The Water Services Regulation Authority: Contract Register & Procurement Profile

GOV.UK register: Non-ministerial departmentCentral governmentWest MidlandsBirminghamRan 1 procurement for other authorities

Official UK PPONPPCX-7855-VXBTWebsiteofwat.gov.uk ↗

Open now0no live notices
i

Tenders you can still bid for.

Notices at tender stage whose deadline has not passed.

Notices, last 12 months35+775% vs prior 12 months (4)
i

Notices published in the last 12 months.

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

Typical bids per lot70% single-bid · 3 bid reports
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 3 lots from this buyer’s competitions, last 24 months. Small sample.

Last 24 months, all categories.

Top-3 supplier share19%of 37 awarded procedures · 32 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.

37 awarded tenders, 32 different suppliers.

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

All awards we hold.

Contracts ending ≤18 months108 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.

A likely retender, not a certain one.

Published award value, 24m£13mnet · on 36 of 39 single-supplier awards · top 5 = 86%
i

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

Sum of award values to single suppliers, VAT excluded, on notices from the last 24 months. Framework ceilings and repeated totals are left out.

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 · 39 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.

  • Contract 100% (39 notices)
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.

  • Direct award 69% (27 notices)
  • Limited / restricted 21% (8 notices)
  • Open 5% (2 notices)
  • Route not published 5% (2 notices)
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 3 lots from this buyer’s competitions, last 24 months. Small sample.

Last 24 months, all categories.

7moderate · n=30% 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 39 notices across all categories, last 24 months.

Last 24 months.

05 of 39 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.

0% at 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
Moorhouse Consulting Limited38.1%339 Jul 2026
HAYS SPECIALIST RECRUITMENT LIMITED25.4%2231 Jul 2026
HR Wallingford Ltd25.4%2212 Jan 2026
Michael Page International Recruitment Limited25.4%2227 May 2026
L.E.K. CONSULTING LLP12.7%1228 Apr 2026
FTI Consulting LLP12.7%1216 Oct 2025
Softcat Plc12.7%1131 Jul 2026
KPMG12.7%1119 Jun 2025

The three most frequent suppliers are named on 19% of 37 awarded procedures (each procedure counted once, so a panel shared by several of them is not double-counted); 32 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 award values to single suppliers, VAT excluded, on notices from the last 24 months. Framework ceilings and repeated totals are left out.

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

£13mSum of published VAT-exclusive values on 36 of 39 single-supplier awards; the five largest make 86%.
Typical single-supplier award (24m)
i

What one of this buyer’s contracts is usually worth.

Middle value of the same awards as the total above.

Last 24 months.

£50k middle valuerobust · n=36Middle half £38k–£98k; 3 duplicate amounts excluded from both figures (heuristic for republished framework ceilings).
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
Independent MonitorL.E.K. CONSULTING LLP——£7,500,000 †
Independent MonitorL.E.K. CONSULTING LLP——£3,000,000 †
System ConsultancyWayne Holdings No.3 Ltd—7 mo£171,168 †
Interim support for Credit and Collateral Arrangements (CCA) ReviewEdge Economic Consulting Ltd—5 mo£169,904 †
Website MaintenanceJAMES BLAKE SOLUTIONS LTD—1 yrs£140,000 †
≈ £140k/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.

A likely retender, not a certain one.

Published end dates only · 36 of 39 contracts carry one · not a retender forecast

Recent procedures

Latest 45 of 39 procedures on this authority cluster, incl. beneficiary and procuring-entity roles

ProcedureStatusPublishedPublished value
Ofwat Innovation Fund delivery partner 2025-30central purchasing body3 lotsPublic utilitiesAwarded / complete15 May 2025—
Price Review 2024 Professional services – Prior Information Noticecentral purchasing bodyPublic utilitiesPlanned1 Jul 2022£1,000,000
Resource Booking System (Hosted)Information technology servicesAwarded / complete15 Feb 2022—
Ofwat Consultancy FrameworkFrameworkcentral purchasing body6 lotsConsulting services for water-supply and waste consultancyAwarded / complete29 Jun 2021—
Delivery Partner Support for in-period Outcome Delivery Incentive assessments (ODI’s)central purchasing bodyConsulting services for water-supply and waste consultancyOpen24 Mar 2021£1,560,000

Search all 39 procedures for this authority →

Data coverage & method
  • Source: Find a Tender OCDS releases; mixed PCR 2015 / Procurement Act 2023 history — no legal-regime label is applied.
  • Counts are procedures (one notice family), not lots. Authority cluster = canonical buyer plus beneficiary and procuring-entity roles.
  • Published procedure values exist on a minority of notices; their lifetime sum (£18m, ceilings stripped) is a catalogue fact, not spend, and is not shown as a headline.
  • Awards on procedures published in the last 24 months: 39 award records on 37 procedures (39 to a single canonical supplier, 0 multi-supplier). 36 values come from the contract record when the award carried none.
  • Bid counts, deadline-to-award, amendments and award-vs-estimate come from the nightly buyer analytics row; each figure’s own method and sample is behind its , the long form on Methodology.
  • Contract end dates: 36 of 39 published contracts carry a period end; 10 end within 18 months, 8 within 6.
  • Never shown: contact details, predicted winners, payment behaviour, or “who to invite”.
Identifiers consolidated into this page (2 historical Find a Tender publication identifiers)

Official notices referenced this authority under these publication identifiers. Alias URLs are not separate pages.

GB-FTS-162990GB-FTS-180920

Canonical page id: GB-PPON-PPCX-7855-VXBT