Official UK procurement notice
Advice and Support Coordination Workers
Authority: East Suffolk and North Essex NHS Foundation Trust (Central government)
What is being bought
Published requirement descriptionAdvice and Support Coordination Workers
CPV: Community health services
The lotProcurement structure
single lot · no lot value publishedLot #1This is a Provider Selection Regime (PSR) intention to award noticePlanned
This is a Provider Selection Regime (PSR) intention to award notice. The awarding of this contract is subject to the Health Care Services (Provider Selection Regime) Regulations 2023. For the avoidance of doubt, the provisions of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 do not apply to this award. The publication of this notice marks on 19 December 2025 is the start of the standstill period. Representations by providers must be made to decision makers by 6 January 2026. This contract has not yet formally been awarded; this notice serves as an intention to award under the PSR. Additional information: 2.The contract title and reference.<br/><br/>Title: REACT Advice and support coordination workers, Ipswich Citizens Advice.<br/>Reference: ESNEFT3037<br/><br/>3.The name and address of the registered office or principal place of business of the provider to whom an award is to be made.<br/><br/>Ipswich Citizens Advice <br/>Registered office address: <br/>19 Tower Street, Ipswich, Suffolk, IP1 3BE<br/>Company number: 3438957 <br/>Charity Registration number: 1064862 <br/> <br/>4.A description of the relevant health care services to which the contract relates, including the most relevant CPV code<br/><br/>Description – Advice and Support Services<br/>CPV Code – 85323000-9 - Community health services, but only in respect of community health services which are delivered to individuals<br/><br/>5.The approximate lifetime value of the contract.<br/><br/><br/>£108,712 (incl VAT) per annum<br/><br/>6.Details of the award decision-makers.<br/>Key Individuals - East Suffolk and North Essex NHS Foundation Trust (ESNEFT)<br/><br/>Service Lead - REACT<br/><br/>7.A statement explaining the award decision-makers’ reasons for selecting the chosen provider, with reference to the key criteria.<br/><br/>Key Criteria:<br/>1. Quality and Innovation – The provider has consistently delivered high-quality social prescribing interventions, evidenced any positive patient feedback and strong engagement with REACT clinicians. They have introduced innovative approaches such as digital referral pathways and proactive outreach for vulnerable patients. Performance against KPIs (e.g., referral turnaround times and patient satisfaction) has been strong with no complaints and high compliance with safeguarding standards.<br/>2. Value – The provider has delivered significant value under the current contract by addressing social determinants of health, reducing escalation of issues that often lead to clinical interventions. Evidence of cost-effectiveness: interventions prevent unnecessary hospital use and improve patient quality of life. Strong integration with REACT and community partners ensures efficient use of resources and maximizes impact per pound spent. Positive feedback and outcome data support the provider’s ability to deliver high-value services.<br/>3. Integration, collaboration, and service sustainability – The provider has demonstrated strong integration with REACT and community partners, ensuring seamless referral pathways and holistic patient support. Collaboration is evident through joint case management and participation in multidisciplinary meetings. The service has maintained continuity despite workforce challenges, showing resilience and commitment to patient care. Current delivery aligns with ICS priorities and supports system-wide objectives for admission avoidance and population health improvement<br/>4. Improving access, reducing health inequalities, and facilitating choice – The provider has demonstrated strong commitment to improving access through flexible referral pathways and outreach to hard-to-reach populations. Evidence of reducing health inequalities includes targeted support for individuals facing financial hardship, housing insecurity, and social isolation. Patient choice is facilitated through tailored interventions and collaborative care planning, ensuring services reflect individual needs and preferences. Positive feedback and engagement metrics confirm the provider’s effectiveness in promoting equity and choice<br/>5. Social Value – Delivered timely and effective social prescribing support, reducing GP workload and hospital admissions. Provided community-based interventions that improve patient confidence and independence. Maintained strong local partnerships, ensuring advice and support are accessible. Evidence: Positive feedback from REACT referrals, consistent engagement metrics, and collaborative working with health teams
Pipeline intelligence · planning stage: how this market runs before the tender is published
How East Suffolk and North Essex NHS Foundation Trust buys Social services (CPV 8532), and who usually turns up
East Suffolk and North Essex NHS Foundation Trust’s published record next to the market for the same work. Frameworks and DPS are left out: they draw different bid counts. Whole-market view: Social services (CPV 8532) →
How the contest usually goes
Winner shares use published awards; bid and price charts use contested lots.
i
How often small and medium firms win.
Share of awards where the winner’s size is known.
The counts under this question show how many awards have a known supplier size.
Small firms have won here. Neither number says whether you qualify; it describes who has been winning.
i
How often local firms win similar work.
Winners with a registered address in the delivery region, out of awards with a known address.
Local means the winner is registered in the region where that award was delivered. The market figure counts awards delivered in East of England.
A local branch does not count if the registered address is elsewhere.
Most of this buyer’s recorded winners were registered in the region where that award was delivered.
i
How long buyers here take to decide after bids close.
Middle value in days from the bid deadline to the award date, on competitions that published both.
Only decided tenders count, so slow ones still waiting are not in.
Half of these awards have an award date within 39 days of the bid deadline.
i
How often work is awarded with no recorded rival.
Direct awards and tenders where every published lot count shows one bid.
The market share is a minimum: some awards have no bid count.
Thin markets produce this too; it is not proof of a tailored specification.
Direct awards or one recorded bid are common here. Check the route before spending time on a bid.
How many bids did past lots attract?
i
How many bids past lots received.
Each colour is a bid-count range. Only competed lots with a published count are included.
Past bids do not predict this tender.
1 bid80% / 21%
2–320% / 11%
4–60% / 53%
7+0% / 16%
How did awards compare with estimates?
i
Where winning prices landed against estimates.
Each colour shows awards below, close to or above the published estimate, one lot at a time.
Past prices are a guide, not a bid price.
Below estimate21%
Within ±2%79%
Above estimate0%
Assess each lot i
What past awards tell you about each lot.
See the forecast, this buyer’s earlier suppliers and firms with relevant wins.
No supplier is confirmed as a bidder.
i
What past awards tell you about each lot.
See the forecast, this buyer’s earlier suppliers and firms with relevant wins.
No supplier is confirmed as a bidder.
Open a lot for its forecast, this buyer’s previous supplier and possible competitors, from published award history, not a bid list
Lot #1This is a Provider Selection Regime (PSR) intention to award noticeCPV 8532Published estimate£109k
i
How many bids this lot may attract.
The forecast uses similar past competitions. The bar shows either that forecast or past bid counts; the line below says which.
Each lot shows its own forecast based on its own category; forecasts for different lots of the same notice are not comparative. The bar shows 19 past lots.
A forecast, not a list of bidders.
1 bid21%
2–311%
4–653%
7+16%
i
Where the award price may land.
The forecast uses similar awards and the buyer’s estimate. The band covers the middle half of likely prices.
No comparable awards for this lot yet.
A statistical guide from past awards, not a price to bid.
Who has supplied this buyer on similar work? i
Who has done similar work for this buyer.
Past contracts are matched by buyer, title and type of work.
A past supplier may not bid again.
i
Who has done similar work for this buyer.
Past contracts are matched by buyer, title and type of work.
A past supplier may not bid again.
No earlier contract of this buyer matches this lot on the published record.
Who could compete for this lot? i
Who could compete for this lot?
Firms with relevant past wins. On a framework, we show firms on that agreement.
None is confirmed as a bidder.
i
Who could compete for this lot?
Firms with relevant past wins. On a framework, we show firms on that agreement.
None is confirmed as a bidder.
Candidate suppliers for this notice have not been worked out yet, so this is not a verdict that nobody fits.
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.
- Two views, kept apart. The authority’s own track record and the wider market for the same kind of work sit side by side and are never mixed. Where the local picture is too thin, a figure widens to a broader market and says which one it used.
- Forecasts are labelled. The price forecast and its range, possible competitors and the earlier-work matches are our estimates from past awards: not published facts, not win chances and not price advice. Official notices do not say who is bidding.
- 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.
Procedure terms & legal framework
From the official record- Legal basis
- CELEX · 32014L0024 Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (Directive 2014/24/EU)
- Procurement category
- Services
- Notice status
- Planned procurement
- Procurement threshold
- Unspecified in notice
- Regulatory regime
- Standard
- Commercial structure
- Stand-alone contract (no framework)
- Competition type
- Competitive procedure
- GPA / WTO covered
- Yes (GPA)
- Recurring procurement
- Unspecified in notice
- First published
- 19 Dec 2025, 16:22 GMT
- Last source update
- 19 Dec 2025, 16:22 GMT
- FTS notice number
2025/S 000-085091- Classification (CPV)
- Delivery area
- Official registry OCID
ocds-h6vhtk-05fad0Find a Tender
How it was run
Official noticeTender documents are also served through a separate tool: https://atamis-1928.my.site.com/s/Welcome ↗
- Submission deadline
- —
Timeline
19 Dec 2025 → 19 Dec 2025 · 2 dates- Tender notice expected312 days ago19 Dec 2025
- Notice published312 days ago19 Dec 2025, 16:22 GMT
Commercial outcome & contract awards
Pipeline notice- Awards (0)
- No award published
- Contracts (0)
- No contract published
- Bid statistics
- No aggregate bid statistics published
Contracting authority & participating public bodies
Official documents & specifications
Official links; attachments are not copiedNo document links were published on the notice.