Leeds Mental Health Wellbeing Support - Talking Therapies

The Contract Authority; NHS West Yorkshire Integrated Care Board intends to award a contract to an existing provider following Direct Award Process C. The authority is publishing this notice in Find a Tender in accordance with the NHS Provider Selection Regime.<br/><br/>NHS Talking Therapies services provide psychological interventions for adults in England who are struggling with anxiety disorders and/or depression.<br/><br/>Contract term: 1 November 2026 to 31 October 2033 (5+2)<br/><br/>Contract Value: Lifetime value, including extensions = £93,735,418<br/><br/>Rationale for why this provider has been awarded the contract for the service:<br/><br/>1. Eligibility for Direct Award Process C<br/>The Record of Decision Making created at the time of the decision confirms that the service:<br/>

• is an existing service;<br/>
• is delivered by an existing provider, Leeds Community Healthcare NHS Trust;<br/>
• is replacing a contract that is due to expire; and<br/>
• is therefore eligible in principle for Direct Award Process C.<br/>The Record also identifies the named decision maker, senior approving bodies, contract value and term, and confirms that no conflicts of interest were declared. This document evidences that the decision was taken consciously and contemporaneously within the PSR framework, rather than by default or assumption.<br/>2. No Considerable Change to Contracting Arrangements<br/>Current value: £85,076,958 <br/>Proposed value: £93,735,418<br/>Increase: £8,658,460<br/>Increase of 10.2% (below the 25% threshold)<br/>The Talking Therapies Service Specification demonstrates that the proposed contract does not introduce any considerable change when compared with the existing arrangements.<br/>In substance:<br/>
• the service model remains a community-based pathway;<br/>
• the population, geography, referral routes, and eligibility criteria are unchanged;<br/>
• delivery remains with the same NHS provider, using the same delivery model;<br/>
• there is no expansion, reconfiguration, or transfer of material risk.<br/>The ICB actively reviewed the proposed scope, duration, outcomes, delivery model, and risk profile against the existing contract and concluded that none of these elements met the PSR “considerable change” threshold. While the specification is presented in an updated format, the underlying service is materially consistent with the existing contract.<br/>3. Provider Performance and Likely Future Performance<br/>West Yorkshire ICB has conducted both an internal Service Review, whereby the focus has been on evidencing that the incumbent provider is satisfying the requirements of the existing contract, as well as a provider assessment which has focussed on assessing the incumbent provider’s ability to be able to satisfy the new contract to a sufficient standard.<br/>The Service Review Template – PSR Key Criteria provides detailed, narrative based evidence demonstrating that the existing provider:<br/>
• is satisfying the current contract to a sufficient standard; and<br/>
• is likely to satisfy the proposed contract to a sufficient standard.<br/>The Service Review has assessed performance against all PSR key criteria, including:<br/>
• Quality and innovation – supported by/evidenced by service outcomes and streamlined delivery<br/>
• Value and stewardship of public funds – demonstrated through return on investment, efficiency gains, cost effectiveness, system savings, infrastructure utilisation and overall delivery model design<br/>
• Integration, collaboration, and sustainability – reflected in partnership working, alignment with wider pathways, embedded delivery across relevant parts of the system<br/>
• Access, inequalities, and choice – supported by inclusive or adapted provision and reach into underserved or priority populations<br/>
• Social value – including local employment, prevention activity, community capacity building, wider social benefits<br/>The ICB considered not only historic performance, but also whether the provider’s established workforce, governance arrangements, and delivery model provide assurance of continued performance under the proposed contract. The proposed contract does not introduce new delivery requirements, expanded cohorts, or increased demand beyond that already successfully managed by the provider. To that end, the ICB is assured that the incumbent provider will continue to satisfy the requirements of the service specification under the new contract.<br/>4. Proportionality and Overall Assurance<br/>In determining the appropriate procurement route, the ICB considered whether a competitive process would deliver additional benefit. Given the continuity of need, the absence of material change, the provider’s sustained performance, the firmly embedded, existing partner relationships and pathways and the risks associated with service disruption, the ICB concluded that a competitive process would not be proportionate to the time, cost, and delivery risk involved.<br/>Taken together, the Record of Decision Making, Service Specification, Service Review Template and the Assessment of the existing Provider’s ability to satisfy the requirements of a new contract, provide the ICB with a coherent and auditable justification for the use of Direct Award Process C, demonstrating that:<br/>
• the regulatory conditions for Process C are met;<br/>
• the decision was taken lawfully, transparently, and proportionately;<br/>
• the existing provider sufficiently meets the PSR criteria; and<br/>
• continuity of a clinically effective and system beneficial service is in the best interests of patients and the wider system.<br/>WY ICB therefore remains satisfied that the requirements of the Provider Selection Regime have been properly applied and evidenced. Additional information: Description of the way in which the key criteria and basic selection criteria were evaluated:<br/><br/>The Provider has submitted evidence against the Basic Selection Criteria. The evidence was reviewed b…