Hartlepool Development Corporation: Contract Register & Procurement Profile
Other public body·North East England·Darlington
Official UK PPONPDZW-2717-CGVM
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.
i
Notices published in the last 12 months.
Counted per tender, not per lot, against the 12 months before where shown.
i
Contracts that finish in the next 18 months.
Contracts ending in that window by the published end date or, where only a duration is published, an estimate from signature plus duration (marked). Neither, not counted.
An end date does not confirm a new procurement.
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 buyi
What kind of work is bought here.
Notices by procurement category (CPV). A notice with several categories counts in each.
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
70 Real estate services1 procedures · 33%How they buyi
How work here is packaged.
Notices by commercial tool: a single contract, a framework, or a dynamic purchasing system.
i
How work here is packaged.
Notices by commercial tool: a single contract, a framework, or a dynamic purchasing system.
Last 24 months · 3 notices · commercial tool and route as published on the notice, not a legal-regime claim
i
How work here is packaged.
Notices by commercial tool: a single contract, a framework, or a dynamic purchasing system.
Contract67%(2 notices)
2 of 3 notices are Contract (67%).Dynamic purchasing system33%(1 notices)
1 of 3 notices are Dynamic purchasing system (33%).
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.
Direct award67%(2 notices)
2 of 3 notices are Direct award (67%).Route not published33%(1 notices)
1 of 3 notices are Route not published (33%).
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 3 notices across all categories, last 24 months.
Who wins herei
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.
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
| Supplier | Procedures | Share | Last 24m | Award records | Last activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GRANT THORNTON UK ADVISORY & TAX LLP | 1 | 50% | 1 | 1 | — |
| Ernst and Young LLP | 1 | 50% | 1 | 1 | — |
2 awarded procedures across 2 suppliers: too few to describe concentration.
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.
Largest published awards iThe 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. | Supplier | Awarded | Term | Published value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HMDC-PROC-0057 - PSAA Audit Fees HMDC | Ernst and Young LLP | — | 2 yrs | £97,659 † ≈ £49k/yr |
| HMDC-PROC-0056 - Cash Flow Modelling MGSC | GRANT THORNTON UK ADVISORY & TAX LLP | — | 2 mo | £76,000 † |
Contracts endingi
Contracts that finish in the next 18 months.
Contracts ending in that window by the published end date or, where only a duration is published, an estimate from signature plus duration (marked). Neither, not counted.
An end date does not confirm a new procurement.
i
Contracts that finish in the next 18 months.
Contracts ending in that window by the published end date or, where only a duration is published, an estimate from signature plus duration (marked). Neither, not counted.
An end date does not confirm a new procurement.
2 of 2 contracts carry an end date · not a retender forecast
| Contract | Holder | Ends | Published value |
|---|---|---|---|
| HMDC-PROC-0057 - PSAA Audit Fees HMDC | Ernst and Young LLP | 3 Apr 2028 | £97,659 |
Recent procedures
Latest 3 of 3 procedures where this authority buys, is the authority the work is for, or runs the procurement
| Procedure | Status | Published | Published value |
|---|---|---|---|
| HMDC-PROC-0060 - Middleton Grange Shopping Centre Professional ServicesReal estate services | Planning | 21 Oct 2026 | £450,000 |
| HMDC-PROC-0057 - PSAA Audit Fees HMDC | Awarded / complete | 18 May 2026 | — |
| HMDC-PROC-0056 - Cash Flow Modelling MGSC | Awarded / complete | 28 Apr 2026 | — |
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. 2 of 2 published contracts have an end date; 0 of those are estimated as the signature (or publication) date plus the published duration and are marked “estimated”. They feed “Contracts ending”, the same rule as the retender radar.
- 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.