Details for first aid supplies contract

Freedom of information request reference no: 01.FOI.23.032785

I note you seek access to the following information:

I would be most grateful if you would provide me, details in respect to the contract below. The details we require are:

- Name of suppliers who applied for inclusion on each framework and were successful and not successful at the PQQ & ITT stages?
- Ranking of all successful and not successful suppliers at the PQQ & ITT stages?
- Total value of the awarded framework?
- Actual spend on this framework (and any sub lots), from the start of the contract to the current date?
- Start date of framework?
- Expiry date of framework
- Is there an extension clause in the framework(s) and, if so, the duration of the extension?
- Has a decision been made yet on whether the framework(s) are being either extended or renewed?
- What are the contractual performance KPI's for this contract?
- Could you please provide a copy of the product specification given to all bidders for when this contract was last advertised?
- Who is the senior officer (outside of procurement) responsible for this contract?”

Decision

I have today decided to disclose some of the requested information. Some data has been withheld as it is exempt from disclosure and therefore this response serves as a Refusal Notice under Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) by virtue of the following exemptions:

Section 43(2) – Commercial Interests
This relates to the request for a list of unsuccessful bidders and their ranking.

Reason for decision

Disclosing the complete list of bidders and their ranks would be likely to prejudice their commercial interests, potentially negatively impacting upon their marketing advantage. It would also be likely to impact upon future tendering processes should companies know that unsuccessful bids would be publicised. Consequently, this may mean that the MPS aren’t considered a company to tender to, which would put the organisation at a financial disadvantage as there would be fewer competitive tender options.

Disclosing the information, you are seeking would undermine our ability to maintain a fair competitive process when tendering for contracts and would compromise the MPS’ ability to achieve best value for money from other commercial contractors in future tenders. Disclosure could also unfairly advantage, or disadvantage, the current contract holders, and other companies entering the process when re-tendering for this contract, or when tendering for other contracts with the MPS, in the future.

There is a strong public interest in ensuring that companies are able to compete fairly and it is therefore imperative that there is a fair tendering process. The disclosure of the information you are seeking would impact on the MPS’ ability to achieve best value for money from other commercial contractors in future tenders.

Disclosure of the requested information would prejudice the commercial interests of both the MPS and the supplier. There is a public interest in ensuring that companies are able to compete fairly in the tender process. Disclosing the information about who was involved in the tender process and the rank they were given could provide successful competitors with an unfair advantage. Full disclosure would weaken the position of the MPS in a competitive environment by revealing market-sensitive information. This would have a harmful effect on future partnerships when entering into commercial activities.

It must be borne in mind that the MPS has limited resources and will always try and negotiate the best deal in order to save resources where we can – anything that hinders this cannot be seen to be in the public interest.

Disclosure of this information would be likely to negatively impact upon the marketing ability of the unsuccessful bidders and also the MPS itself, by potentially reducing who may be willing to tender for contracts in future. It is not in the public interest for the MPS to be negatively affected in a competitive market. It is believed that the disclosure made today satisfies the public interest arguments for disclosure.

Disclosure

Please note, this request has been taken to relate to the three contracts relating to First Aid generally – First Aid, Pharmaceuticals and Medical Gases.

Name of suppliers who applied for inclusion on each framework and were successful and not successful at the PQQ & ITT stages?

This was an open process and so PQQ was not applied.

In relation to the ITT stage, there were two successful bids – Aero Healthcare and Speciality Oxygen Services Ltd.

Total value of the awarded framework?

The total value for the three contracts was £9,560,000 excluding VAT.

Actual spend on this framework (and any sub lots), from the start of the contract to the current date?

This information is not available to the MPS at this point in time as we have not completed the first year of being operational and have not collected that data yet.

Start date of framework?

30 November 2022

Expiry date of framework

29 November 2026

Is there an extension clause in the framework(s) and, if so, the duration of the extension?

Yes, there is a clause allowing for extension however 0 months have been sought at this point.

Has a decision been made yet on whether the framework(s) are being either extended or renewed?

Not at this time.

What are the contractual performance KPI's for this contract?

Please see the Performance Regime Schedule attached.

Could you please provide a copy of the product specification given to all bidders for when this contract was last advertised?

Please see the Services Description Schedule attached.

Who is the senior officer (outside of procurement) responsible for this contract?

The Met’s Senior Advisor for First Aid.