Official UK procurement notice
Feasibility assessment of bioclimate vulnerability approaches for priority marine migratory species in the Caribbean and Pacific UK Overseas Territories
Authority: JNCC SUPPORT CO (Central government)
What is being bought
Published requirement descriptionProject Aims
To assess the feasibility of applying bioclimate vulnerability assessment approaches to priority marine migratory species within the Caribbean UK Overseas Territories and the Pitcairn Islands. Building on previous work undertaken for JNCC, the study will evaluate the suitability of the proposed bioclimate vulnerability approach, consider relevant alternative approaches where appropriate, and determine whether sufficient evidence, data and expertise exist to support future implementation.
4. Project Background
Climate change is increasingly affecting marine migratory species through changes in sea temperature, ocean productivity, habitat availability, ocean circulation patterns, species interactions and the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events (IPCC, 2022; Martay et al., 2023). These pressures may alter species distributions, abundance, migration routes and ecological relationships, with potentially significant consequences for biodiversity, ecosystem services and economies across the Caribbean Overseas Territories (OTs) and the Pitcairn Islands (IPCC, 2022; Martay et al., 2023). Evidence from marine vertebrates indicates that climate-driven changes in ocean conditions can alter migration timing, migratory routes, species distributions and access to suitable feeding and breeding habitats through changes in environmental conditions and prey availability (Kuletz et al., 2024). However, considerable uncertainty remains regarding how priority marine migratory species are likely to respond to future climate conditions and what these changes may mean for conservation and management (Martay et al., 2023).
Read the full description (4,256 more characters)
Previous JNCC work has reviewed available evidence on climate impacts affecting marine migratory species and identified a suite of priority species for further investigation. This work also highlighted the potential application of bioclimate vulnerability assessment approaches, which seek to combine information on species ecology, environmental change and climate pressures to better understand species vulnerability under future climate scenarios. However, uncertainty remains regarding the suitability of these approaches for the priority species and Territories, the data required to support their application, and whether resulting outputs would be sufficiently robust to inform management and decision-making.
Previous work undertaken for St Helena, by Strathclyde University, explored ecosystem-based bioclimate vulnerability assessment approaches to project biomass declines in the marine protected area food web due to climate change (Olher et al., 2026). This study should consider the extent to which this and similar approaches may be applicable to priority species within the Caribbean Overseas Territories and Pitcairn.
While bioclimate vulnerability assessments represent a promising approach, a range of alternative methods of assessing ecological/biological impacts of climate change may also be relevant. These vary in their assumptions, data requirements, technical complexity, resource needs and intended applications. It is therefore important to understand whether the proposed bioclimate vulnerability approach represents the most appropriate option for the priority species and Territories, and whether sufficient evidence exists to support its implementation. However, the primary purpose of this study is to assess the feasibility of applying a suitable bioclimate vulnerability approach to priority marine migratory species, and new geographies, rather than to undertake a comprehensive review of assessment methodologies. Consideration of alternative approaches should therefore be targeted and proportionate, focusing on whether an alternative method would offer a materially stronger basis for future implementation.
The next phase of work is therefore to undertake a feasibility assessment that builds on previous work while critically evaluating the suitability of the proposed approach in comparison with other relevant assessment methods. This will include reviewing methodological requirements, assessing the availability and suitability of biological, ecological, environmental and climate datasets, identifying key evidence gaps and technical constraints, and determining the level of confidence that could be achieved through future assessments.
The study will provide an evidence-based assessment of the most appropriate approach or approaches for application to priority marine migratory species, what analyses could be undertaken using currently available information, and what additional data, expertise or investment would be required to support future implementation. The findings will inform future implementation decisions and provide a roadmap for any subsequent climate vulnerability or bioclimate vulnerability assessment programme, supporting climate adaptation, marine conservation and environmental decision-making across the Caribbean Overseas Territories and the Pitcairn Islands.
5. Project Objectives
To meet the overall aims of this project (Section 2), the objectives are:
Objective 1
Review the proposed bioclimate vulnerability assessment approach and assess its suitability for application to priority marine migratory species within the Caribbean Overseas Territories and the Pitcairn Islands.
Objective 2
Compare the proposed approach against a limited number of relevant alternative assessment approaches and identify the most appropriate option(s) for future implementation.
Objective 3
Assess the feasibility of implementing the recommended approach for a priority list of marine migratory species supplied by JNCC.
Objective 4
Identify key evidence gaps, data limitations, uncertainties and resource requirements associated with future implementation.
Objective 5
Develop recommendations and an implementation roadmap for any future climate vulnerability or bioclimate vulnerability assessment programme.
CPV: Development consultancy services · Environmental issues consultancy services · Natural resources management or conservation strategy planning services · Research consultancy services · Research services · Risk or hazard assessment other than for construction
The lotProcurement structure
single lot · value publishedLot #1Lot 1Published value£50,600
- Value
- £50,600 exc. VAT · £50,600 inc. VAT
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 (4)
- Quality of Bid — 50%
- Details of Contractors — 20%
- Cost — 20%
- Sustainability — 10%
No conditions of participation were published on the notice; check the tender documents.
Competition analysis · published record, not a forecast of who will bid
How JNCC SUPPORT CO buys Environmental management (CPV 9071) — and who usually turns up
JNCC SUPPORT CO’s own published record, next to the East of England market for the same work. Frameworks and DPS are kept out: they attract a different number of bids. Whole-market view: Environmental management (CPV 9071) →
How the contest usually goes
Left: this authority. Right: the market where the work is delivered. Bids and award-vs-estimate pairs are per lot, from contested contracts only — direct awards (including PA 2023 transparency notices) report one bid by definition and are left out. On Procurement Act 2023 notices the count is the tenders assessed at the final stage, not every submission received; pairs compare like with like (VAT-exclusive, or VAT-inclusive on both sides). Empty means nothing was published, not filled in from elsewhere.
JNCC SUPPORT CO
contract notices in 36 months: 2 in CPV 9071 · 21 in division 90 · 25 in all categories
i
How many companies usually bid for work like this.
Middle value of published bid counts, one per lot, for this buyer or this region in the same sector.
Nothing published for this buyer in this sector: no bid reports published.
Nothing is filled in from UK-wide numbers. An empty tile means nothing usable was published.
i
How often only one company bid.
Share of lots that received exactly one bid, on the same competitions as the bids figure.
Nothing published for this buyer in this sector: no bid reports published.
High means a thin market or an incumbent that is hard to beat.
i
Do awards for work like this land above or below the estimate.
Estimate against award per lot, for this buyer or this region in the same sector.
Based on this buyer’s tenders in this industry (CPV 90), last 36 months: 10 pairs.
A past pattern, not a price to bid.
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.
Nothing published for this buyer in this sector: no award dates published.
Only decided tenders count, so slow ones still waiting are not in.
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 this buyer’s tenders in all categories, last 24 months: 48 notices.
i
How often this buyer awards without a competition.
Direct or limited awards as a share of its notices that say which procedure was used. These routes are legal in defined cases. This is just the record.
Based on this buyer’s tenders in this industry (CPV 90), last 36 months: 21 notices.
East of England · Environmental management (CPV 9071)
contract notices delivered in East of England in 36 months: 52 in CPV 9071 (44 competed, 6 route not published) · 500 in division 90 (413 competed, 60 route not published) · the notice publishes no delivery location, so the authority’s registered region is used
i
How many companies usually bid for work like this.
Middle value of published bid counts, one per lot, for this buyer or this region in the same sector.
Based on this region’s tenders in this sector (CPV 9071), last 36 months: 26 lots. 16 lots are from Procurement Act 2023 notices (bids assessed, middle 5) and 10 from older notices (bids received, middle 2.5).
Nothing is filled in from UK-wide numbers. An empty tile means nothing usable was published.
i
How often only one company bid.
Share of lots that received exactly one bid, on the same competitions as the bids figure.
Based on this region’s tenders in this sector (CPV 9071), last 36 months: 26 lots.
High means a thin market or an incumbent that is hard to beat.
i
Do awards for work like this land above or below the estimate.
Estimate against award per lot, for this buyer or this region in the same sector.
Based on this region’s tenders in this sector (CPV 9071), last 36 months: 17 pairs.
A past pattern, not a price to bid.
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.
Based on this region’s tenders in this sector (CPV 9071), last 36 months: 17 notices.
Only decided tenders count, so slow ones still waiting are not in.
i
How much of this market goes to small and medium firms.
SME bidders where buyers published the split, otherwise SME winners.
Based on this region’s tenders in this sector (CPV 9071), last 36 months: 21 lots.
i
How much work like this goes to companies based in the delivery region.
Awards in this category delivered here where the winner’s registered address is in the region.
Based on this region’s tenders in this sector (CPV 9071), last 36 months: 49 awards.
Registered address, so a national firm with a local branch counts as outside.
i
Where this tender’s estimate would land if the usual pattern repeats.
We apply the buyer’s usual movement between estimate and award (or the region’s) to the estimate on this notice.
Based on this buyer’s own usual movement over 10 lots (division 90), applied to the £50,600 estimate on this notice.
A benchmark, not a price to bid.
Who you are likely to meet i
Who you may be up against.
Suppliers on this buyer’s earlier similar contracts, and suppliers whose record fits this tender.
A guess from the record. Buyers do not publish who is bidding.
i
Who you may be up against.
Suppliers on this buyer’s earlier similar contracts, and suppliers whose record fits this tender.
A guess from the record. Buyers do not publish who is bidding.
Suppliers on this authority’s earlier similar contracts, then suppliers with a matching track record — from published award history, not a bid list
Suppliers with a similar track record — and how they price i
Suppliers with a similar track record, and how they price.
Suppliers matched on wins in this category, history with this buyer, location and size. Their award vs estimate is from their own past wins.
A guess from the record, not a bidder list.
i
Suppliers with a similar track record, and how they price.
Suppliers matched on wins in this category, history with this buyer, location and size. Their award vs estimate is from their own past wins.
A guess from the record, not a bidder list.
| Supplier | Evidence | Last award | Their award vs estimate | Relevance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UK CENTRE FOR ECOLOGY & HYDROLOGY Large | 6 class wins · 5 lots for this buyer | this month | at estimate n=1 | 62% |
| Wing Environmental Modelling Consultancy B.V. SME | 2 class wins · 2 lots for this buyer | 1 months ago | no comparable pairs | 60% |
| 3KQ Limited SME | 3 class wins · 1 lots for this buyer | 1 months ago | no comparable pairs | 60% |
| Dialogue Matters Limited SME | 4 class wins · 3 lots for this buyer | 1 months ago | at estimate n=1 | 59% |
| RCD Lockinge Ltd | 3 class wins | 7 months ago | no comparable pairs | 58% |
Matched by the nightly worker on class wins, buyer history, delivery geography, scale and notice text; relevance is a 0–100% heuristic score, not a probability of bidding. “Their award vs estimate” is that supplier’s middle value on its own comparable single-supplier wins, CPV 9071 first. Nobody here is known to be bidding.
Coverage and what to read with care
- Each tile 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 columns are never blended and nothing is filled from a UK-wide figure; an empty tile means the source published nothing usable. Long form: Methodology.
- Coverage. Roughly 40 % of notices publish a bid count; about half publish an ITL1 delivery location, so the market column reads the authority’s registered region when the notice has none (labelled). About 30 % of award-vs-estimate pairs are exact matches — the buyer published the award at the estimate. n is on every figure; a thin sample is muted, never hidden.
- “Match” and “relevance” are model scores from the nightly matcher, not published facts. 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
- Below threshold - open competition
- Legal basis
- UKPGA · 2023/54 Procurement Act 2023
- Procurement category
- Services
- Notice status
- Open for tender
- Procurement threshold
- Below threshold
- Regulatory regime
- Standard
- Commercial structure
- Stand-alone contract (no framework)
- Competition type
- Competitive procedure
- GPA / WTO covered
- Unspecified in notice
- Recurring procurement
- No (one-off requirement)
- First published
- 24 Sept 2026, 13:44 BST
- Last source update
- 24 Sept 2026, 13:44 BST
- Authority reference
C26-0301-2363- Latest notice
- Tender notice (UK4)
- Classification (CPV)
- Delivery area
- Official registry OCID
ocds-h6vhtk-077987Find a Tender
How to participate & submission route
Official notice- Expression of interest (EOI)
- —
- Tender submission deadline
- 20 Oct 2026, 23:59 BST
- Clarification deadline
- 13 Oct 2026, 17:00 BST
- Electronic submission
- Not allowed
Timeline
4 published dates · Europe/London- Tender notice published2 days ago24 Sept 2026, 13:44 BST
- Clarification questions byin 17 days13 Oct 2026, 17:00 BST
- Submission deadlinein 24 days20 Oct 2026, 23:59 BST
- Contract startsin 36 days2 Nov 2026, 00:00 GMT
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
1 event · 1 release on Find a Tender- Tender notice published24 Sept 2026, 13:44 BSTUK4
Contracting authority & participating public bodies
Official documents & specifications (2)
Official links; attachments are not copiedTender pack and attachments
- Bidding documents and specifications You are invited by JNCC Support Co (JNCC) to submit a tender for the supply of works or services required under the above project. If interested, you should download and carefully read the documents contained within the zip file.
Notices published for this procedure
- Tender notice Tender notice on Find a Tender