Legal Services 2

How to access the framework

Call-Off Contract Award

Call-off contracts may be awarded using one of three methods: direct award, Rapid Request for Quote (RFQ) or further competition. The ultimate responsibility for selecting the most appropriate and compliant route for a specific requirement rests with the customer. The onus will be on the customer to carry out their own due diligence before selecting which method to use. The customer will determine the requirement, specification and award, based on the most advantageous tender (MAT).

Direct Award (award without a competitive selection)

This framework permits direct award in accordance with PA23. The key provisions that relate to awarding a call-off contract without further competition via a framework are found in Sections 45 to 49, particularly Section 45(2) and Section 49(10).

A direct award allows a customer to award a contract to a single supplier without a new competition. This is permitted where the customer can objectively determine the most advantageous tender (MAT) for their requirement based on the original tenders submitted by suppliers to join this framework.

• All suppliers have been evaluated against consistent and transparent quality questions.

• A clear pricing mechanism has been submitted and forms part of the framework terms.

• These evaluation criteria form the basis for direct award decisions throughout the life of the framework.

Customers may use any of the following criteria for direct award decisions.

Award based on overall rank (quality + price combined score)

• The rule: Award the call-off contract to the supplier who was ranked #1 overall on the framework (based on their total score for quality and price).
• The process: If the #1 supplier cannot meet the need, the customer must document this and proceed to the #2 ranked supplier, and so on.
• Best for: General requirements where overall supplier capability is the priority.

Overall rank information is available upon request. Customers must retain an auditable record justifying their selection, demonstrating how the supplier’s offer was the most advantageous based on the framework’s established evaluation model.

 Award based on highest quality score

• The rule: Award the call-off contract to the supplier who was ranked #1 on Quality at framework award (based on their total quality score).
• The process: If the #1 supplier cannot meet the need, the customer must document this and proceed to the #2 ranked supplier, and so on.
• Best for: Requirements where quality, delivery approach, and technical capability are the priority, and where the framework permits award using the framework’s quality ranking.

The highest quality rank information is available upon request. Customers must retain an auditable record justifying their selection, demonstrating how the supplier’s offer was the most advantageous based on the framework’s established evaluation model.

Highest Score in a Specific Evaluation Question

• The rule: Award the call-off contract to the supplier ranked #1 for the specified evaluation question at framework award (based on their score for that question).
• The process: If the #1 supplier cannot meet the need, the customer must document this and proceed to the #2 ranked supplier, and so on.
• Best for: Requirements where a single capability or delivery factor is critical to success and customers need a simple route to award linked to that priority.

The highest score in a specific evaluation question information is available upon request. Customers must retain an auditable record justifying their selection, demonstrating how the supplier’s offer was the most advantageous based on the framework’s established evaluation model.

Award based on lowest Overall Price/Highest Commercial Advantage

• The rule: Award the call-off contract to the supplier offering the lowest price for the specific need.

               - From the price schedule: For items listed in the benchmark price schedule, the award is made to the supplier with the lowest price for that specific item.

• Best for: Standard or commoditised requirements where price is the primary driver.

Customers may take into account:

• The supplier offers the most competitive pricing using the submitted pricing mechanism;
• Supplier capability and delivery approach (Quality Criterion)
• Specific strengths in service, innovation, sustainability, or compatibility
• Any other factors that align with the framework’s original award criteria
• The supplier has the best capability for the specific service, or location;
• The supplier achieved the highest score for quality, price and/or social value during the framework evaluation process.
• The supplier’s model delivers continuity or integration with existing estate or contracts.

Pricing information is available upon request. Customers must retain an auditable record justifying their selection, demonstrating how the supplier’s offer was the most advantageous based on the framework’s established evaluation model.

Competitive Call Off Selection Process:

Rapid RFQ

This is a streamlined, competitive process that allows for customer judgment on essential requirements, with price being the ultimate decider. It's perfect for when you have specific, non-negotiable needs.

How to run a Rapid RFQ:

• Define Pass/Fail Criteria: The customer defines their need by identifying a few essential, non-negotiable requirements. These are not for scoring; they are simple "Yes/No" gates.

              - Example: "We need a cloud engineer who 1) holds an active AWS Solutions Architect certification (Pass/Fail) and 2) can be on-site in Exeter within 48 hours (Pass/Fail)."

• Issue Rapid RFQ. The customer sends this simple request to all capable suppliers on the framework, setting a short, fixed deadline (this is not a defined duration.
• Suppliers submit simple bids: Suppliers respond with two things only:

             - Confirmation and evidence that they meet the Pass/Fail criteria.

             - Their price for the work.

• Customer applies judgment (compliantly): The customer evaluates the responses. This is the judgment step. They assess the evidence and decide "Yes" or "No" for each supplier against the Pass/Fail criteria.
• Award to the lowest price compliant Supplier: From the pool of suppliers who passed all the essential checks, the call-off contract is awarded to the one who submitted the lowest price. The audit trail is simple: "Suppliers A, B, and D passed the mandatory checks. Supplier B was the cheapest and was therefore awarded the call-off contract."
• Best For: Requirements needing a specific, verifiable skill, where price is the deciding factor after that essential need is met.

Further Competition (competitive selection process):

A further competition process is used where customers carry out a competition for the award of a call-off contract. 

How to run a Further Competition:

• The customer must invite all suppliers on the framework who are deemed capable of delivering the particular requirement.
• The customer shall be responsible for formulating a specification/product brief containing full details of the goods/services required.
• The customer will send the specification/product brief to all suppliers quoting the framework reference number. A reasonable and proportionate time limit should be set for the submission of fully completed bid responses.
• Responses received must be unopened until the designated closing date and time for final submissions has passed.  Responses received after the specified date and time should be rejected unopened.
• The submitted response shall be evaluated in accordance with the criteria stated in the original specification/product brief.  The headline criteria used must be the same as the headline criteria used for the original Framework or part thereof, but the customer may change the weightings and add their own sub-criteria to apply.
• The bidders must be advised of the result in writing. Customers are not required to provide suppliers with an assessment summary however, they are encouraged to do so as a matter of best practice.
• A voluntary standstill period of no less than 8 working days beginning with the day on which the contract ward notice is published must be completed before entering into the call-off Contract

Best For: Complex projects, high-value call-off contracts, and any situation where the quality of the solution is a critical factor.

Conditions of Participation

Under this framework a further competition process provides for conditions of participation if the customer is satisfied that the conditions are a proportionate means of ensuring that suppliers party to the framework have

              - the legal and financial capacity to perform the call-off contract, or 

              - the technical ability to perform the call-off contract.

In this section, a “condition of participation” means a condition that a supplier must satisfy in order to be awarded a public contract in accordance with the framework.

A condition may not

              - require the submission of audited annual accounts, except from suppliers who are, or were, required to have the accounts audited in accordance with Part 16 of the Companies Act 2006 or an overseas equivalent; 

              - require insurance relating to the performance of the call-off contract to be in place before the award of the call-off contract. 

A condition may relate to suppliers’ qualifications, experience or technical ability, but may not

              - require suppliers to have been awarded a call-off contract under the framework or by a particular customer.

              - break the rules on technical specifications in section 56, or 

              - require particular qualifications without allowing for their equivalents.