Official UK procurement notice
Dane Royd and Mackie Hill Infant and Junior Schools ~ Catering Tender
Authority: Dane Royd and Mackie Hill Infant and Junior Schools (Education)
What is being bought
Published requirement descriptionThe successful Supplier will be required to provide Catering services for Dare Royd and Mackie Hill Junior and Infant Schools.
The expected annual value is £129,000 with a contract length of 3 years plus optional 2 x 1-year extensions.
Dane Royd and Mackie Hill are independent schools who work together for the benefit of the community they serve. Both schools wish to appoint a suitably qualified contractor to deliver the school catering requirement, but also who will take an interest in the school, the pupils’ educational activity and the community. Whilst the winning contractor will contract with each school separately, the schools will not appoint separate contractors following completion of this process.
Dane Royd has 360 pupils, including nursery, its values are Perseverance; Respectful; Open- Minded; Understanding; Determined; (PROUD). The school has a stand-alone kitchen service healthy and nutritious meals to their pupils. They have outsourced the meal provision to a catering contractor and is coming to the end of a 5-year contract. The school requires a new contract to commence on 1st August 2027.
Mackie Hill has 172 pupils; relationships are at the heart of everything they do. They place a strong emphasis on wellbeing, ensuring that every child feels safe, valued and understood. Alongside this nurturing approach, they hold high expectations of both their children and our staff - in behaviour, presentation and effort – because they believe that children flourish when they are supported to aim high.
The school motto, “kind hearts, ambitious minds,” captures their vision perfectly. They are committed to developing kind, compassionate young people with strong self-esteem, curiosity and the motivation to achieve the very best they can. They want their children not only to succeed academically, but also to grow into thoughtful, confident members of society.
Mackie Hill meal service is prepared and cooked at Dane Royd, then transported to Mackie Hill.
Please see PSQ Document for more information.
For more information about this opportunity, please visit the eSourcing portal at:
https://litmustms.co.uk/tenders/UK-UK-Wakefield:-School-catering-services./656Y95UJK6
To respond to this opportunity, please click here:
https://litmustms.co.uk/respond/656Y95UJK6
- How the procedure runs: Please see PSQ Document for more information.
CPV: School catering services
The lotProcurement structure
single lot · value publishedLot #1RenewalPublished value£645,000
- Value
- £645,000 exc. VAT · £645,000 inc. VAT
- Extensions
- 3+2 Please see PSQ Document for more information.
What it takes to wini
How this buyer will score bids.
The evaluation criteria and weights exactly as published on the notice, grouped by family (price, quality, social value and so on).
Evaluation split and conditions of participation as published — the tender pack may add morei
How this buyer will score bids.
The evaluation criteria and weights exactly as published on the notice, grouped by family (price, quality, social value and so on).
Published sub-criteria (2)
- Criterion 1 — 70%
- Criterion 2 — 30%
Published award criteria (2)
- Criterion 1
- Criterion 2
No conditions of participation were published on the notice; check the tender documents.
- Price carries 30 of 100 points — a 10% discount moves about 3 points. The method statement decides this lot, not the discount.
- Turnover usually expected at this size: about £429,608 (twice the annual value).
Price arithmetic assumes straight proportional scoring — the tender pack may use another formula. Turnover is an indicative market norm (≈2× annual value), not a published condition.
Competition analysis · published record, not a forecast of who will bid
Catering services (CPV 5552) in Yorkshire and the Humber — and who usually turns up
Dane Royd and Mackie Hill Infant and Junior Schools has too little published record in this market to describe on its own. Published market evidence for the same work stands beside whatever it has. Frameworks and DPS are kept out: they attract a different number of bids. Whole-market view: Catering services (CPV 5552) →
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.
No winner size data published for this authority.
i
How often local firms win similar work.
Winners with a registered address in the delivery region, out of awards with a known address.
Here, local means registered in Yorkshire and the Humber.
A local branch does not count if the registered address is elsewhere.
Winner locations not published for this authority. Local means a registered address in Yorkshire and the Humber.
i
How long buyers here take to decide after bids close.
Middle value in days from the deadline to the first award notice, on competitions that published both dates.
Only decided tenders count, so slow ones still waiting are not in.
Half of these awards were announced within 56 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.
No awards recorded for this authority in this market.
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 bid13%
2–326%
4–652%
7+10%
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 estimate37%
Within ±2%42%
Above estimate21%
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 #1CPV 5552Published estimate£645k
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.
A forecast, not a list of bidders.
1 bid13%
2–332%
4–650%
7+5%
i
Where the winning price may land.
The forecast uses similar awards and the buyer’s estimate. The band covers the middle half of likely prices.
Based on 20 comparable awards. Each lot reflects its own category; forecasts for different lots of the same notice are not comparative.
A guide, not a price to bid.
Middle 50%£645k
Estimate£645k
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.
| Supplier | This buyer’s earlier contract | Lot | Award value | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| — | ||||
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.
| Supplier | Won in this category | Live contracts | Award vs estimate |
|---|---|---|---|
| £441m50 awards in 36m · last 1 months ago | 25 live · £345m iPublic contracts this supplier still holds. Its awards whose published end date is still in the future, with their values. Many contracts publish no end date, so this is a floor, not the whole book. Unexpired says nothing about spare capacity. | at estimate n=34 | |
| £201m67 awards in 36m · last this month | 36 live · £125m iPublic contracts this supplier still holds. Its awards whose published end date is still in the future, with their values. Many contracts publish no end date, so this is a floor, not the whole book. Unexpired says nothing about spare capacity. | at estimate n=61 | |
| £162m42 awards in 36m · last 2 months ago | 20 live · £74m iPublic contracts this supplier still holds. Its awards whose published end date is still in the future, with their values. Many contracts publish no end date, so this is a floor, not the whole book. Unexpired says nothing about spare capacity. | at estimate n=33 | |
| £164m16 awards in 36m · last 5 months ago | 9 live · £25m iPublic contracts this supplier still holds. Its awards whose published end date is still in the future, with their values. Many contracts publish no end date, so this is a floor, not the whole book. Unexpired says nothing about spare capacity. | at estimate n=14 | |
TAYLOR SHAW LIMITEDLarge | £11m10 awards in 36m · last 1 months ago | 2 live · £3.1m iPublic contracts this supplier still holds. Its awards whose published end date is still in the future, with their values. Many contracts publish no end date, so this is a floor, not the whole book. Unexpired says nothing about spare capacity. | 21% above n=9 |
Coverage and what to read with care
- Each figure explains itself. The on a figure says what it is, how it is counted and which scope this notice’s own record came from (class, division, all categories, or the authority’s 24-month row). The two sides are never blended. A lot’s own market is read at its delivery region where the lot names one; where it names several, or none that can be resolved, the chart falls back to the UK-wide record for the same category and says so under the bar. An empty cell means the source published nothing usable. Long form: Methodology.
- When we call out a difference. A buyer figure is only flagged against the market when the sample is large enough that the gap is unlikely to be chance; at most two callouts appear, always phrased as a comparison with both numbers and the sample size.
- Coverage (re-measured 5 Oct on the live record, 94,497 awarded procedures of the last three years). 51 % publish a bid count and 72 % a delivery region, so the market column reads the authority’s registered region when the notice names none, labelled. Of the 17,687 award-vs-estimate pairs, 34 % sit exactly on the estimate — the buyer published the award at the figure it advertised. n is on every figure; a thin sample is muted, never hidden, and a distribution is not drawn as percentages below ten observations.
- “Match”, text similarity, the expected-bid figure and the distribution drawn beneath it are model outputs, not published facts or win probabilities. Find a Tender does not publish who is bidding. Never shown: contact details, payment behaviour, or a recommended price.
Procedure terms & legal framework
From the official record- Procedure method
- Competitive flexible procedure
- Legal basis
- UKPGA · 2023/54 Procurement Act 2023
- Procurement category
- Services
- Notice status
- Open for tender
- Procurement threshold
- Above threshold (FTS publication)
- 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
- 12 Oct 2026, 14:14 BST
- Last source update
- 12 Oct 2026, 14:14 BST
- Award evaluation window
- Submission end — 7 May 2027
- FTS notice number
2026/S 000-096119- Latest notice
- Tender notice (UK4)
- Classification (CPV)
- Delivery area
- Official registry OCID
ocds-h6vhtk-0785b0Find a Tender
- How it runs
- Please see PSQ Document for more information.
How to participate & submission route
Official notice Submit via Litmus TMS- Requests to participate (first stage)
- —
- Tender submission deadline
- 19 Mar 2027, 12:00 GMT
- Clarification deadline
- 4 Dec 2026, 12:00 GMT
- Submission channel
- Official e-sourcing portal
- Electronic submission
- Allowed
- Accepted languages
- en
Timeline
5 published dates · Europe/London- Tender notice published1 day ago12 Oct 2026, 14:14 BST
- Clarification questions byin 52 days4 Dec 2026, 12:00 GMT
- Submission deadlinein 157 days19 Mar 2027, 12:00 GMT
- Award decision expected byin 207 days7 May 2027, 23:59 BST
- Contract startsin 292 days1 Aug 2027, 00:00 BST
Commercial outcome & contract awards
Nothing awarded yet- Awards (0)
- No award published
- Contracts (0)
- No contract published
- Bid statistics
- No aggregate bid statistics published
Notice history
2 events · 1 release on Find a Tender · since 12 Oct 2026- Tender notice published12 Oct 2026, 14:14 BSTUK4
- First tender notice published12 Oct 2026, 14:14 BST
Contracting authority & participating public bodies
Official documents & specifications (1)
Official links; attachments are not copiedNotices published for this procedure
- Tender notice Tender notice on Find a Tender