Minutes:
The report on the Award of Contract for the Carer Information Advice and
Support Service was presented by two of the joint NHS/Council
Commissioning Officers.
Councillor John Paschoud expressed surprise that the service was marked as
‘boroughwide’ when it had offices in his Perry Vale Ward. He went on to
question the soundness of the bid evaluation process which placed a 60%
weighting on price and only 40% on quality when it was widely known an
emergent Social value would suggest weighing both factors equally.
The Commissioning Officer responded by saying the Service was expected to
operate on a boroughwide basis and that advice taken from Legal and
Procurement colleagues stated current weightings were to be used until
replaced by any new factors.
Councillor John Muldoon asked if in-house provision had been considered in
line with a Mayoral Manifesto commitment and was informed officers believed
Carer support should always be independent of the Council.
Councillor Susan Wise said she lacked confidence in the rankings being used
and believed forthcoming changes to procurement rules would ensure there
was greater emphasis on quality and a possible change to the recommended
provider for this contract.
Councillor Luke Sorba sought information on the staffing implications and was
informed four staff were eligible for TUPE to the new provider. Councillor
Olurtimi Ogunbadewa expressed concerns about the ongoing job security for
any staff transferred to any new provider.
Councillor Juliet Campbell expressed a preference for the contract to be
awarded to a specialist carers agency and was informed officers had looked
more widely at agencies offering information, advice and support services.
Councillor Jim Mallory recognised the need for advisors who were
independent of the Council. He queried any separation between advice for
Young Carers and advice for Adult Carers. Officers stated this was because
Young Carers were funded separately by CYP Commissioning.
Councillor Juliet Campbell raised concerns about any transition to a new
provider and believed a seamless service was unlikely to be achieved.
Councillor Feis-Bryce quoted a Mayoral Manifesto commitment to obtain
services locally which appeared to be at variance with the decisions taken at
Mayor & Cabinet.
The Panel concluded that given their misgivings about this contract award
they should agree a formal call-in and refer the decisions back to Mayor &
Cabinet for reconsideration. The reasons for the call-in were proposed by
Councillor Mallory and after being read back to the Panel, were agreed
unanimously.
RESOLVED that the decision taken by the Mayor & Cabinet on January 16 in
respect of the award of contract Carer Information Advice and
Support Service be called-in and referred back to the Mayor & Cabinet for
Reconsideration for the following reasons:
i. that the scoring system and the balance between quality and price was not
robust given the decision to award the contract to an organisation which was
1st on Price and 4th on Quality over another which was 2nd on Price and 1st
on Quality;
ii. that the Panel was not convinced there would be continuity of provision for
Carers during the transition period;
iii. given the strong interconnections between the Adults and Young Carers
Contracts, the Panel was not persuaded separate awards should be the
preferred option;
iv. in accordance with the Manifesto commitment to use an in house provider
whenever possible, a prominent section of the report should have examined
the advantages and disadvantages of in house provision. The Panel would
further ask that all future contractual reports should contain this consideration;
v. the recommendation appears contrary to the Manifesto commitment to
secure services locally whenever possible.
The meeting closed at 9.25pm