Procurement Services Procurement Outcome Report TVP ......TVP Reference OP19001 Contract for the...

POR Template V8 27092019

1

Procurement Services

Procurement Outcome Report

TVP Reference OP19001

Contract for the supply of Provision of Custodial Healthcare Services

Submitted By Thom Wilson

Date Submitted: 6th April 2020


2

Contract Award (and POR) Sign-Off Sheet

By approving this document the Procurement Governance Board confirms acceptance of the detail contained within this document, approval to proceed with contract award, implementation and realisation of the benefits. In the case of a Procurement which results in a new contract (or extension) the document replaces the previous award paper, and has a section for the relevant sign-offs below.

Executive Summary and Recommendations

1.1 BACKGROUND

1.1.1 Current / Baseline / Budgeted Spend (All figures ex VAT) FY15/16 £2,182,480.92 + set up costs £45,087.00 (No spend shown on NPPH) FY16/17 £2,182,480.92 FY17/18 £2,215,391.80 FY18/19 £2,267,073.26 (FY19/20 base budget is £2,280,117.00) FY19/20 YTD as @ Jan ‘20 Actual £2,306,846.05 Total (Current 5 year contract YTD) £11,199,359.95 Total (Last 4 years of current contract YTD) = £8,971,792.03 1.1.2 Summary of requirement and process: The current five (5) year duration contract for the provision of Custodial Healthcare Services, Healthcare Professionals (HCPs) in custody to our 8 custody suites, expires on 31st May 2020. In consideration of this requirement, Procurement with input from the Project sponsor/primary stakeholder Criminal Justice and other internal stakeholders and in partnership with NHS England (NHSE) carried out a full Restricted EU compliant tender for this requirement for a continued four (4) year, 2+2 outsourced solution via the EU Supply e-procurement portal to maximise the potential for full competition reach within the market. Final bids were received in December 2019, subsequently, this POR makes the recommendations based on those scored, evaluated and moderated bid submissions to set out the options for the best clinical service which is financially, operationally and strategically sustainable solution for the Force. 1.1.3 Regulation 84 form has been completed and is at Appendix A (Note that by default a regulation 84 form should be completed in all circumstances). This is a record of the exercise required to be kept by the Cabinet Office. 1.1.4 Contract Terms and Conditions: The supplier meets all the requirements of the contract terms and conditions and specification and offer the Most Economically Advantageous Solution, as assessed through the evaluation process. 1.1.5 Legal Implications: There are no TUPE implications due to the nature of this award recommendation. The legal route to market for this ongoing requirement was re-tendered under the Restricted Procedure, undertaken via the EU Supply electronic e-tendering system and as such is fully compliant with EU regulations and also fully meets the criteria of Chief Constable’s Financial Instructions. 1.1.6 Equality and Diversity: There are no equality and diversity implications in the assessment and/or award of this contract. 1.1.7 Realisation Implementation Plan: There are no substantive implementation issues arising from the award of this contract due to the nature of the award recommendation. The key milestones are linked to the national Health & Social Care Network (HSCN) connectivity to the NHS National spine to allow the service provider HCP’s to access detainees’ summary care records (SCR) in support of and when assessing and treating them in the Custody environment upon and during detention and subsequent release. As an aside project to this re tender, Procurement and CJ in conjunction Joint ICT TVP Estates Project Manager and Property Services Strategy Manager stakeholders are working with NHS England to connect all custody suites to HSCN within the next few months, funded by NHS E.


3

Project Milestones

Insert key milestones, reattach latest project plan using the Project Timeline template

27/01/2020 RFQ Stage 2 bid evaluation deadline

w/c 27/01/2020

Award Options/Recommendations (PGB/POR etc…) – Local Sign off/Approvals

w/c 06/04/2020

HoF and OPCC Sign off/Approvals

24/02/2020-08/04/2020

Anticipated notification to EU Supply to successful and unsuccessful bidders and start of mandatory standstill period

08/04/2020 Anticipated Award date

08/04/2020 – 20/04/2020

Mandatory 10 day Alcatel period prior to full contract award

20/04/2020-31/05/2020

Implementation (if awarded) – Approx 3 months

01/06/2020 Anticipated Contract Start date – 01/06/2020

31/05/2022-31/05/2024

Anticipated Initial Contract End Date (2+2) - 31/05/2022 Anticipated (fully extended) Contract End Date (2+2) - 31/05/2024

1.1.8 Contract Management Review: Tier 1 or Tier 2 or Tier 3 (double click box to add or remove X) 1.1.9 The procurement process has followed and complied with the 5 key Treaty Principles of PCR 2015:- Transparency; Non-Discrimination; Equal Treatment; Proportionality; Mutual Recognition.

1.1.10 Attachments

Please include the following attachments as additional supporting information: Supplier Scoring Evaluation (double click box to add or remove X)

Insert here Quality/Delivery 60% Price 40% (On initial 2-year contract term (yrs 1 & 2). The table below shows the final combined weighted score result identifying Mountain Healthcare as the successful bidder.

Any additional Supporting information (double click box to add or remove X) Moderated evaluation scores & results (Tab 1 Yrs 1 & 2 results as per RFQ guidance, Tab 2 for information only)

20200402_OP19001

Custodial Healthcare Evaluation Cost & Delivery FINAL.xlsx

Mitie Care &

Custody Health

Mountain

Healthcare

CastleRock

Recruitment

93.84% 93.88% 84.68%


4

1.2 RECOMMENDATION 1.2.1 The Police and Crime Commissioner (Chief Finance Officer and Director of Finance) are invited to agree the award of contract in respect of the above mentioned delivery of a managed service to the current incumbent Mountain Healthcare Ltd. The above contract is for an initial term of 24 months duration, with one (1) extension option of 24 months period. (2+2) with no further extensions available. The total value of this contract is estimated at £8,985,659.39 ex VAT over the full four (4) year project period (including extension options and the potential 1% increase in years 3 and 4, although not automatically uplifted or guaranteed). See Table 1 for breakdown. There will be additional spend attributable to the contract, covering *TACT and Operational demand for HCPs over and above the core custody provision, this varies but has averaged £25,668 per annum over the last three (3) years and has been included in the potential savings calculations. *TACT refers to Detainees arrested and held under the Terrorist Act, primarily at Newbury Custody as this is TVP’s dedicated TACT suite. Table 1

Contractual Year

20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 Total

Totals £2,280,875.00 £2,276,375.00 £2,203,188.75 £2,225,220.64 £8,985,659.39

For evaluation purposes and information only the initial two (2) year bid costs of £4,557,250.00 ex VAT were used. See Table 2 for breakdown. Table 2

Contractual Year

20/21 21/22 Total

Totals £2,280,875.00 £2,276,375.00 £4,557,250.00

Cashable potential savings have been identified as part of this tender process. There are no initial cashable potential savings identifiable over four (4) years taking into account the annual average additional spend compared to the bid costs, see Table 3 for breakdown. Based on historical spend including additional YTD this is variable as we do not know exactly how much additional resource will be required during the lifetime of the new contract. Table 3

Contractual Year (bid costs) 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 Total

Totals £2,280,875.00 £2,276,375.00 £2,203,188.75 £2,225,220.64 £8,985,659.39

Actuals last 4 yrs £2,182,480.92 £2,215,391.80 £2,267,073.26 £2,306,846.05 £8,971,792.03

*Additional spend last 3 yrs £77,003.27

Potential Cashable savings (£ & % including additional spend)

-£90,870.63

-1.0%

Green = Committed/paid

Amber = variable (incl additional spend YTD which may increase)

*Averaged additional spend (only since last 3 yrs = £25,667.76


5

The full total value cashable if we take cashable to be a reduction against expected (budgeted) spend potential savings equates to £861,012.47 / 9.58% over four (4) years based on the financial years breakdown of bid costs compared to our budget profile and taking into account the annual average additional spend, see Table 4 for breakdown. Comparing the budget profile with the bid costs including average additional spend this is variable as we do not know exactly how much additional resource will be required during the lifetime of the new contract. Table 4

Contractual Year 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 Total

Budget Profile £2,378,162.03 £2,449,506.89 £2,522,992.10 £2,598,681.86 £9,949,342.88

Contractual Year (bid costs) 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 Total

Totals £2,280,875.00 £2,276,375.00 £2,203,188.75 £2,225,220.64 £8,985,659.39

Potential Non cashable savings £ & % (including average annual additional spend)

£71,619.27 £147,464.13 £294,135.59 £347,793.47 £861,012.47

3.14% 6.48% 13.35% 15.63% 9.58%

Amber = variable (incl average annual additional spend which may increase) Mountain Healthcare suggest that the impact of inflation on the cost base is expected to be circa 2% annually. There are many factors that can affect this, such as wage inflation within specific disciplines (such as nursing), interest rates, and the impact Brexit will have upon the economy. It is difficult to accurately forecast the level of inflation in 2022 to 2024. Consequently, they have applied the 1% increase across the entire cost base in contract years 3 and 4. Given that 1% inflation is below what they will expect to incur, Mountain Healthcare state they will work in partnership with the Authority to identify cost base efficiencies over the term, so that the pricing for any potential extension achieves the best value for money possible. Years 1 and 2 also have an additional cost for 2 Custody Clinical Coordinator role(s) for an initial trial period. This will be then reassessed at the end of the trial period as to how effective this has been and whether to fully incorporate this requirement into the final 2 years of the contract. The service provision has been outsourced for some considerable time now and is dominated by a number of key players in a stable, mature market, although there are some smaller new entrants showing interest. Of the four (4) bids received, one (1) was non-compliant on a technicality leaving three (3) to be scored and evaluated. To continue to meet the current service standards and HMICFRS recommendations the minimum service provision was tendered for in the specification, to the same or higher level. The service provider recommended for award is offering four (4) embedded HCPs at Abingdon, Milton Keynes, Maidenhead and Loddon Valley and 2 x shared rotas, providing 24/7/365 access to onsite or call out resources dedicated to covering Banbury and Aylesbury and Newbury and High Wycombe.


6

Process and POR approval

Role Name Contact Details

Signature Sign-Off Date

Project Sponsor/Primary Stakeholder

Force Custody Lead C/Insp Criminal Justice (CJ) James Hahn

301 5864 (CJ Admin No.)

Electronic 07/04/2020 (Craig Kirby)

Head of Procurement Richard Fowles 301 3762

Electronic 07/04/2020

Procurement Business Partner

Allyson Hughes 301 3769 Electronic 06/02/2020

Procurement Lead Thom Wilson 301 3765 Electronic 05/02/2020

Procurement Joint Lead Bev Gerrard 301 3764 Electronic 10/02/2020

TVP Finance Dave Allen 301 5423 Electronic 17/02/2020

Internal Stakeholders (ICT)

David Wilson, CJ ICT Business Relationship Manager (HC/TVP)

CC’d in for info only


*Internal Stakeholders (ICT)

Paula Gabbitas Joint ICT, TVP Estates Project Manager



*Internal Stakeholders (Property Services)

Peter Smith, Strategy Manager



Internal Stakeholders (Legal)

Ciaran Gould, Deputy Head of Legal, Legal Services



External Stakeholder (NHS England)

Ivan Trethewey, National Liaison & Diversion & Police Healthcare Team



*In relation to awareness of the HSCN Connectivity elements and alignment.

Contract Award Approval

Approval Role Name Job Title Signature and Sign-Off Date

Reviewer: Richard Fowles Head of Procurement Electronic 07/04/2020

First Approver: Linda Waters Director of Finance Electronic 08/04/2020

Second Approver: Ian Thompson Chief Finance Officer

Third Approver: Anthony Stansfeld OPCC


7

Public access to information Information in this POR is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) and other legislation. Part 1 of this form will be made available on the website within 1 working day of approval. Any facts and advice that should not be automatically available on request should not be included in Part 1 but instead on a separate Part 2 form. Deferment of publication is only applicable where release before that date would compromise the implementation of the decision being approved.

PART 1 – FOR PUBLICATION ON TVP / PCC INTERNET SITE

Contract Summary and Information for BLPD

Proposed Supplier (s) Mountain Healthcare Ltd

Planned Contract Start Date 01/06/2020

Contract Duration – Initial Term (months) 24 Months

Contract Extensions Available (months) One (1) Option to extend by 24 Months

Contract Value Initial Period (months) Complete Contractual Years

£4,557,250.00 (24 months)

Contract Value Extension per extensions periods £4,428,409.39 (1 x 24 months)

Collaborative Purchase Information (who are we buying with and what is there proportion of spend).

This is not a collaborative approach/contract, 100% spend attributable to TVP only.

Project Savings (for use on Home Office benefits reporting – NOT TO BE INPUT ON BLPD)

Baseline Spend (highlight any changes to information provided in PLD)

Renewal of existing contract – FY15/16 £2,182,480.92 + set up costs £45,087.00 (No spend shown on NPPH) FY16/17 £2,182,480.92 FY17/18 £2,215,391.80 FY18/19 £2,267,073.26 (FY19/20 base budget is £2,280,117.00) FY19/20 YTD as @ Jan ‘20 Actual £2,306,846.05 Total (Current 5 year contract YTD) £11,199,359.95 For info only Total (Last 4 years of current contract YTD) = £8,971,792.03

Savings Enabled: Detail at High, Low and Expected level if the savings are likely to be variable e.g. based on demand. Include Annual & Total Contract Savings

Cashable: NIL Tender activity. Re tendered costs broadly in line with current contract costs, however, there may also be additional spend for Healthcare cover for Operations and other Force requirements in the final 4 months of the current contract and subsequently during the new contract. An average additional spend element has been taken into account when calculating any savings or shortfall.

Total Cashable: £861,012.47 Cost avoidance, budget profile compared to bid cost profile. Re tendered costs in line with current contract costs, however, there may also be additional spend for Healthcare cover for Operations and other Force requirements in the final 4 months of the current contract and subsequently during the new contract. An average additional spend element has been taken into account when calculating the savings.


8

Savings Start Date if different from Contract start date N/A

Collaborative Savings No Collaboration Partner Savings £N/A

Savings Types (based on Savings Definitions in Savings Analysis Worksheet)

Tender activity & Cost avoidance.

Other Benefits: N/A

Total Savings as a % of baseline spend: 9.58%


9

PART 2 – CONFIDENTIAL OR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE NOT REQUIRED (not for publishing on our intranet site)

Contract Documents Insert (double click box to add or remove X) Insert here

Additional Confidential Information Include any additional confidential information to support the recommendation

Detail any additional information not required by Regulation 84, See Appendix A, which collates all compulsory required information with regards to award. Subjective Codes: MHL Ariba/NPPH Spend found under 1142; 1748; 3601; *6571; 6572 *Should only be coded to 6571 Financial due diligence was carried out on the bid costs received in conjunction with the Accountant(s) attached to this project. The bid costs used in the evaluation are the full costs for the initial 2 year period of the contract with no elements removed. The whole life costs including potential extensions have also been included in the breakdown attached to this POR. Further due diligence on particular elements of the bid costs relating specifically to the IT Installation costs and ongoing IT support costs was carried out with more detailed breakdowns of these costs requested from each of the three (3) bidders. This was to ensure that they and the Authority were fully aware and conversant with all individual elements of these costs, in particular as to what is and is not included by the successful service provider. The data storage and ICT elements of each of the bidders’ submissions were passed by the CJ ICT stakeholder, Information Governance and Information Assurance. None had any concerns based on the suppliers using their own kit and networks. Essentially the selected service provider will not be a data processor for forces, they will be data controllers in their own right. Hence they own the data risks and liabilities resulting from their use of their data. Mountain Healthcare have a reasonable set of documents and information governance regime and structure in place and so there are no concerns that they would not be a trusted and competent supplier in terms of their ability to access their data to provide the service we intend to contract them for. Ongoing Brexit negotiations have caused some issues around recruitment/retention of medical staff in all areas of the medical profession throughout the UK, however the service provider recommended for award have seen minimal impact of this and have a good staff recruitment and retention record to date.


10

APPENDIX A - REGULATION 84 REPORT The Regulation 84 actual original Information is not required to be input into this document, but you should ensure that the information is contained within your procurement files. Please only insert a text summary of the information in the table below.

Regulation Data Required? Included?

84(1)(a) Name and address of contracting authority Name and Address Thames Valley Police

Yes Y

84(1)(a) Subject-matter and value of the contract Services Description Provision of Custodial Healthcare Services

Yes Y

84(1)(b) Names of candidates/tenderers passing any selection stage and the reasons for their selection. Four tenderers through to RFQ stage 2; Mountain Healthcare, Mitie Care & Custody, CastleRock Health and G4S Healthcare, all having met the minimum RFI scoring and evaluation criteria. To See Cost and Deliverables overall evaluation summary in POR or N/A

If relevant N

84(1)(b) Names of candidates deselected following any selection stage and the reasons for their deselection. RFI Stage 1 (In alphabetical order) Bidder Names: Applocum Reason: No RFI stage 1 bid received. Bidder Names: Berkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust Reason: No RFI stage 1 bid received. Bidder Names: Brook Street Reason: No RFI stage 1 bid received. Bidder Names: Mitie Care & Custody Reason: RFI stage 1 bid received, successful score at RFI stage 1 to pass into RFQ Stage 2. Bidder Names: Care UK Reason: Non-compliant bid received. Bidder Names: Caremark Reason: No RFI stage 1 bid received. Bidder Names: Central & North West London NHS Foundation Trust Reason: No RFI stage 1 bid received. Bidder Names: Chiefly Living Limited Reason: No RFI stage 1 bid received. Bidder Names: Custody & Offender Medical Services Reason: No RFI stage 1 bid received. Bidder Names: G4S Healthcare Services Reason: RFI stage 1 bid received, successful score at RFI stage 1 to pass into RFQ Stage 2. Bidder Names: Go Locum Medical Services Ltd Reason: No RFI stage 1 bid received. Bidder Names: Healthcare Resourcing Group Limited Reason: RFI stage 1 bid received, successful score at RFI stage 1 to pass into RFQ Stage 2. Bidder Names: IPRS Health Reason: No RFI stage 1 bid received. Bidder Names: Mountain Healthcare Ltd Reason: RFI stage 1 bid received, successful score at RFI stage 1 to pass into RFQ Stage 2. Bidder Names: Nacro Reason: No RFI stage 1 bid received Bidder Names: Partnering Health Limited Reason: Non-compliant bid received. Bidder Names: Pertemps Medical Partnership Limited Reason: No RFI stage 1 bid received. Bidder Names: Phoenix Futures Reason: No RFI stage 1 bid received Bidder Names: PULSE Reason: No RFI stage 1 bid received Bidder Names: SPR-ing CORP LTD Reason: No RFI stage 1 bid received Bidder Names: World Health Systems LTD Reason: Non-compliant bid received. RFQ Stage 2 (In alphabetical order) Bidder Names CastleRock Health Reason: Lower overall score after moderated evaluation of RFQ Stage 2 bid. Bidder Names G4S Healthcare Reason: Non-compliant RFQ Stage 2 bid received. Bidder Names Mitie Care & Custody Reason: Lower overall score after moderated evaluation of RFQ Stage 2 bid.

If relevant Y


11

84(1)(b) Names of bidders selected (following a “reduction of numbers” under Regulation 66), to continue to take part in a competitive with negotiation or competitive dialogue process, and the reasons for their selection. To See Cost and Deliverables overall Evaluation Summary or N/A

If relevant N

84(1)(b) Names of bidders deselected (following a “reduction of numbers” under Regulation 66) from a competitive with negotiation or competitive dialogue process, and the reasons for their deselection. To See Cost and Deliverables overall Evaluation Summary or N/A

If relevant N

84(1)(c) Reasons for rejection of any tender found to be abnormally low Reason ……………………………………………………….. (insert) or N/A

If relevant N

84(1)(d) Name(s) of successful bidder(s) Bidder Name(s) Mountain Healthcare Ltd.

Yes Y

84(1)(d) Reasons why successful bid(s) was/were selected Reasons Selection based on most economically advantageous bid after moderated evaluation, based on evaluation criteria of 60% quality/deliverables and 40% cost.

Yes Y

84(1)(d) Share of the contract/framework agreement that the successful bidder intends to sub-contract Percentage of contract sub-contracted …………… (insert) or N/A

If relevant N

84(1)(d) Names of the main sub-contractors Names of Sub-Contractors …………………………… (insert) or N/A

If relevant N

84(1)(e) Justification for use of competition with negotiation process or competitive dialogue process (see Regulation 26) Justification …………………………………………. (insert) or N/A

If relevant N

84(1)(f) Justification for use of negotiated procedure without a notice (see Regulation 32) Justification …………………………………………. (insert) or N/A

If relevant N

84(1)(g) Reasons why the contracting authority decided not to award the contract/framework agreement. Reason ………………………………….. (insert) or N/A

If relevant N

84(1)(h) Reasons why non-electronic means was used for submission of tenders. Reason ……………………………………………. (insert) or N/A

If relevant N

84(1)(i) Details of conflicts of interest detected and measures taken to nullify these. Details …………………………………………….. (insert) or N/A

If relevant N

76(4)(b)(iii) In a Light Touch regime process, where the contracting authority has chosen to depart from the process as originally stated in the procurement documents (in accordance with the conditions permitting this at Regulation 76(4)), this decision and the reasons behind it must be documented in compliance with Regulations 84(7) and (8). Reasons ……………………………………………….. (insert) or N/A

If relevant N

58(9) If not recorded elsewhere in the procurement documentation, an indication of the main reasons why the contracting authority considers there to be a justified case for requiring bidders to evidence turnover that is greater than the standard permitted maximum of twice the estimated contract value (for example, due to special risks attached to the nature of the works, services or supplies). Reasons for evidencing turnover …………………………………. (insert) or N/A

If relevant N

46(2) If not recorded elsewhere in the procurement documentation, the main reasons for decision of the contracting authority not to subdivide the requirement into lots. Reasons for not Lotting ……………………………….. (insert) or N/A

If relevant N

Comments (please insert any comments relating to Regulations 84 compliance) N/A


12

Document Ref Status Author Approver Date

POR Issue 6 Live Des Dockerill R Fowles 11-02-2019

Change recorded Template Re-formatted based on compliance and PCC feedback. Document Control Added.


Change recorded Addition of confirmation on compliance to Treaty Principles at 1.1.9


Change recorded Reformat of if Project Savings Table into Part 1 of FOR PUBLICATION ON TVP / PCC INTERNET SITE (NOTE NAME CHANGE FROM INTRANET TO INTERNET)

Procurement Services Procurement Outcome Report TVP ......TVP Reference OP19001 Contract for the...

Documents

Transcript of Procurement Services Procurement Outcome Report TVP ......TVP Reference OP19001 Contract for the...