Content

RESOLVED:
To approve the award of contract
for the delivery of Day & Evening Services to the successful
suppliers listed in Exempt Appendix 1, and any subsequent
successful providers who apply to deliver the Day & Evening
Services via the Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS), for a period of
up to 4 years in total (2+1+1) commencing in May 2024 at a maximum
cost of £8.44m.
 
Reason(s) For Decision / Options Appraisal
 
This report asks CPIC to approve the award of
contract for the delivery of Day & Evening Services to
suppliers listed in Exempt Appendix (1) and any subsequent
providers who successfully bid for the provision of Day &
Evening Services via the DPS.
 
Local Authorities, under the Care Act 2014,
have a duty to promote wellbeing. The Act highlights the importance
of preventing or delaying the development of needs for care and
support and the importance of reducing needs that already
exist.
 
The preferred option, agreed at Business Case
stage (Option 1 below) was to Procure a DPS under the Public
Contract Regulations 2015 (PCR) light touch regime. Providers would
be admitted onto the DPS after having been evaluated as adhering to
the required legal and quality standards and financial parameters.
Providers then sign up to a set of overarching Terms &
Conditions which govern the way they will operate, as well as set
out a floor and ceiling rate for fees and other standardised fee
rates if they have anyone placed with them. Providers would apply
to be on the DPS; however, this would not be a guarantee of work.
This would then create a “menu” for where Individuals
would then be placed with the most appropriate service, using a
combination of customer choice, geography, availability,
etc – with the most cost
effective option that meets need and choice being selected. Each
service user is placed with an individual placement agreement (IPA,
rather than an overarching or block contract) which stipulates the
needs and goals of the individual.
 
This will complement the current in-house
service which is considering becoming a centre of excellence to
take on more complex cases in future, currently being provided by
external agencies often out of the borough.
 
Alternative Options (Considered and
Rejected)
 
Option 2: Continue with current spot
purchasing arrangements, which has the advantage of retaining the
status quo for providers. The drawback of this option would be: it
is difficult to assure the quality of spot purchased day
opportunities without a specific service specification. It is also
difficult to negotiate fair rates for services and it is an
inefficient use of social worker/brokerage officer time, searching
for appropriate provider services and negotiating prices. Potential
providers may see spot purchasing as offering no level of security
to operating their business, furthermore, it does not consistently
offer a choice for the people wishing to use these services.
Without an overarching contract, there is also no standardisation
of the service offer. For example, some providers class half a day
as 4 hours and some 3 resulting in inconsistency of offer to
individuals.
 
Option 3: Insourcing Fully. To insource fully
would be less choice for the residents, and reduce the range of
expertise available. While Oswald street does provide a good
service, and this proposal supports its development into a centre
of excellence it remains vital that there is different expertise
and choice open to our residents depending on their need, culture
and personal choice and control
 
Option 4: Complete appropriate procurement
processes to award a number of separate contracts based on the
scope of the existing provision. This would have the advantage of
regularising existing arrangements and establishing a fixed model
of provision for the duration of the contracts. However, it would
fail to deliver the added benefits of the DPS that are detailed
below and it would be extremely time consuming to complete all of
the separate contracting arrangements required.
 
The following options were considered and
appraised for the future of provision in the borough
 

Option 1
(preferred)

DPS - creating a
hybrid
in/outsourcing
arrangement

Balances both in-house
provision and use of
external Hackney based services
wherever
possible. Contract with Quality
Standards and
specification. Will mean
Provider Services can
develop Oswald Street as a
centre of
excellence, whilst offering
wider choice and
control of residents and their
families/carers
 

Option  2

Remain as is and
continue with spot
purchasing
arrangements

Poor value for money. No
control over costs
and what's included in provider
costs. Costs
and fees are not transparent.
No service
specification or KPIs to
maintain quality or
ensure consistency of service
provision.
 

Option 3

Insource fully

Currently the in-house service
delivered at
Oswald Street is at reduced
capacity. Work is
underway to address this but
even when it is
fully open, the centre would
not be big
enough. It would detract from
creating a centre
of excellence. Choice would be
reduced for
residents; it would reduce the
market
substantially.
 

Option 4

Separate contracts
(no
overarching
framework
or DPS)

Very time consuming, requiring
a number of
separate procurement processes
to be
completed. Not seen as good
practice or best value.

 
Option 1 was the preferred option, approved by
the Hackney Procurement
Board in November 2023.