Digital Catapult: Contract Register & Procurement Profile

Companies House: PRI/LBG/NSC (Private, Limited by guarantee, no share capital, use of 'Limited' exemption)Greater LondonLondon

Official UK PPONPQJV-5136-MHMLWebsitedigicatapult.org.uk ↗

Open now0no live notices
i

Tenders you can still bid for.

Notices at tender stage whose deadline has not passed, counted the way the search counts them: a notice shows under every code and region it names.

Notices, last 12 months3-50% vs prior 12 months (6)
i

Notices published in the last 12 months.

Counted per tender, not per lot, against the 12 months before where shown.

Top-3 supplier share33%of 12 awarded procedures · 15 suppliers
i

How much of this buyer’s work goes to its three most frequent suppliers.

Share of its awarded tenders that name at least one of the top three. Each tender is counted once.

12 awarded tenders, 15 different suppliers.

Describes the record. It is not a sign of favouritism.

All awards we hold.

Contracts ending ≤18 months52 within 6 months
i

Contracts that finish in the next 18 months.

Published contracts with an end date in that window. No end date, not counted.

An end date does not confirm a new procurement.

Published award value, 24m£1.0mnet · on 6 of 6 published values · top 5 = 96%
i

How much this buyer has awarded recently, by published values.

Sum of published VAT-exclusive awards to single suppliers, last 24 months. Left out: concession revenue, framework ceilings, repeated notices, equal-value duplicates.

Published values, not actual spend. The biggest rows are listed so you can check.

What they buy
i

What kind of work is bought here.

Notices by procurement category (CPV). A notice with several categories counts in each.

Last 24 months · CPV divisions on published procedures · a notice with several divisions counts in each

How they buy
i

How work here is packaged.

Notices by commercial tool: a single contract, a framework, or a dynamic purchasing system.

Last 24 months · 9 notices · commercial tool and route as published on the notice, not a legal-regime claim

Commercial tool
i

How work here is packaged.

Notices by commercial tool: a single contract, a framework, or a dynamic purchasing system.

  • Contract100%(9 notices)
    9 of 9 notices are Contract (100%).
Procedure route
i

Which procedures buyers here use.

Notices by the procedure they declare: open, selective, limited or direct. Open and selective are competitions; limited and direct are not.

  • Open67%(6 notices)
    6 of 9 notices are Open (67%).
  • Route not published33%(3 notices)
    3 of 9 notices are Route not published (33%).
Typical bids per lot
i

How many companies usually bid when this buyer runs a tender.

Middle value of the bid counts on its award notices, one per lot. Only real competitions count: direct awards and framework places are left out.

Based on 2 lots from this buyer’s competitions, last 24 months. Small sample.

Last 24 months, all categories.

5indicative · n=20% of lots drew a single bid
Notice amendments
i

How often this buyer changes a notice after publishing it.

Middle number of amendments per notice. Deadline extensions and corrections both count.

Based on 9 notices across all categories, last 24 months.

Last 24 months.

16 of 9 notices amended
Award vs estimate
i

Do this buyer’s awards land above or below its own estimates.

Each lot’s published estimate against its award, on this buyer’s competitions, like for like.

Based on 1 lots with both an estimate and an award, last 24 months. Small sample.

A past pattern, not a price to bid.

Last 24 months.

24.7% below estimateindicative · n=1

Who wins here
i

Which suppliers win the most here.

Suppliers ranked by the number of tenders won, not by money. A supplier on one big framework with many call-offs does not outrank one that won many separate competitions.

All published awards naming a supplier · ranked by distinct procedures, not pounds · panel and call-off entries inflate award records

SupplierProceduresShareLast 24mAward recordsLast activity
Capgemini216.7%13—
GEMX LIMITED18.3%11—
Bae Systems (Operations) Limited18.3%11—
ST Engineering Antycip18.3%11—
Ethical Fashion Group Limited18.3%119 Mar 2026
Keysight UK Limited18.3%1126 Jun 2025
VIAVI SOLUTIONS UK LIMITED18.3%01—
boxxe Limited18.3%01—

The three most frequent suppliers are named on 33% of 12 awarded procedures (each procedure counted once, so a panel shared by several of them is not double-counted); 15 distinct suppliers hold at least one. Descriptive concentration of published awards, not a statement of preference.

Published award value (24m)
i

How much this buyer has awarded recently, by published values.

Sum of published VAT-exclusive awards to single suppliers, last 24 months. Left out: concession revenue, framework ceilings, repeated notices, equal-value duplicates.

Published values, not actual spend. The biggest rows are listed so you can check.

£1.0mSum of published VAT-exclusive values on 6 of 6 published single-supplier values; the five largest make 96%.
Typical single-supplier award (24m)
i

The middle published award value for this buyer.

Middle value of the same awards as the total above.

Last 24 months.

£115k middle valuerobust · n=6Middle half £63k–£150k.
Largest published awards
i

The biggest published awards.

Awards to a single supplier with a published value, largest first, so you can check the totals against the notice.

A repeated framework total can appear here. Open the notice to check.

SupplierAwardedTermPublished value
P2025-187Keysight UK Limited26 Jun 20252 yrs£527,210
≈ £264k/yr
P2025 - 227 Digital Supply Chain Hub – Virtual Hub Platform Hosting, Development and MaintenanceEthical Fashion Group Limited9 Mar 20261 yrs · up to 3 yrs£150,516
≈ £151k/yr
Invitation to Tender - SmartNano Event Services - Northern IrelandGEMX LIMITED—1.9 yrs£150,000 †
≈ £78k/yr
Provision of Non Real Time RAN Intelligent Controller (Non RT - RIC) base softwareCapgemini—6 mo£80,000 †
P2025 - 222 - Digital Twin Design Centre Modelling and Simulation SoftwareST Engineering Antycip—1 yrs£56,870 †
≈ £57k/yr

Contracts ending
i

Contracts that finish in the next 18 months.

Published contracts with an end date in that window. No end date, not counted.

An end date does not confirm a new procurement.

Published end dates only · 9 of 14 contracts carry one · not a retender forecast

Recent procedures

Latest 25 of 25 procedures where this authority buys, is the authority the work is for, or runs the procurement

ProcedureStatusPublishedPublished value
Test and Measurement Equipment and ServicesSoftware package and information systemsNot published23 Jun 2022—
Test and Measurement Equipment and ServicesChecking and testing apparatusOpen23 Jun 2022—
5G Mobile Private Network - PIN for Pre-procurement market engagementNetworksPlanned13 Jun 2022—
Industrial IoT Enablement PlatformComputer equipment and suppliesUnsuccessful16 Feb 2022£300,000
Equipment, software and related services to upgrade the Research and Innovation Testbed in Brighton (Brighton 5G Testbed)3 lotsCommunications networkOpen29 Oct 2021£350,000

Search all 25 procedures for this authority →

About this data
  • Source. Official UK public procurement notices (Find a Tender), reused under the Open Government Licence v3.0. New notices arrive through the day; the figures are rebuilt nightly.
  • One profile per authority. Different spellings and registration numbers of the same body are merged into this profile. It includes tenders the authority ran for other bodies and tenders run on its behalf; spend is credited to the body that pays.
  • Values are published values. Award values are what the authority published, excluding VAT and framework ceilings. They are not a budget or total spend.
  • Contract end dates. 9 of 14 published contracts state an end date; those feed “Contracts ending”.
  • Every figure shows what it rests on. Not every notice publishes a bid count, a value or a delivery region, so each figure carries the number of records behind it, and one built on few records is marked as such. The on a figure explains it; the counting rules are in the methodology. Spotted something wrong? Tell us.