Transparency | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding a Westminster Council Tender for Penfold Extra Care Scheme in Autumn 2019. The supplier was concerned that the lack of an opportunity for the commissioning team to understand their organisation and team better through a meeting/ presentation could favour the incumbent. The supplier also felt that the pricing structure was overly complex and unnecessary. Furthermore the supplier felt that their requests for clarification did not add any meaningful output to assist them and multiple other organisations from submitting a competitive bid. | The Authority advised that the decision to exclude a meeting/presentation was actively taken pre-tender to promote equality and fairness and to reduce requirements upon suppliers. The Selection Questionnaire and Invitation to Tender enabled all bidders to demonstrate their suitability in exactly the same way. With regards to the pricing matrix the Authority responded that there are many demands on Local Authority budgets, keeping a service within budget for the duration of a contract is a key requirement and there is a need for suppliers to appreciate this and understand what this would mean in real terms for their delivery model. This informed the approach. The authority provided PPRS the clarification log for review and it demonstrated that they responded to all queries raised providing clarification for all bidders. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | March | South West London and St George’s Mental Health NHS Trust | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS to raise a concern over a recent tender under the Crown Commercial Service Framework, Network Services 2 RM3808 Lot 8 for South West London and St George’s Mental Health NHS Trust. The supplier was concerned about what model numbers had been purchased for the Internet Protocol (IP) telephony products and whether the winning bid price includes all costs for 5 years as stipulated in the tender documentation. The supplier did not expect the bid to be reopened but wanted clarification on the points above. | The authority provided PPRS with the model numbers purchased to date and confirmed that the tender was an open, fair and transparent process with an evaluation team that rated the bids using a balanced scorecard method. All clarifications and questions were responded to via the tender portal. Furthermore the authority confirmed that the winning bid price included all costs for 5 years as stipulated in the tender documentation. The supplier raised no further queries. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | April | British Film Institute | Procurement Process | Lack of feedback | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the British Film Institution (BFI) procurement for Sight and Sound Magazine Audience Development. The supplier was seeking more detailed information on the reasons for their rejection. | BFI confirmed that the tender was completed at the end of March 2021 and was below threshold. The supplier was offered feedback on their submission as part of their regular procurement procedures but it is at the discretion of the buyer whether they supply more detailed feedback. Although there has been no breach of the Public Contracts Regulations (2015), PPRS would always encourage buyers to give detailed feedback, recognising that this can improve the quality of bids put forward and lead to more standardised submissions as well as helping suppliers learn for future opportunities. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | April | East Riding of Yorkshire Council | Procurement Strategy | Tender requirement | A supplier raised a concern over East Riding of Yorkshire Council's procurement reference DN531043 - Mobile Telephony, RM3808 - Lot 6. The supplier believed that the essential aspect of the requirements to provide 4G geographical coverage footprint above 84% would result in suppliers not participating in the further competition, as it appeared uncompetitive and they could be downselected by not meeting the criteria. | For this opportunity the authority advised that they had a specific range of technical and service criteria which had been deemed as essential to meet their business and operational needs. The authority also advised they had used OFCOM data to provide an industry recognised and independent benchmark that is in line with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 regulation 42.(11a & b). Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | April | Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding four overdue invoices for Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust totalling £3,413.28. | The Trust paid two of the invoices. The other two were in dispute and therefore outside of our scope and remit. PPRS provided contact details for the supplier to resolve this directly. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | April | University Hospital Coventry & Warwickshire | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding £21,691.61 owed by University Hospital Coventry & Warwickshire for overdue invoices. | The Hospital reviewed the supplier's account and paid the outstanding invoices. PPRS reminded the Hospital of their obligations where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | April | South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust | Procurement Process | Award | PPRS was contacted by a supplier regarding the South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (SLaM) opportunity for “Support for SLaM Transformation Programme”. The supplier was concerned that although they scored higher in Lot 3 they had not been successful and their requests for a 1:1 call to discuss the requirement during the process was not acknowledged. | A typographical error had transposed within the name of the complainant with that of the winning supplier. The Trust apologised for the error and agreed to arrange a debrief session with them directly. PPRS reminded of the importance of accurate communications to ensure that this does not happen in future procurements. Complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | April | Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding £7,262.25 owed by Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust for overdue invoices. | The Trust promptly reviewed the account and all invoices were paid in full. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | April | Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding 16 outstanding invoices for Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust totalling £38,945.92. | The Trust reviewed the account and requested copy invoices. Once received, they promptly paid all of the valid and undisputed invoices. PPRS reminded the Trust that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | April | Kirklees Council | Procurement Process | Award | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Kirklees Council opportunity for Colne Valley Mental Health Intervention Service. The supplier was seeking assurance around the due diligence process undertaken, raising concern that the contract had been awarded to an unincorporated organisation. | The Council provided assurance that a full due diligence process was undertaken prior to contract award. The due diligence checks included a review of the winning supplier’s insurance certificates verified for appropriate insurance levels, their financial status was assessed as acceptable for the purposes of this commission and their Health and Safety and Safeguarding policies were provided. These were all requirements of the Request for Quotation. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | May | Merton London Borough Council | Procurement Strategy | Timescales | PPRS was contacted by a supplier regarding two opportunities advertised by London Borough of Merton. 1. West Wimbledon Primary School fabric repairs & MEP upgrades, published date: 27 April 2021, closing date: 5 May 2021 2. William Morris Primary School structural repairs & toilet block refurbishment, published date: 27 April 2021, closing date: 5 May 2021 The supplier was concerned over the short timescales to submit their bid. | London Borough of Merton advised us that these were below threshold construction opportunities. They were undertaking a restricted process using a Supplier Questionnaire (SQ) to avoid many contractors needing to submit a detailed tender. The SQ information requested was the minimum requirement with a small amount of extra information required for the buyer to determine experience and suitability of contractors to undertake the works. The timescale was short due to an Invitation to Tender needing to follow and the works required to be undertaken in the forthcoming school summer holidays. There is no stipulated timescale for below threshold contracts. PPRS recommended that the supplier raise the issue directly through the London Tenders Portal where the opportunity was advertised. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | June | Waltham Forest Council | Procurement Strategy | SME exclusion - financial requirement | PPRS were contacted by a supplier regarding London Borough of Waltham Forest – Dynamic Purchasing System – Joint Architects / Principal Designer and Sustainability Consultants Design Team for Vicarage Road, Leyton and Osborne Grove, Walthamstow. The supplier was concerned that by withholding 40 percent of the service fee smaller suppliers were being discriminated against and it did not adhere to best practice principles. | PPRS contacted the Council who explained the milestone structures and that it was intended to spread the fee claims appropriately across the earlier phases of the assignment, while ensuring a sufficient % of fees were retained for (i) receipt of planning approval and (ii) to ensure work that may be required between approval and issue of Formal Decision Notice is fully undertaken. The council has agreed to review the payment terms for future commissions. PPRS would recommend that the Council carefully consider the way in which future procurements on the DPS are structured and ensure that milestones are adequately explained to promote maximum participation by suppliers. As the Council have taken onboard the concerns raised and advised that the feedback will be fed into future procurements PPRS will mark this case for a follow up in 6 months to understand what improvements have been made to procurements in that time frame. Future procurements to be adjusted as the complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | June | HM Revenue & Customs | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding four overdue invoices for HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) totalling £161,004.88. | HMRC promptly reviewed the supplier's account and extended the purchase order and made the full outstanding payment. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did claim late payment interest charges and HMRC paid these in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | June | University of Birmingham | Procurement Strategy | SME exclusion - Lotting | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding University of Birmingham Framework FRAM460/260: Supply of Laboratory Consumables & Reagents 2021/S 015-035061. They were concerned that the procurement strategy excluded SME participation because of the large range of items included in each lot. The supplier requested that as the University had adopted a UK Shared Business Services (UK SBS) Framework for service/calibration of Pipettes (Lot 1), could that be extended to Lot 9 of the same Framework to allow suppliers to continue to supply the University, albeit for a reduced range of equipment. | The University advised that they require and actively encourage Tier 1 suppliers to engage with local suppliers and SMEs as a significant part of their supply chain. For this tender, they further encouraged Tier 1 suppliers to work with third-party SMEs suppliers and encouraged SME suppliers to engage in a dialogue to explore the opportunities available if not already connected as part of their existing third party procurement service. For this reason and also due to the impact of the pandemic, they extended their tender deadline for two weeks. The University advised that they awarded five suppliers to the framework, one of which was an SME. After careful consideration and to support SMEs the University agreed that in this instance they would allow buyers to utilise Lot 9 of the UK SBS framework RE160396 allowing suppliers to continue to supply the University as requested. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | June | City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding two opportunities advertised by Bradford Council: 1. DN442492 - Maintenance and Repair of Commercial Gas & Oil Fired Appliances – November 2019 2. DN521059 - Maintenance and Repair of Commercial Gas & Oil Fired Appliances – January 2021 The supplier was concerned that the Council did not provide justification for abandoning the 2019 procurement. The supplier expressed further concerns over the 2021 opportunity, believing that the Council did not fully review the TUPE information provided by the incumbent service provider which in turn gave an unfair advantage to the incumbent, narrowing the competition. Furthermore, the supplier believed that the evaluation methodology had been applied differently in 2021 compared to 2019 leading to higher scoring of quality responses and that there was an abnormally low bid submitted by the incumbent service provider. | The Council communicated its decision to abandon the first procurement to all tenderers via letter on their e-procurement portal on 12th February 2020. The letter referenced Clause 3.9 of the Bidders Instruction Document allowing the Council to cancel or withdraw from the procurement exercise at any stage. The award criteria in the 2021 procurement was very similar to the award criteria in the 2019 abandoned procurement; the evaluation in the 2019 procurement had no bearing on the evaluation of the tenders in the 2021 re-procurement because the tenders were different and were two separate processes. It is for each tenderer to make their own independent assessment and allowance for TUPE. The Council considered that the TUPE information from the incumbent appeared to be an accurate representation of the incumbent’s workforce and further sought to check the information for due diligence purposes. The Council did not consider that overall the incumbent service provider’s tender had the appearance of being abnormally low and was assured that the information provided did satisfactorily account for the level of the elements in question. The Council advised PPRS that they have conducted thorough reviews of both procurement processes inline with their continuous improvement processes as the Council continually reviews their procedures to ensure that their templates and processes continue to meet the Public Contract Regulatory standards. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | June | Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier contacted PPRS with regards to the award of contracts by Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office for G7, two visits of President Trump in 2019, Commonwealth Heads of State Summit in London in 2019, for the Ground Transportation Services and COP 26. The supplier was concerned that despite being on the Crown Commercial Service framework RM6121 they were not made aware of these opportunities and could not see that they had been published on Contracts Finder. | PPRS sought clarification from Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) on how the opportunities were advertised. FCDO provided assurance and links to Contracts Finder etc. to demonstrate that all the contracts in question had been awarded in compliance with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 in an open, fair and transparent way. At the point FCDO tendered and awarded the contract for the G7 Ground Transportation, the supplier was not an accredited supplier on the Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS). FCDO confirmed that they, alongside the Crown Commercial Service and their 3rd party support contractor, worked to register the supplier onto the DPS successfully. As the supplier has since been successfully approved on the DPS, they will have the opportunity to access government contracts, assisting their business to enter the supply chain. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | July | English Heritage | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier contacted PPRS with regards to the award of 6 contracts by English Heritage for the following advertised opportunities:- https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/notice/89bd0d03-7f0f-496b-b8f5-f50cbe0bccf7?origin=SearchResults&p=1, https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/notice/62b2e674-5231-4de9-becc-3ac8df9f4ae8?origin=SearchResults&p=1, https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/notice/a83b7fde-13ca-4c6a-a930-0d06455fddfd?origin=SearchResults&p=1, https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/notice/b40bdbd7-f044-44d9-9aa4-466ff415564a?origin=SearchResults&p=1, https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/notice/52ad991f-08a6-4f95-abc3-ddf7416dac21?origin=SearchResults&p=1 and https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/notice/b6a9d627-17a2-4f31-8b93-4bb287b26893?origin=SearchResults&p=1. The supplier was concerned that despite these opportunities being awarded, Contracts Finder has not been updated accordingly. | Complaint partially upheld PPRS contacted English Heritage who duly updated the notices on Contracts Finder and advised the reason for the delay in publishing the award notices was due to an administrative matter as follows: Once English Heritage entered into the standstill period they received an informal challenge on one of the opportunities which was of a nature that could have applied to all the other opportunities, the matter was not concluded until 30 April 2021. On that basis they refrained from publicly awarding the contracts until this informal challenge had been concluded. PPRS would remind the authority that under the Public Contracts Regulations, Contract Award notices section 50.—(1) Not later than 30 days after the award of a contract or the conclusion of a framework agreement, following the decision to award or conclude it, contracting authorities shall send for publication a contract award notice on the results of the procurement procedure. The supplier raised a subsequent concern regarding the strategy of the pricing evaluation and how this had been communicated. English Heritage provided the evaluation criteria as detailed within the Invitation to Tender to demonstrate that all suppliers had received the same guidance, ensuring a level playing field for all bidders. Complaint upheld on the original point but not on the second issue raised. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | July | Infrastructure Project Authority (IPA) | Procurement Process | Feedback | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Infrastructure Project Authority (IPA) Benchmarking Hub Service (Beta) opportunity advertised on the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/14904?utm_id=20210602) The supplier had not received any feedback on their submission. | Complaint upheld CCS confirmed that the procurement had been cancelled and this was the reason the supplier had not received any feedback. The Digital Marketplace will be updated accordingly. The requirement may be redefined and advertised again in the near future. Complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | July | Norfolk County Council | Transparency | Transparency | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Norfolk County Council (NCC) procurement for NCCT42078 Endpoint Protection for Schools” Norfolk County Council (NCC). The supplier was concerned that the contract was not awarded due to NCC stance on EU Exit but was advised that a supplier was put in place. | Complaint not upheld PPRS contacted NCC who advised that the procurement was advertised on Contracts Finder and NCC received no suitable bids that could be considered for award due to data storage concerns, and as such no contract was awarded. The Council was unable to issue a no award notice via Contracts Finder as this function is not available. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | July | Home Office (HO) | Procurement Strategy | Favours incumbent | PPRS were contacted by a supplier regarding the Home Office (HO) procurement for Behavioural Approaches to Neighbourhood Crime Prevention - Phase 2. The supplier raised concerns about how competitive the process was because of the conditions in the Statement of Requirements. Specifically, the supplier believed the procurement favoured the organisation commissioned for the first phase of work and was seeking assurance that the procurement strategy was open, fair and transparent to all suppliers who were not involved in the phase 1 works. | Complaint not upheld HO advised that Phase 2 was a standalone procurement and all bids would be evaluated, in accordance with its terms, solely on their own merits and as per the evaluation criteria stated in the Invitation To Tender documents. Furthermore, HO sought their own independent commercial advice following a clarification question and were advised that it was compliant to reference previous work, as the bidder would be expected to build on phase 1. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | July | Leeds City Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding Leeds City Council Tender Ref: DN522508 - Responsive Roofing Repairs to Housing Properties. The supplier was concerned that submitted prices were passed back to all tenderers explaining that many contractors had misunderstood the criteria. The supplier had since learned that other companies were allowed to reduce tender sum totals and resubmit. | Complaint not upheld PPRS reviewed the Invitation To Tender (ITT) pack and communications issued between the supplier and Leeds City Council (LCC). LCC confirmed that bidders' pricing structures were not shared with others and that all bidders had the same opportunities to resubmit their pricing schedules after LCC noticed that a number of bids were not completed as per the guidance provided. In accordance with Regulation 56 (4) and paragraph 9.5 of the ITT document the procurement team allowed all bidders an opportunity to re-submit the pricing element of the tender, as there would not have been enough compliant submitted bids in order to continue with the procurement. Complaint not upheld, however PPRS recommended that LCC use the lessons learnt in this procurement exercise when structuring future ITT packs to avoid bidder confusion. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | July | Telford and Wrekin Council | Procurement Strategy | Length of documentation | A supplier contacted PPRS with regards to Telford & Wrekin Council's procurement for Management and Leadership Training. The supplier believed that the bid process was onerous due to the length of the tender documentation which could be perceived as a barrier to SMEs due to the volume of input required. | Complaint not upheld PPRS contacted Telford & Wrekin Council who provided background information, the rationale for the documentation and the justification which appeared to have been proportionate to the complexity of the procurement. PPRS could not see a breach in the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, however PPRS have shared the supplier's concerns with the Cabinet Office Small Business Policy team for their information. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | August | Dorset Police | Procurement Strategy | SME exclusion - insurance requirement | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Forensic Capability Network (FCN) carrying out a procurement for the national provision of Digital Forensics Services on behalf of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Dorset. As a part of the requirement FCN had stipulated that bidders must have £10 million of Cyber cover. This could potentially exclude smaller enterprises from applying. Furthermore, suppliers had been advised by the Forensic Science Regulator that in order to be able to carry out Police forensic work the Company must have UKAS:ISO17025:2017 accreditation. However, concerns had been raised that a few companies on the supplier list did not appear to have the required accreditation. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS contacted the Police and Crime Commissioner for Dorset who advised that the Digital Forensics Dynamic Purchasing System (DF DPS) had been assessed as high risk and as such suppliers were required to self-certify whether they already had, or could commit to obtaining, prior to the commencement of the contract, Cyber Liability Insurance = £10 million. The Forensic Science Regulator (FSR) sets out expected levels of accreditation required for all providers of digital forensics services; not all digital forensic processes and procedures currently require accreditation. To achieve a place on the DF DPS suppliers had to agree to both the terms and conditions and pass the requirements detailed in a quality standards/accreditation template by self-certification which differed depending on the lots they applied to join, a no response did not necessarily mean a supplier failed to join the DF DPS but that these areas would be tested at further competition stage by contracting authorities. The authority is committed to helping SMEs by encouraging existing providers (who have already obtained the insurance) to assist SMEs establish their own cover by providing advice and guidance around their own approach. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | August | Bracknell Forest Council | Procurement Strategy | Lotting | PPRS was contacted by a supplier who had concerns over a live procurement for Bracknell Borough Council, being conducted via the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Framework RM3808 and had been published under Lot 4. The requirement was for a cloud based full functionality integrated contact centre which the supplier did not believe fell under the scope of Lot 4. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS contacted CCS who reviewed the information provided and advised that there was potential for the buyer's requirements to be procured via either Lot 4 or Lot 13 of RM3808. As much of the requirement was related to inbound telephony services for a contact centre functionality, it is not an unreasonable position to release the opportunity under Lot 4. Equally they could see how the opportunity could have been issued under Lot 13 if the buyer had chosen to do so. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | August | Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) | Procurement Process | Communication | A supplier contacted PPRS who was concerned that a communication issued regarding the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) ITT-474 - Adult Education Budget 21/22 Procurement to the effect, that although it was intended to notify bidders of the award decision on 24 June 2021 it had been postponed without supplying justification or an alternative date. The supplier had stated that the delay would seriously affect all training providers who had planned provision for 1 August 2021 and would affect staffing (possible redundancies) and cash-flow. | Complaint not upheld. The ESFA advised that an indicative timetable was provided within the Read Me First Document that was published as part of the ITT. Guidance that accompanied the indicative timetable stated that whilst it was not the authorities intention to move the timetable this may happen, there may be occasions where the timetable would be subject to change, potential contractors would be made aware of any changes to the timetable and that the authority reserved the right to amend the timetable at any stage of the process. Bidders were notified on 24 June 2021 of a delay and award decision notices were issued to all potential contractors on 14 July 2021. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | August | Sanctuary Housing | Procurement Process | Feedback | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding a Sanction Housing Association opportunity advertised on the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/15089. The supplier was concerned that they had not received feedback on their submission for the opportunity. | Complaint not upheld. CCS confirmed that the procurement team was at the shortlisting stage and would inform all suppliers, whether successful or not, adhering to the DPS guidelines. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | August | Sunderland City Council | Transparency | Advertisement | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the procurement for Mobility Hub by Sunderland City Council (SCC). The supplier was concerned that by not publishing a pre-procurement notice on Contracts Finder / Find a Tender Service, SCC was not complying with PPN 07/21 section 4. | Complaint upheld. PPRS contacted SCC who reviewed the concerns raised and subsequently published a notice to ensure compliance. In light of the query raised, the Council would review its internal processes in respect of publishing ‘market engagement’ notices. Although it is not mandatory to publish pre-procurement notices it is best practice as advised in https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/987353/The_Sourcing_Playbook.pdf. page 20. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | August | Thetford Town Council | Procurement Process | Tender requirement | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding Thetford Town Council's procurement reference TTC/21/003 Design and Creation of Heritage Displays. The supplier was concerned that bidders were provided with different briefings on the specification and that the evaluation was not carried out on a set criteria. | Complaint not upheld. As the procurement was below threshold (PPN 04/17 gives details on new threshold levels (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/670666/PPN_0417_New_Thresholds_2018__1_.pdf) PPRS would only be able to make best practice recommendations (which are not mandated) as stated in the Playbook (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/987353/The_Sourcing_Playbook.pdf). There was no evidence to support the supplier's complaint; however, PPRS recommended the council give clear specifications as a precursor to fair and open market engagement, which should provide sufficient information for bidders to make an informed decision about whether they want to bid. Best practice would be to collate and share Questions and Answers raised with all bidders to ensure a level playing field for all potential suppliers. The council shared their evaluation criteria and provided assurance that all bidders were treated fairly and equally. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | August | Great Baddow Parish Council | Procurement Process | Favours incumbent | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding Great Baddow Parish Council’s procurement for Cemetery and Allotment Maintenance Contract. The supplier raised several concerns regarding feedback, award criteria, scoring and award notice publication. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS contacted the council however as the procurement is below threshold, PPN 04/17 gives details on new threshold levels (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/670666/PPN_0417_New_Thresholds_2018__1_.pdf) PPRS would only be able to make best practice recommendations (which are not mandated) as stated in the Playbook (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/987353/The_Sourcing_Playbook.pdf). The council provided assurance that the procurement was completed in compliance with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 and without further evidence from the supplier PPRS were unable to make any recommendations. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | September | Salford City Council | Transparency | Favours incumbent | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding Salford City Council's procurement reference 532431 - Domestic Abuse Service. The supplier was concerned that TUPE may apply, however, no further information was available to potential bidders therefore favouring incumbent suppliers. | Complaint upheld. PPRS contacted the council who advised that they had requested further information from incumbent suppliers. This information would be shared with all bidders who had signed the TUPE declaration from. Furthermore, once this information was available the council extended the submission deadline to ensure all bidders had sufficient time to complete their submissions. PPRS would recommend that detailed information should be shared with all potential bidders to ensure transparency and fairness to all bidders. Complaint upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | September | North Yorkshire County Council | Procurement Process | Award | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding North Yorkshire County Council procurement exercise, Contract Reference: DN524879 for the Provision of an E Tendering Solution. The supplier raised several concerns over evaluation and the winning bidder meeting the evaluation criteria. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS raised the supplier’s concerns with the council who confirmed that all of the raised concerns had been addressed through the procurement process via clarification, robust evaluation panel, external credit checks and further review by the North Yorkshire County Council Finance. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | September | Metropolitan Police | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding overdue invoices for Metropolitan Police Service totalling £4,502.59. | Complaint upheld. The Metropolitan Police Service promptly reviewed the supplier's account and made the outstanding payment. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did claim late payment interest charges and Metropolitan Police Service paid these in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | October | Brent Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an overdue invoice for London Borough of Brent Council totalling £2,622.60. | Complaint upheld. London Borough of Brent Council promptly reviewed the supplier's account and made the outstanding payment. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | October | West Midlands Police | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding overdue invoices for West Midlands Police totalling £438.00. | Complaint upheld. The West Midlands Police promptly reviewed the supplier's account and made the outstanding payment. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did claim late payment interest charges and West Midlands Police paid these in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | October | Kent County Council | Procurement Strategy | Tender requirement | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Kent County Council - SC21025 - Property Construction Partnership Framework. The supplier was concerned that the contract duration was longer than it should be without sufficient justification in relation to the subject-matter of the framework agreement. Also a full suite of documentation including the specification was not provided to enable potential bidders to make an informed decision about whether to participate and for best value to be achieved. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS contacted the council who advised that they had carefully considered the procurement strategy with regards to contract duration. The council informed PPRS they concluded that the vast investment in infrastructure, resources, supply chains and social value required to operate the framework within the county of Kent was satisfactory justification for the six year contract term. Furthermore, the council advised that a pipeline of future work had been provided within the documentation to give candidates sufficient information on how the framework would operate and what work could be delivered. The Selection Questionnaire detailed the level of the capacity and capability that candidates would require to be invited to tender. Those candidates being invited to tender would receive final version of the Invitation to Tender that would include but not limited to: NEC 4 Framework Conditions of Contract, Framework Information (how the framework will operate), Quality Questions and Methodology, Price Evaluation (this will include preliminaries, direct fee and staff resources applicable through the framework period) and Final Award Criteria/Scoring (Price and Quality Evaluation)”. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | October | Westminster City Council | Transparency | Insufficient Detail | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding Westminster City Council procurement exercise reference: itt_WCC_14740 - FM Benchmarking Consultancy, Project: prj_WCC_19175 - FM Benchmarking Consultancy. The supplier was concerned that the specification did not provide enough information to ensure a level playing field for all potential bidders. Furthermore, the supplier believed that the lack of information available in the specification led to their company being disqualified on quality which excluded them from the pricing element of the evaluation. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS contacted the council who advised that they had responded directly to the supplier through the e-tendering portal Capital-Esourcing explaining that due to the nature of the requirement and value of the contract the specification was not exhaustive. The specification relied on the expertise of the bench-marker, and this included providing a robust methodology to somewhere near the suggested timescale. The council also advised that the procurement was under Public Contracts Regulations 2015 threshold. For transparency the council did provide feedback, comments and scores to all bidders. Complaint not upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | October | Dorset Healthcare University NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding overdue invoices for Dorset HealthCare University NHS Foundation Trust totalling £302.16. | Complaint upheld. The Dorset HealthCare University NHS Foundation Trust promptly reviewed the supplier's account and made the outstanding payment. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did claim late payment interest charges and Dorset HealthCare University NHS Foundation Trust paid these in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | November | Office for National Statistics (ONS) | Procurement Process | SME exclusion | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Office for National Statistic’s (ONS) procurement for the Provision of Physical Security Intrusion Testing Services. The supplier believed the requirement to have Security Check (SC) cleared resources at the point of submission of a response to the Invitation to Tender was a barrier to SMEs bidding. The supplier felt it would be more appropriate to meet this requirement at the point of contract award. As set out in the Sourcing Playbook (May 2021) procurement processes should be proportionate so as not to create barriers of entry for SMEs and VCSEs. | Complaint upheld. PPRS contacted the ONS who reviewed and updated the contract notice to extend the need for the SC clearance of resources to be completed to the award stage of 6 December 2021. This will provide additional time for interested suppliers to complete the necessary SC clearance process. The ONS confirmed that due to the current timescales to complete SC vetting it was not possible to delay this requirement beyond the award stage, with the service delivery commencing early January 2022. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | November | UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding overdue invoices for the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) totalling £824,985.00. | Complaint upheld. UKHSA promptly reviewed the supplier's account and made the full outstanding payment.PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | November | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Strategy | SME exclusion - accreditation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Crown Commercial Service Communications Marketplace framework (RM6142) being let through the Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS). The supplier was concerned that the requirement for Cyber Essentials basic certification prior to being appointed on the DPS was a barrier to SMEs. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS contacted the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) who explored options for flexibility regarding the requirement for Cyber Essentials. However, CCS advised that it is standard policy for all suppliers to have Cyber Essentials in place as part of the onboarding process onto a DPS. By way of additional background, the Cyber Essentials Assurance Framework was designed to be light touch and achievable at low cost. It was developed in consultation with SMEs including the Federation for Small Business and is not intended to be a barrier to entry. Procurement Policy Note 09/14 provides information on the policy (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/procurement-policy-note-0914-cyber-essentials-scheme-certification).PPRS also raised this matter with the Cabinet Office Small Business Policy team who confirmed that CCS's requirement for Cyber Essentials or equivalent is in line with current public procurement policy. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | November | ESPO | Procurement Process | Communication | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding ESPO 664_21 Consultancy Services tender process. The supplier believed that the ITT guidance on completing the pricing element was ambiguous and as a result their submission was rejected. Furthermore, the supplier had believed that the responses received to their concerns were not answered sufficiently and in a timely fashion by the authority. Another concern raised was that a second standstill period was required due to errors in scoring. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS reviewed the instructions for the completion of the pricing element and felt that it was clear, as strongly indicated by the low number of incomplete rate cards. ESPO advised that the level of SME participation was 75% of bidders awarded to 664_21 were SMEs, including over 19% classified as micro organisations. Tenders were received from 327 bidders over 28 lots/sub-lots of which 179 were successful. Of the 148 unsuccessful bidders only 5 were due to incomplete rate cards. PPRS reviewed the response provided by ESPO regarding the concerns raised along with a communications log to demonstrate compliance with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. Following complaints received by ESPO with regards to the award decision relating to scores and selection criteria, ESPO carried out an informal review. ESPO then made all bidders aware of any changes to the award decisions in an outcome update letter and observed a further voluntary standstill period as good practice. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | November | Dorset Healthcare University NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding overdue late payment interest for Dorset HealthCare University NHS Foundation Trust totalling £102.96. | Complaint upheld. The Dorset HealthCare University NHS Foundation Trust promptly reviewed the supplier's account and made the outstanding payment. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998.In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | November | Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted us regarding four overdue invoices for Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust totalling £6,280.96. | Complaint upheld. The Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust reviewed the supplier's account and made the outstanding payments. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | November | University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding overdue invoices for University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust totalling £635.26. | Complaint upheld. The University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust promptly reviewed the supplier's account and made the outstanding payment.Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998.In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did claim late payment interest charges and University Hospitals for North Midlands NHS Trust paid these in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | December | West Berkshire Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding West Berkshire District Council tender for Economy Website design and build including Inward Investment (https://in-tendhost.co.uk/westberks/aspx/ProjectManage/561). The supplier raised concerns over the suitability of one question raised as part of the evaluation, the project delivery timescales and the overall fairness and transparency of the procurement process. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS raised the supplier’s concerns with the Council and evaluated their response, together with the supporting information. PPRS confirmed a fair and transparent process had been followed that aligned with the advertised opportunity. The potential contract value of this procurement was not subject to the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015), however, PPRS confirmed the Council has followed the key principles of the PCR 2015. The published procurement timescales were reasonable given the complexity of the procurement and with consideration of the contract commencement date. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | December | The National Museum of the Royal Navy | Procurement Process | Technical issue with e-portal | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding The National Museum Royal Navy (NMRN) procurement under competitive dialogue: HMS Victory Conservation - Scaffolding (https://museuminsider.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Annex-A-Scaffolding-Statement-of-Requirements.pdf). The supplier provided a response to the selection questionnaire (SQ) prior to the 3rd September 2021 deadline. Despite several attempts to chase NMRN for an update the supplier did not receive any further communication from the authority. | Complaint upheld. PPRS contacted NMRN, who initially were unable to locate the supplier responses. After further investigations it was discovered that the supplier's SQ response had been received prior to the response deadline and subsequent emails sent by the supplier had all been blocked by the NMRN's firewall. In this instance emails were caught in the firewall’s filter to a DominaKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) check failure. This may happen due to the sender's domain not having their DKIM verification set-up correctly. As the procurement had proceeded beyond the SQ stage of the competitive dialogue, to ensure fairness to the supplier NMRN suspended the procurement whilst they evaluated the supplier's response. This approach was communicated in writing to all appropriate bidders (including other down-selected bidders), noting that if successful, the supplier would be invited to the next stage and timescales adjusted accordingly. NMRN have updated their procedures to prevent a recurrence of this situation including; future delivery receipt and email acknowledgement, updated submission criteria to ensure submissions are DKIM compliant, enable suppliers to call a published point of contact to confirm receipt and an automatic email response if any email is blocked by the firewall. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | December | Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding a DOS5 Digital Outcomes opportunity for Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, entitled ‘Specialist digital team: deliver discovery and business case for regional Genomic IT architecture’ (https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/16120?utm_id=20211119). They were concerned that the buyer was requiring suppliers to submit the standard DOS Stage 1 responses to the Essential and Nice-to-Have Criteria (100 word responses) as well as the standard ‘Second Stage’ full written proposal, which the supplier felt directly contradicted the standard and agreed-upon DOS processes and procedures. | Complaint upheld. PPRS contacted the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Category Specialist and the Commercial Agreement Manager who agreed that this was out of scope of DOS processes and procedures and would uphold the complaint. Furthermore the CCS team reached out to the buyer to request that the opportunity was redone and confirmed the buyer had cancelled this procurement. The buyer confirmed that they would keep in touch with the DOS team to ensure the next opportunity was compliant. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | December | Ministry of Defence (MoD) | Procurement Process | Timescales | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding a Ministry of Defence opportunity advertised on the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Digital Marketplace (https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/15641). The supplier was concerned that the response date stated was 4 days rather than the published guidance of 5 days. | Complaint Upheld. PPRS contacted the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) DOS team with regards to timescales and they advised that the submission date for the work history had not followed best practice and although the authority had taken a hard line approach, it was not unlawful (as timescales are not mandated), but could give rise to inconsistencies. The CCS DOS team cannot instruct the authority on how they run the process as it is the authorities own risk, however, in this instance they would advise the authority to review their process in order to comply with the principles of Public Contracts Regulations 2015. CCS would be looking to review how the end-to-end procurement journey is controlled and the digital platform that supports it (for DOS6). With best practice in mind, the complaint was upheld. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | December | Together Housing Group | Procurement Process | Transparency | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Together Housing Group Ltd procurement for Insurance and Related Services (https://www.contractfinderpro.com/doc/YbExX/together-housing-group-ltd/provision-insurance-related-services-together). The supplier was concerned that parts of the Selection Questionnaire (SQ) appeared to be ambiguous as to how responses would be scored. Furthermore, the Find a Tender Service Contract Notice correctly stated competitive procedure with negotiation but the Contracts Finder notice stated Negotiated Procedure giving confusion to the procedure being used. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS contacted Together Housing who were forthcoming with responses and providing clarification/communication logs. PPRS reviewed the information provided from the authority, which confirmed that the points raised had been addressed and the authority had voluntarily extended the submission date. Furthermore, the authority confirmed that errors on the contracts finder website only allows the use of the word Negotiated rather than the full title however it was clearly described in the SQ. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | December | HS2 | Procurement Process | Communication | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding opportunity Title: HS2 Euston Station - Catering published by Mace Dragados on behalf of HS2 (https://www.competefor.com/business/viewOpportunityDetailsSupplier.html?id=56905589). The supplier was concerned that despite having confirmation of their interest in the opportunity, no other communications had been received. | Complaint Upheld. PPRS contacted the authority who confirmed that the procurement had been put on hold and unfortunately once the advert had closed they were unable to amend the original dates on the e-portal. As such the opportunity was cancelled and would be reissued closer to the time of requirement to avoid the issue reoccurring. The authority confirmed that they would send individual emails to the companies that expressed interest and advised that the package will be advertised again in Q2 2022. PPRS recommends that the authority ensure communications are issued to potential bidders as soon as possible should they encounter future technical issues to avoid bidder confusion. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2021 | December | Waltham Forest Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier has contacted PPRS regarding London Borough of Waltham Forest (LBWF) and the Yorkshire Purchasing Organisation tender: Local Government Resourcing Partnership (LGRP) (https://www.ypo.co.uk/frameworks-home/900608#details). The supplier was concerned about the decision to increase the number of suppliers awarded under lot 1 and lot 2 of the framework. The supplier was concerned that the evaluation negated any consideration of the pricing of the suppliers, meaning that the ITT was no longer being assessed on the basis of Most Economically Advantageous Tender (MEAT) as required by Regulation 67(1) of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. The supplier was concerned that the decision to extend the number of suppliers may have been influenced by a desire to ensure that the incumbent suppliers were reappointed. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS contacted LBWF who provided PPRS with their rationale for increasing the number of awarded suppliers, together with supporting information. Having reviewed the information provided, PPRS concluded that LBWF did follow the evaluation process, against quality and price criteria as set-out within the ITT. Additionally, following the decision to increase the number of suppliers awarded under lots 1 and 2, LBWF extended the timelines and communicated this to all bidders. In order to prevent future concerns being raised against their approach PPRS has made the following suggestions, that the Authority should consider the Sourcing Playbook when planning future evaluations to achieve maximum effectiveness when calculating MEAT and deliver the best price to quality ratio and test before implementation. (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/987353/The_Sourcing_Playbook.pdf) and Bid Evaluation Guidance (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/987130/Bid_evaluation_guidance_note_May_2021.pdf). PPRS will follow-up with LBWF to review the implementation of this recommendation. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | January | Public Defender Service | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an overdue invoice for the Public Defender Service totalling £551.33. | Complaint upheld. Public Defender Service promptly reviewed the supplier's account and made the full outstanding payment. PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | January | King's Health Partners Academic Health Science Centre | Procurement Strategy | Timescales | A supplier has contacted PPRS regarding King’s College Hospital, Guy’s and St Thomas’ Hospital and Royal Brompton Hospital Mini Competition for the Provision of Public Switched Telephone Network Services against Network Services 2 (RM3808) Lot 4 inbound telephony services. The supplier felt the framework was not appropriate for this opportunity and tender timescales were restrictive over the Christmas and New Year period, with the additional ongoing Covid situation impacting staffing. | Complaint Upheld. PPRS raised the supplier's concerns with the NHS Trusts. Following the contact from PPRS the Trusts reconsidered and cancelled the procurement. It was relaunched on 22 December 2021 against (RM3808) Lot 3 traditional telephony services. The procurement timescales were also extended by four weeks to accommodate the Christmas and New Year period. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | January | Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding overdue invoices for Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust totalling £6,662.00. | Complaint Upheld. The Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust promptly reviewed the supplier's account and made the outstanding payment. Where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | January | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Strategy | SME exclusion - Framework Strategy | A supplier has contacted the PPRS regarding CCS tender: RM6263 Digital Specialists and Programmes. The Supplier was concerned the new RM6263 Digital Specialists and Programmes framework, and removal of specialist services from RM1043.7 Digital Outcomes and Specialists (DOS) 5 will significantly remove access for SME companies to compete and be awarded work. The opportunity to search and apply for Specialist roles, had been removed and there appeared to be no mitigation to allow micro and small SMEs to compete for work through the new RM6263 framework. Access to opportunities will be filtered by the larger organisation winning a place on the framework, this also applies to a supplier which is part of a consortium supporting a large organisation. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS contacted CCS to raise the supplier’s concerns and to understand their approach. CCS confirmed the maximum number of suppliers to be awarded to RM6263 was based on an analysis of historical supplier applications to opportunities published under the Digital Outcomes and Specialists Agreement (DOS). For the large majority of DOS opportunities only a handful of SMEs applied compared to the total number of SMEs awarded onto the DOS frameworks. The new RM6263 agreement incorporates subcontracting arrangements as well as formation of consortium that can be put in place to apply to the framework. This is in accordance with the Social Value priority to increase supply chain resilience and capacity in Procurement Policy Note PPN 06/20 and “the Sourcing Playbook”. There was advance notification in order for suppliers to undertake any necessary preparations such as forming a consortium and identifying possible subcontractors to apply to the framework. Lot 1 (Digital Outcomes) will continue to be suited to SMEs with a light touch application process. PPRS were satisfied with the approach applied and the Authority had considered the ongoing opportunities for SMEs. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | January | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Strategy | SME exclusion - Framework Strategy | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the pending Crown Commercial Service (CCS) procurement for a new framework: Mobile Voice and Data Services in the Public Sector (RM6261). The supplier raised a concern that the new framework is targeted towards large suppliers in the market space, disregarding the services that SMEs can bring. Whilst the existing Network Services 2 (NS2) (RM3808) agreement, under Lot 6, has 16 suppliers, the new framework agreement will reduce this. The supplier also reported that the requirements for the new framework is set up in a way that would mean SMEs would need to recruit for additional resources to manage the administration overheads of the new agreement. They feel this would leave them at a disadvantage, compared to the larger suppliers, and overall this is seen as a barrier to entry and competition for SMEs, which does not align to best practice as defined in the Sourcing Playbook. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS contacted CCS to understand their SME strategy for RM6261. CCS confirmed they determined, using extensive pre-market engagement alongside other sources of information, that a more restrictive supplier base would drive better value for the public sector. This included the analysis of spend on the existing NS2 (RM3808) Lot 6 where the majority of spend was restricted to a limited number of suppliers. That suppliers could bid for any Lot and consortia bids were permissible, however there are restrictions to prevent a supplier being awarded both Lots 1 and 2, due to the nature of the services. Consideration was given to wider opportunities for SMEs, by enabling subcontracting, including consideration for supply chain visibility, as set out under Procurement Policy Note (PPN) 01/18 and prompt payment, as set out under PPN 07/20. CCS has confirmed the administration activities of the new agreement are in keeping with standard requirements for mobile services. PPRS is satisfied that the CCS sourcing strategy for RM6261 does provide opportunities for SMEs and does not breach the Public Procurement Regulations 2015. However, in order to further improve the opportunities for SMEs. PPRS has marked this case for a follow up to ensure that recommendations have been implemented. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | February | Wrighton, Wigan and Leigh NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an overdue invoice for the Wrightington, Wigan & Leigh NHS Trust totalling £174.40. | Complaint upheld. Wrightington, Wigan & Leigh NHS Trust promptly reviewed the supplier's account and made the full outstanding payment. PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | February | Bridgewater Community Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an overdue invoice for the Bridgewater Community Healthcare NHS totalling £603.60. | Complaint upheld. Bridgewater Community Healthcare NHS promptly reviewed the supplier's account and made the full outstanding payment. PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did not claim late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | February | Sactuary Housing Association | Transparency | Transparency | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding Sanctuary Housing Association DPS for Estate Agency Services (https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/notice/e827f64b-49c1-4a61-aeb1-cd207231e8b1?origin=SearchResults&p=1). The Supplier was concerned that there was a bias towards one bidding organisation under the DPS. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS reviewed a recent competition for Abbey Meadows. PPRS found that the Contracting Authority had not breached the Public Contracts Regulations (2015), this is based on comprehensive information supplied by the authority regarding the overall management of the DPS. This included the process the Authority applied/applies to ensure fairness to awarding contracts and confirmed the process they followed to evaluate suppliers’ bids was in accordance with the Public Contracts Regulation (2015) regulation 34 (23). The Contracting Authority had followed the correct process to ensure conflicts of interest were identified and managed correctly in accordance with the Public Contracts Regulation (2015) regulation 24. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | February | Flood RE | Procurement Process | Insufficient Detail | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Flood RE procurement for an IFRS 17 Solution (https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/Notice/cdb8bff7-b63a-4c5c-b421-3fc3b2d42b55). The supplier was concerned that the contract notice stated that the procurement documents were available on Flood RE's website, however, the supplier had been unable to locate the documents. Also despite trying the supplier was unable to make contact with the authority for support. | Complaint upheld. PPRS contacted Flood RE and with the suppliers permission shared contact details so the authority could work with the supplier to resolve the issue. The authority provided the procurement documentation and in this instance the supplier decided not to pursue the opportunity. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | February | Ministry of Justice (MoJ) | Procurement Process | Feedback | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding a Ministry of Justice (MoJ) procurement for HR Data and Insight hub using the Crown Commercial Service Digital Marketplace (https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/15686). The supplier was concerned that a submission was rejected due to exceeding the allowable word count when the system does not allow a word count greater than 100 words. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS contacted the MoJ who advised that the supplier submission had been rejected due to non compliance of submission instructions. The supplier had included more words into their word limited phase 1 response form than was stipulated. Furthermore feedback had been provided to the supplier explaining why their submission was rejected in a follow up debrief. The supplier was content to close the case. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | February | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Strategy | SME exclusion - Framework Strategy | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding Crown Commercial Service (CCS) tender RM6242 for Construction Professional Services Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS). The supplier was concerned that the contracting authorities required a Carbon Reduction Plan to be provided as part of the DPS Questionnaire submissions, even for suppliers only requesting to receive lower value opportunities. It is a reasonable assumption that suppliers opting for lower value opportunities will generally be SMEs applying to the framework. Therefore the need to produce a Carbon Reduction Plan as a prerequisite to be awarded onto the DPS was seen as a barrier to SME participation. | Complaint upheld. PPRS contacted CCS and questioned whether PPN 06/21 "Taking account of Carbon Reduction Plans in the procurement of major government contracts" had been applied to the procurement. CCS confirmed that the PPN had been taken into consideration and that various information sessions were being delivered to assist suppliers with developing Carbon Reduction Plans. However CCS further reviewed the requirement and agreed that they would vary the Live DPS, to allow suppliers who provided services under £5m only Value Threshold filter, to be exempt from Carbon Reduction Plans. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | March | North Yorkshire County Council | Procurement Process | Administration | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding North Yorkshire County Council's Framework: North Yorkshire County Council “the provision of a management information system and financial accounting system for schools and academies” (2016/S 202-365994). The supplier was concerned that after the framework submission deadline had passed and during the framework agreement being live, a further supplier was added as a supplier to the Framework. | Complaint upheld. PPRS contacted North Yorkshire County Council who confirmed that they had reviewed the supplier list and advised that a supplier was mistakenly included in the list of suppliers and products for Lot 2 (Secondary Schools). This was an unintended error and they would now correct the website to make it clear that this product and supplier are only available for Lot 1 (Primary Schools). | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | March | City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council | Procurement Process | Clarification questions | A supplier contacted the PPRS regarding City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (CBMDC) Procurement for Advocacy Provision & Return to Care Interviews for Children Missing from Home or Care (Tender Ref 49584). The Supplier was concerned they have not received any clarification responses, including specific TUPE information. The supplier felt by failing to provide this information it prejudiced non-incumbent suppliers. | Complaint Upheld. PPRS contacted CBMDC to raise the supplier's concerns. CBMDC confirmed they had subsequently responded to all clarification questions outside of the published timetable. The procurement timescales were also extended to provide all bidders with additional time to respond. These updates were communicated to all bidders to ensure fairness, transparency and equal treatment as set-out in the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | March | Wiltshire Council | Procurement Process | Administration | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding Wiltshire Council (WC) procurement FM1123 RB Print invitation to tender (ITT). The supplier had not been invited to participate in a further competition run against Crown Commercial Service (CCS) RM6017 framework. Furthermore, the supplier reviewed the ITT and raised a number of concerns regarding the procurement scope, evaluation and timescales, which they felt favoured the incumbent. | Complaint Upheld. PPRS contracted WC to raise the supplier's concerns. WC confirmed they had subsequently cancelled the procurement. Following an error, not all suppliers on Lot 7 of the CCS framework RM6017 were invited to bid. WC felt this was a one-off error, but will be reviewing their processes for calling off from framework agreements. They will make any adjustments required to ensure the same error does not occur again. WC will be reissuing the tender over the coming months. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | March | Office for Standards in Educations, Children's Services and Skill (OFSTED) | Procurement Strategy | Timescales | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the OFSTED procurement for the Provision of independent complaint reviewer (tender_291310/1017738). The supplier was concerned that from the contract being advertised on the 3 December 2021 to the bid closure on the 23 December 2021 this did not give enough time for bidders to give full and fair consideration to their applications and was showing undue preference to the incumbent. | Complaint Not Upheld. PPRS contacted OFSTED to raise the supplier's concern. OFSTED confirmed the procurement was completed following the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 regulatory requirements. This was a below threshold procurement, of approx £85,000. Bidders were given 3 weeks to provide their submissions to the ITT. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | March | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Strategy | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) procurement: RM6229 Permanent Recruitment 2. The supplier was concerned over some of the quality questions. The supplier felt that the questions were open and wide in scope, referring to large areas of specification leaving bidders to guess what areas of specification needed to be covered in their response meeting a strict character limit. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS reviewed the procurement documentation and debrief letter and were unable to substantiate that CCS had breached the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. Furthermore the authority provided assurances that the procurement has been run in an open, fair and transparent manner evidenced by the number of submissions and subsequent bidders who passed the quality threshold. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | March | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Strategy | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) procurement: RM6229 Permanent Recruitment 2. The supplier was concerned over some of the quality questions. The supplier felt that the questions were open and wide in scope, referring to large areas of specification leaving bidders to guess what areas of specification needed to be covered in their response meeting a strict character limit. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS reviewed the procurement documentation and debrief letter and were unable to substantiate that CCS had breached the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. Furthermore the authority provided assurances that the procurement has been run in an open, fair and transparent manner evidenced by the number of submissions and subsequent bidders who passed the quality threshold. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | March | Waltham Forest Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Framework for The Provision of Home-Based Support Services within Waltham Forest Council Contract Reference Number: DN567845 - 2021/S 000-023343. The supplier was concerned that the evaluation of their financial assessment was incorrect, resulting in their submission being wrongly rejected. The supplier has advised that the supporting documents for their bid were compliant as per the provided guidance. | Complaint Upheld. PPRS contacted Waltham Forest Council who have reviewed the supplier's concern. This has resulted in the supplier being reinstated into the process and the supplier was informed. Waltham Forest Council has communicated a new timeline for the procurement to allow all suppliers the same period in which to review their outcome and respond. This ensures compliance with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | April | London Borough of Barking & Dagenham | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the London Borough of Barking & Dagenham (LBBD) tender: ITT_728 - Home Care and Day Care provision for residents with disabilities. The supplier was concerned the evaluation had changed from the published guidance within the Invitation to Tender (ITT). The quality criteria was to account for 60% of the overall score, with social value at 10%. Based on information provided to them from LBBD the supplier believed it has been altered into a single overall criteria of 70%. This change could potentially result in some suppliers with zero social value scores being awarded onto the framework. | Complaint Upheld. PPRS contacted LBBD who reviewed the ITT. The findings of the review identified ambiguous statements contained in the ITT, including the scoring methodology. This resulted in LBBD cancelling the ITT and issuing formal communication to all bidders to advise. LBBD are addressing the problems and will reissue the ITT to ensure alignment to the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | April | The National Archives | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding The National Archives procurement for Mental Health Training & Consultancy (TNA430). The supplier was concerned with the overall running of the procurement, specifically the shortlisting applied at the expression of interest (EOI) stage of the tender (https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/notice/6e41912f-f5b5-48bc-b3a5-e7b5ee30d358?) and the fairness of the evaluation of their tender response against Lot 1. | Case Upheld. PPRS contacted The National Archives to understand the process they followed with the tender, including evidence of the evaluation. The authority confirmed the process of shortlisting at the EOI stage was not appropriate and did not align to the open procurement procedure under The Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR205). The authority discovered this error during the procurement and ensured all suppliers responding to the EOI had been invited to bid. The authority provided evidence of the process they followed to evaluate and moderate the quality criteria of bids. PPRS felt the evaluation of the quality responses was a fair process and did align to PCR2015. However, PPRS also discovered an Excel formula error in the scoring of the pricing. This error did lead to the supplier not being awarded onto Lot 1 of the agreement. PPRS validated the scores for all bids against all lots of the procurement. The authority acknowledged the error and agreed to award to the supplier. No other supplier had been impacted by this error. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | May | Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an overdue invoice for the Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust totalling £175.04. | Complaint upheld. Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust promptly reviewed the supplier's account and made the full outstanding payment. PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did claim late payment interest charges and Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust paid these in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | May | Barts Health NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an overdue invoice for the Barts Health NHS Trust totalling £6,588.60. | Complaint upheld. Barts Health NHS Trust promptly reviewed the supplier's account and made the full outstanding payment. PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier is claiming late payment interest charges. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | June | Nottinghamshire County Council | Procurement Process | Advertisement | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding Nottinghamshire County Council's pending procurement for Early Intervention Services (DN513999). A Prior Information Notice (PIN) 2020/S 244-605898 was raised in December 2020, with an estimated tender publication date of July 2021. The supplier subsequently had seen no evidence the tender had been run. Furthermore, the supplier felt the incumbent had continued to be paid to provide these services, despite their contract with the authority having already expired. | Complaint upheld. PPRS contacted Nottinghamshire County Council who advised that the services were complex and wide in scope involving many stakeholders. Officers in the Council’s Adult Social Care department and CCGs were unable to meet regularly to carry out a full system wide review as they were redirected to locally managing the Covid-19 crisis. A new Prevention Strategy continued to be developed and the Council's intention was to proceed with a Tender process in the summer of 2022. The authority advised that The Early Intervention and Promoting Independence Contract opportunity will be published using the Find a Tender Service and Contracts Finder in Summer 2022. PPRS will follow up on this case in three months to confirm that this action has been taken. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | June | North East Lincolnshire Council | Contract Management | Use of Existing Contracts | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding concerns over the management of an ongoing contractual dispute with North East Lincolnshire Borough Council (NELBC). | Complaint upheld. PPRS contacted NELBC who provided them with details of the dispute and the steps they had followed to remedy the situation. After consultation NELBC agreed to review their dispute and following legal guidance reissued a new dispute notice to the supplier. PPRS reexamined the steps taken by NELBC and were agreeable to the revised notice and rationale for this. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | June | Home Office | Procurement Process | Equivalents | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Home Office procurement for Immersive English Language Training, Reference CF-0248200D5800000L5A4EAK1. The supplier is concerned about the prerequisite for potential suppliers to hold British Council accreditation when suppliers with other accreditations, such as ASIC, could also provide these services. The supplier felt this requirement did not align with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR) principles of fairness and paragraph 64(8) of the PCR regarding equivalence for official lists and certification. | Complaint upheld. PPRS contacted the Home Office who reviewed the supplier's concern. This has resulted in an corrigendum being raised to amend the prior information notice (https://www.find-tender.service.gov.uk/Notice/015909-2022) to also invite suppliers with accreditations equivalent to the British Council (Accreditation UK) to raise an expression of interest in the procurement. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | June | Birmingham City Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding overdue invoices for Birmingham City Council totalling £96,111.12. | Complaint upheld. Birmingham City Council advised there was a delay due to change in system, the supplier's invoices were processed and the full payment was made. PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | June | Wirral Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS concerning the Wirral Borough Council procurement for Mental Health First Aid Services, Contract Ref: DN597401. The supplier received correspondence from the authority to confirm their bid was unsuccessful. They subsequently requested a full debrief and were concerned about the time to receive a debrief letter, which took several months and only after a number of chasing communications. This led to the supplier having doubts with the fairness of the overall procurement process, including the authorities approach to evaluation. | Complaint Not Upheld. PPRS contacted Wirral Borough Council to understand the reasons for the delays with the issuing of the debrief letter and to request evidence of the procurement process and evaluation for this tender. The authority confirmed that due to the project value of £40K they followed a Request for Quotation process for 3 quotes. PPRS reviewed the provided evidence and confirmed the authority has followed an appropriate, robust and compliant procurement process. The authority confirmed the delays with the debrief were caused by long term sickness. PPRS has recommended to the authority that for future procurements they need to ensure they are more responsive to suppliers requests for a debrief. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | June | East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted the PPRS regarding East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust tender for Regional PACS and RIS solution, run as a further competition under the Clinical Software (and Hardware) solutions for Use in Healthcare Framework. The supplier was unsuccessful with their submission at the initial stage of the process, due to the answers they provided against questions GQ9 and GQ10 of the Gateway Questions. The supplier is concerned about the compliance of the process and specifically adherence to Section 18 of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, Principles of Procurement. They feel these questions do not meet these principles by purely focussing on past performance, rather than the potential to deliver with consideration of their past performance. | Complaint Not Upheld. PPRS contacted the East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust in order to understand the procurement process they followed and seek evidence a fair process had been carried out. The authority confirmed to PPRS that prior to running the further competition the authority had carried out market research to ensure their requirements were defined by internal subject matter experts with genuine operational justification. This process was carried out independently from the framework team, who would then be responsible for managing the further competition. PPRS reviewed the information provided by the authority and concluded the process followed was appropriate, did align to the call off provisions under the framework and was not in breach of Section 18 of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. Furthermore, under the terms of the ordering process of the framework it was appropriate for the authority to include questions GQ9 and GQ10 within the further competition. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | July | Waltham Forest Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | Two suppliers contacted the PPRS regarding the Borough of Waltham Forest tender for Framework for The Provision of Home-Based Support Services (Reference DN567845 - 2021/S 000-023343). The suppliers were concerned over the fairness and proportionality of the evaluation approach for social value, as set out in the Invitation To Tender (ITT). Within their response bidders had to make a commitment of the social value benefits they would deliver during the life cycle of the framework. This commitment was based on a standard response matrix using the National TOMs (Themes, Outcomes and Measures). The suppliers were concerned their bids had been disadvantaged due to other bids setting unachievable social value commitments. Furthermore, the suppliers were also impacted by the remediation process carried out by the authority to correct an error regarding the financial assessment of other suppliers. This was also investigated by PPRS and the outcome published on GOV.UK in March 2022. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS contacted Waltham Forest Council to understand the process they followed and seek evidence of their evaluation for social value. Bidders were asked to provide both a quantitative social value commitment, together with a qualitative statement of how this would be achieved. The qualitative statements were evaluated by the authority to ensure the quantitative commitments were achievable. Additionally, the authority reserved the right to clarify aspects of a suppliers social value response, which the authority did carry out. PPRS reviewed the bidders social value responses, together with the authorities evaluation. PPRS concluded the response requirements and evaluation was clearly defined and consistent to all bids. Overall, PPRS felt the evaluation did align to the principles of procurement as set-out in Section 18 the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 and the suppliers had not been disadvantaged. With regards to the impact of the remediation process. The events and outcome around the evaluation issue had previously been investigated by the PPRS and did align to the ITT, as published in March 2022. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | July | Lambeth Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an overdue invoice for Lambeth London Borough Council totalling £821.40. | Complaint upheld. Lambeth London Borough Council promptly reviewed the supplier's account and made the outstanding payment. PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998, in this instance the supplier did not claim late payment interest. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | July | St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted the Public Procurement Review Service (PPRS) regarding overdue invoices for St George's Hospital totalling £1,047.35. | Complaint upheld. St George's Hospital advised that full payment has now been made. PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998, in this instance the supplier did claim late payment interest. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | July | HM Prison and Probation Service | Procurement Process | Evaluation | The supplier contacted the PPRS regarding a Legacy Systems Replacement (https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/17079) procurement run by HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) under the Digital Outcomes and Specialists 5 framework agreement (DOS). The supplier had not progressed beyond the shortlisting stage of the procurement. Their complaint had several grounds: 1. That their scoring on essential criteria 4 was unfair, and prevented them from progressing in the further competition 2. That their scoring on desirable criteria 1 was unfair 3. That their scoring on desirable criteria 2 was unfair 4. That the tender feedback was misleading because it included the phrase “winning supplier”, which was inappropriate for a shortlisting process. | Partially upheld. HMPPS had followed the correct process under the DOS framework. PPRS reviewed the marking of the supplier against other suppliers, including the short-listed suppliers. With regards to the issues raised: 1. We found that the scoring against essential criteria 1 was fair and in line with other supplier evaluations. 2. We found that the scoring for the desirable criteria 1 was fair and in line with other supplier evaluations. 3. We found there were some issues with the audit trail for the scoring for desirable criteria 2. The scoring of this criteria did not affect whether the supplier was shortlisted. 4. While the wording of the feedback did not affect short-listing, the wording used was misleading. Recommendations: HMPPS should ensure that consensus scores are accompanied by a clear rationale that aligns with the score received by the supplier. HMPPS should also ensure that supplier feedback accurately reflects the stage and outcome of the procurement. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | July | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Transparency | Framework Ordering Procedures | A supplier contacted the PPRS regarding service offers on Crown Commercial Services G-Cloud 12 Framework (RM1557.12). The supplier raised an issue with price cards on some G-Cloud 12 service offers having a range of prices rather than a fixed price. This would have the effect of making those service offers price on application, which is out of scope of G-Cloud. | Complaint upheld. PPRS assessed a sample of G-Cloud service offers, and our findings suggest that around 13% of G-Cloud service offers may be affected by the pricing issue. We recommended that CCS look at a range of options to address the issue going forward. We also shared with CCS several suggestions made by the complaining supplier. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | July | Birmingham City Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding overdue invoices for Birmingham City Council totalling £12,720. | Complaint upheld. Birmingham City Council reviewed the account and requested that the invoices needed to be resubmitted to their current system. Once this had been done, both invoices were paid. PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998, in this instance late payment interest was not claimed. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | July | North East Procurement Organisation (NEPO) | Procurement Strategy | Selection | A supplier contacted PPRS) regarding NEPO's procurement reference NEPO525 - Executive Recruitment, OJEU Contract Notice Reference Number 2022/S 000-004495. The supplier was concerned that the wording regarding contract examples was ambiguous within the Invitation To Tender (ITT) instructions, Section 6 – Technical and Professional Ability within the Selection Questionnaire, resulting in their submission being rejected. | Complaint not upheld. NEPO advised that Question 6.1 Technical and Professional Ability was a threshold question, Tenderers were required to score a minimum of a 2. Tenderers were asked to provide up to three examples, however the scoring matrix detailed within the instructions for question 6.1 clearly identified that to achieve a score of 2 tenderers were required to provide a response which “addresses all requirements and demonstrates fair evidence of three contracts for relevant services similar in size, scope and nature”. The Tenderer only detailed one example of a relevant contract, referring to a single client and did not meet the criteria to be awarded a score of 2. The example given did not provide evidence of three contracts. Tenderers were advised within the scoring methodology for Question 6.1 – Technical and Professional Ability that failure to score a 2 would result in their submission being ineligible to be awarded the Framework Agreement within the question guidance. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | July | Homes England | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted Public Procurement Review Service (PPRS) regarding Homes England Property and Financial Services Framework - Lot 2 (Procontract Reference: DN562720). The supplier was concerned that their submission was rejected due to lack of content after being asked to drastically reduce the word count in their submission, specifically section 6. | Complaint not upheld. Homes England advised that the supplier was not excluded because of the word count requirement. Their tender was excluded due to providing limited information relating to lot 2 of the scope of services in their Section 6 submission. The supplier submitted a tender for Lot 2, however the focus of the information provided in their Section 6 submission was on lot 1 services which did not form part of the lot 2 Suitability Assessment. The word count of 250 words was stated in the ‘question description’ and also repeated under ‘question help’. The 250 word requirement was the original requirement and had not been reduced at any stage in the competition. All other tenders met the Section 6 requirements including the word count requirement of 250 words. There were 12 other tenders for Lot 2. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | August | Great Ormond Street Hospital | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an overdue invoice for Great Ormond Street Hospital totalling £920.80. | Complaint Upheld. Great Ormond Street Hospital promptly reviewed the supplier's account and made the outstanding payment. PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | August | West Sussex County Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an overdue invoice for West Sussex County Council totalling £2,915.00. | Complaint upheld. West Sussex County Council reviewed the supplier's account and made the full outstanding payment. In this instance the authority was unable to provide a reason for the delay in payment. PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did claim late payment interest charges and West Sussex County Council paid these in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | August | Essex County Council | Procurement Strategy | DPS Operation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Essex County Council (ECC) Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) CO0096 Temporary and Permanent Worker Supply Chain. The supplier raised a number of concerns regarding the compliance of the DPS to Regulation 34 of the Public Procurement Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015); ? DPS Agreement - Inclusion of service obligations and commercial terms within the DPS agreement that fall outside of the scope of a DPS ? Categories and Lots - A poorly defined structure of the categories and lots (tiers) of the DPS. The use of lots under a DPS. ? Award Criteria - An overall lack of clarity with regards to the evaluation criteria with no price component ? Selection Criteria - The selection questionnaire contains criteria which are not permissible under Regulation 58(2) of the PCR 2015. ? Timescales - The timescales to evaluate new applications to join the DPS. | Complaint upheld. PPRS contacted ECC who have supported PPRS to review the supplier’s concerns by providing written responses, a copy of the DPS procurement documentation and attending meetings between both parties. PPRS has reviewed all information shared and upholds the majority of the supplier’s concerns, as set-out below. Additionally, PPRS has made number of recommendations to ECC, summarised below; ? DPS Agreement (Complaint Upheld) - ECC should consider the risks of this approach and how it can be best resolved. ? Categories and Lots (Complaint Partially Upheld) - ECC needs to update the DPS procurement documentation to clearly define the categories and tier structure of the agreement. ? Award Criteria (Complaint Upheld) - ECC needs to update the evaluation criteria to ensure pricing forms part of the call-off evaluation process OR ECC needs to update the DPS to based on fixed price. ? Selection Criteria (Complaint Upheld) - ECC needs to update the selection criteria to ensure full compliance with Regulation 58(2) of PCR 2015 and Procurement Policy Note 08/16. ? Timescales (Complaint Not Upheld) - Evidence was provided by ECC to confirm all applications to join the DPS are processed within 10 working days. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | August | Metropolitan Police | Procurement Process | Tender Process | A supplier contacted PPRS to complain that they had been deprived of commercial opportunities following the award by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) of contracts for the provision of Digital Forensic Capability by Single Tender Action (STA). MPS had a managed services contract in place for forensic services due to run through to 2024 with an option to extend. That contract had come to an end early, and the contracts were put in place via STA to allow for continuity of essential services. The original managed services contract had provisions in place for novation to subcontractors including in the event of the original contract ending earlier, but the circumstances of the contract ending ultimately did not allow for these novations to take place. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS found that, given the time constraints at the point of the contract ending, there would not have been enough time to run a tender process. Therefore STAs, as allowed for under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, were an appropriate commercial option. Further, PPRS found that, as the STA contracts had earlier end dates than the original managed services contract, the supplier would be able to tender for opportunities earlier than had the original contract run its course or been novated. Therefore we do not find that the supplier has been deprived of commercial opportunities. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | August | Lancing Parish Council | Transparency | Changing approach | A supplier contacted PPRS to complain about a contract let by Lancing Parish Council for the operation of car parks. The contract was below threshold. The complaining supplier had scored best in the initial evaluation. Following a council meeting, the contract was awarded to the supplier that had scored the second best in the initial evaluation. The complaint was that the award was based on criteria that were not set out in advance. | Complaint not upheld. Sub-threshold procurements are not required to follow all of the procedures in PCR2015. However, PPRS found that the Council's process did not align with the principles of procurement laid out in the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015) regulation 18. The procurement documentation was not sufficiently transparent about how the award decision would be made. The documentation should have been clearer in the following respects: that the final decision would be made by councillors; that the councillors might over-rule the initial scoring; and the criteria that would be used by the councillors to come to their decision. The PPRS has not come to a view as to whether the award decision was correct, only that the process did not align with PCR 2015. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | August | London Borough of Havering | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an overdue invoice for late payment interest for London Borough of Havering totalling £45.12. | Complaint upheld. London Borough of Havering reviewed the supplier's account and made the outstanding payment. PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998 (in this instance the outstanding amount was late payment interest as the invoice was paid separately). In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | August | Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) | Procurement Process | DPS Operation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding a Dynamic Purchasing System for Global Internet Connectivity Services run by the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO). The supplier had made an application to join the DPS on 13 April 2022. The application had not yet been processed, and follow-on queries had not received a response. | Complaint Upheld. The application had not been processed due to technical issues with the DPS platform. The platform had not sent a notification to FCDO staff when the application was received, and so staff had not assessed the application. FCDO processed the application promptly upon being notified of the issue by PPRS. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | September | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Strategy | SME exclusion - financial requirement | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) procurement reference RM6257 Security Services – Physical, Technical and Support Services. The supplier was concerned that it was not appropriate for CCS to apply PPN 08/21 at the framework award stage. The supplier understood that PPN 08/21 set out how payment approaches can be taken into account in the procurement of in scope central government contracts in excess of £5 million per annum. Whilst the total potential value of the framework was clearly higher than this, the supplier did not believe that it was likely that many, if any, call off contracts awarded under it will be in excess of £5 million per annum. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS contacted CCS who advised that Lot 4 was a brand-new LOT with a potential that contract values could reach £5 million. CCS believed that they had been consistent across the framework in applying PPN08/21. During the clarification period for RM6257 there were no challenges or questions regarding the procurement strategy or indeed the application of PPN08/21 within the Bid pack and Award Criteria. Furthermore, CCS confirmed that over 50% of the bidders who had submitted a bid on RM6257 were SMEs. CCS was confident that this procurement met the principles of procurement, as set out in Regulation 18 of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, and was in keeping with supporting the SME agenda. In this instance PPRS will share high level detail of this case with colleagues in the Cabinet Office SME Policy team and PPRS will mark this case for a follow up in six months to understand how PPN's are being applied at a framework level for new procurements. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | September | The Royal Mint | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding The Royal Mint’s (TRM) procurement reference ITT_353, Equipment for Component Depopulation and Board Waste Processing. The supplier raised concerns regarding Research & Development (R&D) carried out and subsequent award of contract. | Complaint partially upheld. PPRS contacted TRM who confirmed that the supplier had been engaged in R&D however at no point was an order issued for said works or any guarantees of future contract award given. However TRM did confirm that due to staff changes a debrief letter was not issued to make the supplier aware of the reasoning for their bid submission being rejected. In this instance, to ensure transparency and procurement best practice, PPRS has recommended that TRM is explicit and transparent in the expectations of future R&D exercises and provides timely communications in compliance with The Public Contracts Regulations 2015 specifically regulation 55, Informing candidates and tenderers (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2015/102/regulation/55/made). With this in mind PPRS will mark this case for a follow up in six months time to understand if the authority has taken onboard the recommendations made. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | September | Mersey Care NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an overdue invoice for Mersey Care NHS Foundation Trust totalling £452.40. | Complaint Upheld. Mersey Care NHS Foundation Trust reviewed the supplier's account and requested the Supplier confirm their bank details due to a bank details mismatch, even though other invoices had been paid to the same account. Once this had been done the Authority made the outstanding payment. However, the Authority did not provide an explanation why this was needed. PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | October | Bolsover District Council | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding Bolsover District Council’s procurement reference BDC/007/2022, Health and Safety Tender. The supplier was concerned that their submission was not fairly evaluated and that additional marks had been awarded for service offerings not requested within the tender response. | Complaint partially upheld. PPRS reviewed the Invitation to Tender and debrief letter provided by the Council and was satisfied that the Council had followed their documented process for evaluation. They provided feedback to the unsuccessful supplier outlining the reasons for the difference in scores. For a supplier to obtain the highest score the supplier's response would need to meet the following:- "Exceptional demonstration by the Bidder of the relevant ability, understanding, skills, resource & quality measures required to provide the supplies / services. Response identifies factors that will offer potential added value, with evidence to support the response." In this instance the winning bidder identified factors that would offer potential added value, with evidence to support the response. Potential value add was requested in the tender response. The authority scored a question on accreditation which PPRS would recommend to be a pass/fail option for future procurements. The authority agreed to consider this in their future procurement strategies. PPRS will follow up this recommendation in six months to understand if the authority has taken on board the recommendation. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | October | Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) | Procurement Process | Feedback | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding The Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS) procurement reference 17326 – Climate Change Content. The supplier was concerned that their request for feedback had not been addressed. | Complaint upheld. PPRS reviewed the feedback letters provided and although most of the feedback given was good and in line with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR2015), the feedback letter provided didn't describe the relative merits of the winning supplier but provided the scores and comments against each criteria. PPRS recommended that the additional detail was added to ensure that BEIS’s feedback was in line with the Framework and was fully compliant with PCR2015, specifically regulation 55 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2015/102/regulation/55/made). BEIS accepted the recommendation and reviewed their feedback and will reissue the feedback letters to all bidders to include the additional detail. Furthermore BEIS advised that this would be applied to all future procurements. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | October | Countess of Chester Hospital NHS Foundation Trust | Procurement Process | Evaluation | A supplier contacted PPRS to complain about a tender process run by Countess of Chester Hospital NHS Foundation Trust for a National Framework Agreement for the Provision of Refurbished Electronic Devices and Repair Services. Following the tender close date the trust had contacted the supplier asking them to re-upload a document that appeared to have been previously uploaded in error. The supplier confirmed the error and reuploaded the document. The trust then declined to evaluate the document as it had been submitted after the tender close date. The supplier complained that the trust had acted unreasonably in first asking for the document to be uploaded and then declining to evaluate it. | Complaint upheld. PPRS found that if the trust did not intend to evaluate the new document they had no reason to ask for it to be uploaded. The trust therefore created a reasonable expectation in the supplier that the submission would be evaluated. The trust’s tender pack did indicate they reserved the right not to evaluate any late submissions, and as such felt their decision to not evaluate was in line with their published process. PPRS recommends to the trust that they take care in future procurements not to create false expectations by being clearer in their communications with suppliers and to ensure that they set appropriate expectations. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | October | East London NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an overdue invoice from March 2022 for East London NHS Foundation Trust totalling £1,580.40. | Complaint upheld. East London NHS Foundation Trust reviewed the supplier's account and made the outstanding payment. PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998, in this instance the supplier did not claim late payment interest. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | October | Kingston Hospital NHS Foundation Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an overdue invoice from May 2022 for Kingston Hospital NHS Foundation Trust totalling £10,639.20. | Complaint upheld. Kingston Hospital NHS Foundation Trust reviewed the supplier's account and made the outstanding payment. PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998, in this instance the supplier did not claim late payment interest. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | October | NHS Supply Chain | Procurement Process | Short deadlines | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding NHS Supply Chain Operated by DHL Supply Chain Limited acting as agent of Supply Chain Coordination Ltd future opportunity SQ_254 RFI Tourniquet Project_1093. The supplier was concerned that the tender was advertised on Contracts Finder, however when following the directions to complete the Request for Information (RFI), the tender was not listed. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS contacted NHS Supply Chain Operated by DHL Supply Chain Limited who confirmed the RFI was not available as it had passed the original 1 month period of being open. For this reason, the complaint was not upheld. However, the Authority has acted quickly to evaluate their position on this and reopen access to the RFI, making it available for responses until March 2023. The supplier has confirmed this is now available. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | October | Hampshire Constabulary | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an overdue invoice from July 2022 for Hampshire Constabulary totalling £606.28. | Complaint Upheld. Hampshire Constabulary promptly reviewed the supplier's account and made the outstanding payment. PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. The supplier did claim late payment interest charges and Hampshire Constabulary paid these in full. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | October | London Borough of Redbridge | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding an overdue invoice from June 2022 for London Borough of Redbridge totalling £17,303.87. | Complaint upheld. London Borough of Redbridge reviewed the supplier's account and made the outstanding payment. PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998, in this instance the supplier did not claim late payment interest. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | October | Leeds City Council | Contract Management | Administration | A supplier contacted PPRS to complain about a contract let by Leeds City Council under the Digital Outcomes and Specialists Framework (DOS). The complaint was in two parts. Firstly, Leeds City Council had let four contracts from a single DOS opportunity. Secondly, that the contract was terminated without proper cause after the supplier ceased work under the contract due to a dispute over payment. | Complaint partially upheld. Crown Commercial Service is the framework authority for DOS and is of the opinion that awarding four contracts against a single DOS opportunity is not compliant with the framework ordering process. Therefore, we uphold this part of the complaint. We would recommend the council engages with the framework authority to determine the best use of the DOS framework going forward. PPRS found that the two parties did not use the DOS dispute resolution process prior to the contract termination. Our view is that the parties should have followed the contractual process including escalation routes as stated in the contract. We note that only the customer authority has the contractual right to trigger arbitration. The dispute resolution process explicitly states that a supplier should not cease work during a dispute. The termination of the contract was valid on the grounds that the supplier had ceased work. This part of the complaint is not upheld although we do have a recommendation relating to it. The dispute resolution clause survives contract termination, and PPRS would recommend the parties use this to resolve the outstanding questions of payment. PPRS will check progress with the parties on this point in three months. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | October | Department for Transport | Procurement Process | Clarification | A supplier contacted PPRS to complain about a contract let by the Department for Transport (DfT) under the Digital Outcomes and Specialists Framework (DOS) - The UK Ship Emissions Reporting Service (UK-SERS) – Alpha phase (with option to go to Beta) - Digital Marketplace. Due to timing issues in the clarification process, a discovery report was only made available to some but not all suppliers. The supplier felt disadvantaged by not receiving a copy. | Complaint partially upheld. PPRS found that there was a risk that not receiving a copy of the discovery report had disadvantaged the supplier in the shortlisting process. However, as not all shortlisted suppliers had received a copy of the report, we cannot be certain that is the case. PPRS recommends that in future procurements, additional steps are taken by DfT to ensure all suppliers receive equal treatment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | November | South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive | Procurement Strategy | Use of framework | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (SYPTE) procurement for the maintenance of legacy bus stop displays using the West Yorkshire Combined Authority Battery Display Framework (BDF). The supplier was concerned the scope of the SYPTE procurement did not align to the intended use, evaluation approach and scope of the BDF. They additionally felt the SYPTE procurement did not offer best value to the public sector. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS reviewed information and documents provided to them by the SYPTE. PPRS were unable to substantiate that SYPTE had breached the terms and conditions of the BDF or the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. Furthermore SYTPE had provided PPRS with details of their approach, together with supporting evidence, to determine best value for the public sector. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | November | University of Bristol | Procurement Process | Transparency | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding University of Bristol procurement reference itt1138, Supply and Implementation of a Computer-Aided Facilities Management System. The supplier was concerned that the opportunity had not been advertised on Contracts Finder, therefore potentially preventing them from bidding. | Complaint not upheld. University of Bristol's market research identified the total spend for this procurement would be approximately £70K. This is under the procurement threshold, as set-out in PPN 10/21 "Thresholds Values and Inclusion of VAT in Contract Estimates". Due to the value of the procurement the authority compliantly opted to run a procurement with 4 suppliers identified as part of their market research. Under Regulation 110.5 of PCR 2015, given the authorities choice of procurement process and the value of the procurement, they did not need to publish this opportunity on Contracts Finder. As set-out under PPN 09/21 "Requirements to publish on Contracts Finder", we have reminded the authority of their responsibility to publish the Contract Award Notice within 90 calendar days after the contract award date. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | November | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Process | Out of scope extension | A supplier raised an issue that DOS 5 Framework had been extended beyond its published term and if it was possible for the supplier to join the extended DOS 5 framework, PPRS investigated what grounds under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 were used for extending the framework beyond its published term. | Complaint not upheld. The Contracting Authority (CA) confirmed the extension was made by applying Regulation 72, to allow for a short extension of the original term of the DOS 5 framework. This was due to unforeseen issues with the testing of the platform for DOS 6 (the replacement agreement). The purpose of this short extension was to ensure that customers could continue to buy the services they need. It would also allow the CA to complete user testing to ensure that when the DOS 6 framework is launched it will deliver the best experience for customers and suppliers. PPRS also confirmed to the supplier once a framework has been agreed it is not lawful for additional suppliers to be added. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | November | Metropolitan Police | Procurement Strategy | Use of framework | A supplier contacted PPRS to complain about a contract for “Mobile Phone and Computer Digital Forensic Analysis - Digital Marketplace” advertised by the Metropolitan Police Service under the Digital Outcomes and Specialists Framework (DOS). The complaint was that the advertised opportunity was not in scope for DOS. | Complaint upheld. Crown Commercial Service (CCS) is the framework authority for DOS. CCS has advised that the requirement is not a bespoke application development suitable for DOS but a technical support requirement and do not believe a good outcome can be obtained using DOS. Therefore, PPRS upholds the complaint, and our recommendation would be for the Metropolitan Police Service to engage with CCS's DOS team to support the development of future DOS opportunities, and take due care regarding the scope of frameworks in future. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | November | London Borough of Camden | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding overdue invoices from March 2022 for London Borough of Camden totalling £11,533.50. | Complaint upheld. London Borough of Camden reviewed the supplier's account and made the outstanding payment. PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998, in this instance the supplier did not claim late payment interest. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | November | Leicestershire County Council | Procurement Process | Tender Process | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding Leicestershire County Council contract reference S5 for the provision of home to schools transport. The supplier was concerned both that their existing contract to provide the S5 service was terminated early and another operator put in place without a tender process being followed. | Complaint partially upheld. Leicestershire County Council provided evidence to PPRS of the process they followed to inform the supplier of the notice to terminate. This was permissible under the call-off agreement, as it included termination for convenience. After the supplier had originally contacted PPRS, the authority provided the supplier with a detailed explanation of the factors behind the termination. PPRS was satisfied with the stated explanation. A replacement call-off was awarded following a competition run for the provision of a number of routes during the 22/23 academic year under an existing Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) "BB4". All operators under the DPS were invited to respond. Six operators did respond, but only one response met the school transport requirements for the pupils that had previously travelled on the S5. This bid was evaluated and awarded against the conditions as set-out within the tender documentation. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | November | Procurement for Housing | Procurement Process | Equivalents | A supplier raised an issue with the PPRS about a live procurement by Procurement for Housing (PfH) for a "National Agreement For: Material Supply and Associated Services" (Agreement Reference: JA / April 2023 / Materials). The supplier had concerns about the pricing mechanism, which included a target price and penalised pricing that was too far above and below this target. They raised concerns that this might prevent best value being achieved. The supplier also raised concerns around the scope of goods. The ITT asks for specific standard goods, with no opportunity to offer equivalent alternatives. | Partially upheld. PPRS notes that some of the lots under this procurement relate to authorities in Scotland and are subject to relevant Scottish law. PPRS's findings do not relate to those lots as they are out of scope of PPRS's remit. PfH were able to provide a detailed and evidenced based rationale for the pricing mechanism. PPRS is satisfied that the mechanism is commercially appropriate. We do not uphold this part of the complaint. PfH were also able to provide a detailed and evidenced based rationale for specifying named goods rather than generic technical requirements. This is allowed under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, regulation 42(12). However regulation 42(13) goes on to say where this is allowed “the reference shall be accompanied by the words “or equivalent”. We therefore uphold this part of the complaint. PPRS would recommend that PfH consider the addition of the words "or equivalent" to the relevant parts of the tender documentation, or that they consider issuing a clarification to bidders to that effect. Suppliers may be required to prove that where they offer alternatives that they are genuinely equivalent, that is, that they meet "the performance or functional requirements of the contracting authority" per PCR 2015 42(16). | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | December | Crown Commercial Service (CCS) | Procurement Process | SME exclusion | A supplier contacted PPRS to complain about a framework in the process of being let by Crown Commercial Service (CCS) called Vertical Application Solutions (RM6259). A complaint related to the application of PPN 06/21 to the framework. CCS requires all suppliers on the framework to have a Carbon Reduction Plan in place regardless of the value of the contracts involved, whereas PPN 06/21 requires the plans to be in place for central government contracts of over £5 million per annum value, excluding VAT. The supplier complains that this has a discriminatory effect on themselves and other SMEs, who may only be interested in applying for smaller contracts. A further complaint concerning the requirement for suppliers to meet an extensive list of standards and accreditations, which they felt was disproportionate and therefore discriminatory to SMEs. | Complaint 1 upheld. The complaint is upheld on the same grounds as PPRS case reference 1953, from January 2022, as the issue is the same. CCS is required to implement policy notice 06/21 as they are an in-scope organisation and expect contracts of over £5M to be let under the RM6259 framework. However, they are still required to operate the principles of procurement outlined in the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (18), specifically the principle of proportionality. Advice given to CCS in January 2022 from the Cabinet Office Policy team does not appear to have been shared internally as best practice. This advice was to consider splitting requirements by value and only requiring Carbon Reduction Plans for higher value contracts, for example; a specific Lot for contracts over £5 million or suppliers providing a Carbon Reduction Plan only if they want to bid for Central Government contracts greater than £5 million. PPRS will seek to engage with CCS centrally to understand why procurement policy advice is not being shared across CCS. Complaint 2 not upheld. CCS addressed this complaint as part of the framework application clarification responses, by confirming suppliers did not have to achieve the accreditation's, rather they need to deliver to the published standards. The listed standards and accreditations do largely align to similar framework agreements, such as RM3821, Data and Application Solutions framework. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | December | Lambeth Council | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding overdue invoices for Lambeth London Borough Council totalling £2,501.84. | Complaint upheld. Lambeth London Borough Council reviewed the supplier's account and needed to onboard them to their systems as a provider in order to issue a Purchase Order. Once this had been done the Authority agreed to pay the outstanding invoices. PPRS reminded the authority that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2022 | December | Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust | Payment | Payment | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding overdue invoices for Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust totalling £104,662.08. | Complaint not upheld. Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust provided evidence to PPRS to confirm some of the invoices have not been paid due to missing or incorrect data being presented with the invoices. The Trust is currently working with their 3rd party resourcing provider and the supplier to resolve the missing and incorrect data. At the point of case closure there was an overall reduction in the amount due, so we are confident the parties are working to resolve the issue. PPRS reminded the Trust that where public sector invoices are not paid within 30 days and are not disputed, interest becomes liable as set out in the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. In addition, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, public sector buyers must publish annually the amount of interest paid to suppliers due to late payment. Furthermore, PPRS has reminded the supplier of their obligations to provide resources and the associated invoices in line with the process agreed with the Trust. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2023 | February | University of York | Procurement Strategy | Tender Process | A supplier contacted PPRS regarding the University of York voluntary ex ante transparency (VEAT) notice (https://www.find-tender.service.gov.uk/Notice/033267-2022?origin=SearchResults&p=1) for Data Centre Hosting Services. The supplier was concerned with regards to the VEAT notice with the decision to award to a supplier in Sweden. The supplier believed their data centre in the UK had very similar net zero credentials with REGO certified 100% renewable green energy and that they had future plans to receive energy from a UK Government sustainability project. Additionally, given that the University was committed to Net Zero, had they taken into account (in their Net Zero Total Cost of Ownership / Business Case) the Green House Gas Emissions associated with shipment of equipment to Sweden and site visits to Sweden by University staff e.g. for equipment installation and any ongoing support? All of these activities fall under Scope 1 and Scope 3 GHG scopes in line with UK Government’s Procurement Policy Notice 06/21 Carbon Reduction Planning. The supplier was further concerned that the University had failed to investigate UK based solutions as to the best of their knowledge, UK data centre operators, as well as themselves, had not been involved in any pre-market engagement activity with the University. | Complaint not upheld. PPRS contacted the University to understand what process the University followed resulting in the decision around their chosen procurement route, specifically any pre-market engagement completed to understand potential UK options. The University confirmed that they had not yet awarded a contract to EcoDC as they wait for 30 days to elapse from the point of issue of any VEAT notice in case they have missed a potential alternative supplier. Furthermore the University advised that as part of their strategy of "A University for Public Good (york.ac.uk)", they want a below net zero facility (not net zero) and, to this effect, they considered a range of issues, not just the power consumption/green energy but other factors such as method of construction of the data centre and sustainable reuse of heat generated by the data centre. They also considered space to expand and scale up their HPC if needed, in terms of shipment of equipment, this will be required as a one-off wherever their data centre is located and they have not sourced the equipment yet. In terms of site visits, they do not envisage travelling to Sweden - they would be using "remote hands'', as they do now for their current data centre. Lastly they confirmed they did conduct direct market engagement, together with their own research of the market. The University urged the supplier to contact them directly should they wish to discuss the requirement further and be considered for the opportunity. PPRS would recommend that the University issues a Request for Information via Contracts Finder in the future to ensure that any potential suppliers have sight of the potential requirement. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |
| 2023 | February | Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) | Procurement Process | Feedback | PPRS received a query from a supplier who applied for a BEIS Digital Marketplace opportunity (https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/digital-outcomes-and-specialists/opportunities/18398) and had not received any feedback on the evaluation. | Complaint upheld. PPRS contacted BEIS who advised that due to staff absence the process had not been completed and confirmed that they were fully aware of the obligation to issue communications in a timely fashion. The buyer took action to resolve the matter and the supplier confirmed that feedback was then received. | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set | Not set |