Find a TenderOpen for tender Tender notice
Published 24 Sept 2026, 13:44 BST

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)

ServicesBelow threshold - open competitionBelow thresholdSME suitable
Published estimate£50,600£50,600 inc. VAT
Submission deadline 20 Oct 202623:59 BST · 24d 3h left
Clarification cut-off 13 Oct 202617:00 BST · questions to the authority
Contract term 5 mostarts 2 Nov 2026
Bids per lot · the market 4CPV 9071 · n=26 · competition analysis ↓

What is being bought

Published requirement description

Project 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 published
Lot #1Lot 1 5 moSMEPublished value£50,600
Contract period: 2 Nov 2026 — 19 Mar 2027 (5 mo)Eligibility: SME eligibleDelivery: AI, KY, MS, PN, TC, UK, VGTurnover guideline: ~£101,200/yr≈ 2× annual value
Value
£50,600 exc. VAT · £50,600 inc. VAT
73110000 Research services73210000 Research consultancy services73220000 Development consultancy services90711100 Risk or hazard assessment other than for construction90712400 Natural resources management or conservation strategy planning services90713000 Environmental issues consultancy services

Who is likely to bid for this lot ↓

What it takes to win
i

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 more
How bids are scored
Quality: 70%Price: 20%Environmental: 10%
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) →

1

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.

This authority

JNCC SUPPORT CO

contract notices in 36 months: 2 in CPV 9071 · 21 in division 90 · 25 in all categories

Bids per lot
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.

—no bid reports published
Single-bid lots
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.

—no bid reports published
Award vs estimate
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.

at estimatedivision 90 · 36m · n=10 pairs
Deadline → award date
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.

Last 36 months.

—no award dates published
Notice updates
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.

Last 24 months.

0all categories · 24m · n=48 notices
Awarded without competition
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.

Last 36 months.

0%division 90 · 36m · n=21 notices
Winning award vs estimate robust · n=10
i

How often winners come in below, near or above the estimate.

Each lot with both an estimate and an award is placed by how far the award sat from the estimate.

Based on 10 lot pairs · division 90, last 36 months.

A past pattern, not a price to bid.

  • Below estimate 40%
  • Within ±2% 30%
  • Above estimate 30%

10 lot pairs · division 90.

How procedures are run robust · n=21
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.

Based on 21 notices · division 90, last 36 months.

  • Open 100%
  • Selective 0%
  • Limited 0%
  • Direct 0%

21 notices · division 90. Open and selective are competed (they feed the bid and price figures above); limited and direct are not; notices publishing no route are outside all four.

The market · authority’s region

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

Bids per lot
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.

4CPV 9071 · 36m · n=26 lots
Single-bid lots
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.

15%CPV 9071 · 36m · n=26 lots
Award vs estimate
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.

at estimateCPV 9071 · 36m · n=17 pairs
Deadline → award date
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.

Last 36 months.

41dCPV 9071 · 36m · n=17 notices
SME bidders
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.

Last 36 months.

77%CPV 9071 · 36m · n=21 lots
Winners based in the region
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.

Last 36 months.

73%CPV 9071 · 36m · n=49 awards
Bids per lot robust · n=26
i

How the number of bidders is spread across lots.

Each lot with a published bid count is put in a band: one bid, two to three, four to six, seven or more. Real competitions only.

Based on 26 lots on 22 contested notices · CPV 9071, last 36 months.

  • 1 bid 15%
  • 2–3 23%
  • 4–6 23%
  • 7+ 38%

Middle value 4 · 26 lots on 22 contested notices · CPV 9071.

Winning award vs estimate robust · n=17
i

How often winners come in below, near or above the estimate.

Each lot with both an estimate and an award is placed by how far the award sat from the estimate.

Based on 17 lot pairs · CPV 9071, last 36 months.

A past pattern, not a price to bid.

  • Below estimate 41%
  • Within ±2% 29%
  • Above estimate 29%

17 lot pairs · CPV 9071.

robust · n=10
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.

The middle award in JNCC SUPPORT CO (division 90, n=10 pairs) lands at estimate: on this notice’s £50,600 that is about £50,549. Context for a bid, not a recommended price.
2

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.

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.

SupplierEvidenceLast awardTheir award vs estimateRelevance
UK CENTRE FOR ECOLOGY & HYDROLOGY Large6 class wins · 5 lots for this buyerthis monthat estimate n=162%
Wing Environmental Modelling Consultancy B.V. SME2 class wins · 2 lots for this buyer1 months agono comparable pairs60%
3KQ Limited SME3 class wins · 1 lots for this buyer1 months agono comparable pairs60%
Dialogue Matters Limited SME4 class wins · 3 lots for this buyer1 months agoat estimate n=159%
RCD Lockinge Ltd 3 class wins7 months agono comparable pairs58%

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)
Development consultancy servicesEnvironmental issues consultancy servicesNatural resources management or conservation strategy planning servicesResearch consultancy servicesResearch servicesRisk or hazard assessment other than for construction
Delivery area
AIKYMSPNTCUKVG
Official registry OCID
ocds-h6vhtk-077987 Find 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
Detailed submission instructions & authority contactsFrom official release
To be eligible for consideration your tender must arrive by 09:00 hours on 20th October 2026. Please submit your return by email to the following address: [email protected]
Published estimate £50,600 excludes VAT (£50,600 including VAT).

Timeline

4 published dates · Europe/London
  1. Tender notice published2 days ago
    24 Sept 2026, 13:44 BST
  2. Clarification questions byin 17 days
    13 Oct 2026, 17:00 BST
  3. Submission deadlinein 24 days
    20 Oct 2026, 23:59 BST
  4. Contract startsin 36 days
    2 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
  1. Tender notice published
    24 Sept 2026, 13:44 BSTUK4

Contracting authority & participating public bodies

JNCC SUPPORT CO

Contracting authorityPublic authority - central governmentScottish devolved regulations apply GB-COH: 05380206 · GB-PPON: PRPL-6981-TDJT QUAY HOUSE, 2 EAST STATION ROAD, FLETTON QUAYS, PETERBOROUGH, East of England, PE2 8YY [email protected]

Official documents & specifications (2)

Official links; attachments are not copied

Tender pack and attachments

  • Bidding documents and specifications tenderBidding documents and specificationsZIPYou 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 tenderTender noticeUK4Tender notice on Find a Tender