TenderlineUK
Procurement Intelligence
Official OCDS
Find a Tender
complete
Official procurement procedure

Hosting and Basis Managed Service Contract

No classification published
Location not published
Published value
Not published
Submission deadline Not published
Lots published1
Procurement Executive Summary
AI & Search Synopsis
Generated from official OCDS record
Tenderline Synopsis: Isle of Wight Council: "Hosting and Basis Managed Service Contract". Published status: complete. Published value: Value not published. 1 published lot. Submission deadline not published. See the official notice for participation instructions.
Contracting AuthorityIsle of Wight CouncilScope & CategoriesNot publishedSubmission Window
complete
No deadline published
Submission GatewayDirect notice routeLegal Basis & RegimeStandard procurementEstimated Value (exc. VAT)Not published
Bidder Intelligence · Authority Profile: Isle of Wight Council
Market Analytics
View Authority Profile →
Derived from OCDS awards & bid statistics
Published history for Isle of Wight Council. These figures describe retained records, not a forecast of bids or a measure of buyer bias.
Average Price Reduction
Not availableInsufficient comparable data
Requires at least 5 comparable procedures
Competition Density
2.2Bids / Report
66.7% of reports have one bid
Supplier ConcentrationHigh Concentration
BARNARDO'STop vendor: 100% of attributable value
Payment Terms
Check noticePublished terms
Payment obligations depend on the applicable regime and contract. Consult the official documents.
Coverage: 78 active published awards; 9 bid reports (which may be per lot). Supplier values exclude multi-supplier awards, frameworks and DPS, and use GBP only. They are published award values, not payments. Price reduction compares single-lot, single-award, single-supplier GBP procedures with explicitly non-framework/non-DPS status; increases remain in the average. Unpublished data stays unknown. Awarded suppliers are winners, not all bidders.
Historical Awarded Suppliers With This Authority:
Supplier NameHistoric AwardsAttributable GBP Value
BARNARDO'S1 win£9,482,285
Procedure terms
Contracting AuthorityIsle of Wight Council
Procedure methodNot published
Procurement categoryNot published
Statuscomplete
Framework / DPSNot published
CompetitionNot published
Above thresholdNot published
Legal basisNot published
Tender period startsNot published
Clarification deadlineNot published
Electronic submissionNot published
Submission languagesNot published
Published15 Apr 2025, 16:44 BST
Last source update15 Apr 2025, 16:44 BST
Recurring procurementNot published
ClassificationNot published
Delivery areaLocation not published
OCIDocds-h6vhtk-04efe8
What is being bought
To provide Hosting for the IWC SAP Landscape, provide Basis support, and use of the following Epi Use tools: Query Manager / Document builder Data Sync Manager Value is based on whole life cost (3 year). Please note that the contract is due to commence on 01 April 2025. The notice won't allow this date to be selected due to the signing date needing to be after standstill but before contract start. The contract is likely to be signed within the first week due to the value and internal processes (sealing) required.
What changed
From the official release history
  1. Official notice release published
    15 Apr 2025, 16:44 BST
  2. Official notice release published
    20 Mar 2025, 16:19 GMT
  3. Status changed to complete
    20 Mar 2025, 15:50 GMT
  4. Official notice release published
    20 Mar 2025, 15:50 GMT
  5. Buyer information updated
    20 Mar 2025, 15:50 GMT
Lots and requirements (1)
Published by the contracting authority
  • Lot 1 · #1
    Individual lot title not published
    complete
    Published valueNot published
    The source published no individual title or description for this lot.
    Contract periodNot published
    EligibilityNot published
    Options / renewalNot published
Timeline
  1. Procedure published
    15 Apr 2025, 16:44 BST
  2. Award active
    Not published · Not published
  3. Contract active
    Signed 1 Apr 2025, 00:00 BST · £556,201
Commercial outcome and competition
Awards
EPI-USE LABS LIMITED
Not published · Not published · active
Contracts
Hosting and Basis Managed Service Contract
£556,201 · signed 1 Apr 2025, 00:00 BST · active
Contract period: 2 Apr 2025, 00:00 BST31 Mar 2027, 23:59 BST
Bid statisticsNo aggregate bid statistics published
Buyer and organisations in this procedure

Isle of Wight Council

Contracting authority GB-PPON-PGYX-7387-YJXG
View buyer profile
  • Isle of Wight Council
    buyer

    GB-PPON: PGYX-7387-YJXG
    County Hall, Newport, UKJ34, PO30 1UD, GB
  • EPI-USE LABS LIMITED
    supplier

    GB-COH: 09302382 · GB-PPON: PJNT-7812-QQCW
    Suite 11n-B, Trafford House Chester Road, Manchester, UKD34, M32 0RS, GB
Documents (1)
Official links; attachments are not copied
  • Not published

    tender
    conflictOfInterest
Related procedures (0)
No data
No related procedures published
Planning and rationale
Planning budgetNot published
No-engagement rationaleNot published
Procedure rationaleThe public contract concerns the supply of goods, services, or works by the existing supplier which are intended as an extension to, or partial replacement of, existing goods, services, or works in circumstances where- (a) A change in supplier would result in the contracting authority receiving goods, services, or works that are different from, or incompatible with, the existing goods, services, or works. Specifically, moving to another hosting provider would incur additional costs and require significant resources, which is not feasible during the ongoing review of our existing SAP system (Future of SAP Project). As part of the work undertaken by an external consultant organization for the SAP replacement project, they have been reviewing our systems architecture and consolidating this into an options proposal which will soon be presented to IWC. Changes to the existing landscape will cause parts of this proposal to be incorrect or inaccurate, undermining the Future of SAP project. (b) The difference or incompatibility would result in disproportionate technical difficulties in operation or maintenance. Staying with the current provider ensures continuity and compatibility, allowing us the necessary time to make a decision on the future of SAP and take any subsequent actions. Many areas make up and link to our SAP architecture, including Finance, Procurement, Human Resources, and Payroll. There would be significant technical challenges in changing our landscape in advance of any outcome from the Future of SAP project. The purpose of the Future of SAP project is to outline the best available options for the system and its dependencies that meet the IWC requirements. Making significant changes to the SAP landscape would have a major impact on the Future of SAP Project and the cost/benefit analysis that will be part of that project. 1. Minimized Disruption: Changing suppliers during the review of the SAP system could cause significant disruption to ongoing operations. Maintaining the current provider ensures stability and minimizes the risk of operational downtime. 2. Expertise and Familiarity: The current provider has in-depth knowledge and expertise with our existing SAP system. Their familiarity with our specific setup and requirements allows for more efficient and effective support, reducing the learning curve and potential errors that a new provider might face. 3. Cost Efficiency: Transitioning to a new provider would not only incur additional costs for the migration but also potential hidden costs related to integration, and roubleshooting. Staying with the current provider avoids these expenses and ensures cost efficiency. 4. Strategic Alignment: The current provider is already aligned with our strategic goals and has been involved in the Future of SAP Project. Their continued involvement ensures that the project progresses smoothly without the need for re-alignment or re-briefing a new provider. 5. Risk Mitigation: Introducing a new provider at this stage could introduce unforeseen risks and challenges. The current provider has a proven track record of reliability and performance, which mitigates the risk of project delays or failures. 6. Regulatory Compliance: Ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements is critical. The current provider is already compliant with our regulatory standards, and switching providers could complicate compliance efforts and introduce potential risks.