Official UK procurement notice
Maiden Erlegh Trust - Mobile Device Scheme
Authority: Maiden Erlegh Trust (Public body)·On behalf of: MOXTON EDUCATION LTD
What is being bought
Published requirement descriptionMaiden Erlegh Trust has just over 4,904 pupils cross 10 sites in and around Reading. What makes it unique is the fact that it has a very diverse range of schools from large Secondary to small secondary, primary, SEN, PRU and Outreach.
Maiden Erlegh Trust is committed to delivering our values which are to: aim high, be inclusive and work together.
Our schools will continue to excel at bringing out the best in students of all abilities.
To do this we place students at the heart of what we do and work closely in partnership with parents and the communities we serve.
Our vision is to:
- Provide a safe, calm, respectful and happy place to work and learn
- Provide a stimulating and challenging learning for all
- Provide high quality and inspiring teaching
- Provide a rich and relevant curriculum
- Provide a varied and exciting extra-curricular opportunities which allow students to flourish outside the classroom
- Provide high quality and personalised pastoral care
This procurement is about identifying a partner with both the skills and experience to deliver a Mobile Device programme in partnership with the Trust, as well as supply the actual equipment.
The ability to work collaboratively with all stakeholders will be key to the projects success over the next 5 years. In terms of the Trust itself, they will appoint a senior member of staff for all parties to interface into and be responsible of the programme.
- The Trust estimate that circa 9,000 Chromebooks will be purchased over the life of the contract
- Staff, Primary and SEN School devices will be purchased by the Trust and (apart from staff devices) not be taken home by pupils
- ipads supply will only be minimal
- The Primary, SEN and Staff devices will be 'self insured' so if accidents occur for any reason, like another device in school, they will be replaced as a cost to the school for a new purchase
- Secondary pupils will be 'parental purchase' / 'parental contribution', hence this partner is not being identified initially.
- The initial delivery will be circa 400 devices required by 1st April 2027 (Ideally between the 15th to 19th of February)
- The ability to support the programme with relevant training and expertise will be a key evaluation
Suppliers should also note the following:
- The Trust will provide a standard contract as part of the ITT Pack
- There will not be a requirement for TUPE from existing supplier
A separate procurement regarding leasing will be carried out in 2027
- How the procedure runs: Submission and evaluation of PSQ Shortlist Submission and evaluation of ITT Moderation Presentations Decision
CPV: Adult and other education services · Computer-related equipment · IT services: consulting, software development, Internet and support · Primary education services · Secondary education services · Training services · Word-processing machines
The lotProcurement structure
single lot · value publishedLot #1Published value£6,000,000
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)
- Quality: 50%
- Cost: 50%
Published award criteria (2)
- Quality
- Cost
No conditions of participation were published on the notice; check the tender documents.
- Price carries 50 of 100 points: a 10% discount moves about 5 points. This one is won on the number: sharpen the price before polishing the prose.
- Turnover usually expected at this size: about £2,397,373 (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
How Maiden Erlegh Trust buys CPV class (CPV 3011), and who usually turns up
Maiden Erlegh Trust’s own published record, next to the published market for the same work. Frameworks and DPS are kept out: they attract a different number of bids. Whole-market view: CPV class (CPV 3011) →
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.
Small firms have won here. Neither number says whether you qualify; it describes who has been winning.
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 South East England.
A local branch does not count if the registered address is elsewhere.
Most of this buyer’s recorded winners are registered outside South East England.
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 13 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.
Missing bid counts may hide more single-bid awards. This share is a minimum.
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 bid25%
2–30%
4–613%
7+63%
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 estimate38%
Within ±2%46%
Above estimate17%
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 #1Published estimate£6.0m
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. The bar shows 95 past lots.
A forecast, not a list of bidders.
1 bid17%
2–323%
4–627%
7+33%
i
Where the award price may land.
The forecast uses similar awards and the buyer’s estimate. The band covers the middle half of likely prices.
No comparable awards for this lot yet.
A statistical guide from past awards, not a price to bid.
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.
No earlier contract of this buyer matches this lot on the published record.
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.
Candidate suppliers for this notice have not been worked out yet, so this is not a verdict that nobody fits.
About this data
- Source. Official UK public procurement notices (Find a Tender), reused under the Open Government Licence v3.0. New notices arrive through the day; the figures are rebuilt nightly.
- Two views, kept apart. The authority’s own track record and the wider market for the same kind of work sit side by side and are never mixed. Where the local picture is too thin, a figure widens to a broader market and says which one it used.
- Forecasts are labelled. The price forecast and its range, possible competitors and the earlier-work matches are our estimates from past awards: not published facts, not win chances and not price advice. Official notices do not say who is bidding.
- Every figure shows what it rests on. Not every notice publishes a bid count, a value or a delivery region, so each figure carries the number of records behind it, and one built on few records is marked as such. The on a figure explains it; the counting rules are in the methodology. Spotted something wrong? Tell us.
Procedure terms & legal framework
From the official record- Procedure method
- Competitive flexible procedure
- Legal basis
- UKPGA · 2023/54 Procurement Act 2023
- Procurement category
- Goods
- 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
- Unspecified in notice
- Recurring procurement
- Unspecified in notice
- First published
- 21 Oct 2026, 08:19 BST
- Last source update
- 21 Oct 2026, 08:19 BST
- Award evaluation window
- Submission end – 1 Feb 2027
- FTS notice number
2026/S 000-099231- Latest notice
- Tender notice (UK4)
- Classification (CPV)
- Delivery area
- Official registry OCID
ocds-h6vhtk-078c5aFind a Tender
- How it runs
Submission and evaluation of PSQ
Shortlist
Submission and evaluation of ITT
Moderation
Presentations
Decision
How to participate & submission route
Official notice- Requests to participate (first stage)
- —
- Tender submission deadline
- 23 Nov 2026, 12:00 GMT
- Clarification deadline
- 6 Nov 2026, 17:00 GMT
- Electronic submission
- Not allowed
- Accepted languages
- en
Submission information is in the attached PSQ Documentation
Timeline
21 Oct 2026 → 1 Apr 2027 · 5 dates- Tender notice publishedearlier today21 Oct 2026, 08:19 BST
- Today21 Oct 2026
- Clarification questions byin 16 days6 Nov 2026, 17:00 GMT
- Submission deadlinein 33 days23 Nov 2026, 12:00 GMT
- Award decision expected byin 104 days1 Feb 2027, 23:59 GMT
- Contract startsin 162 days1 Apr 2027, 00:00 BST
Notice history
1 event · 1 release on Find a Tender- Tender notice published21 Oct 2026, 08:19 BSTUK4
Commercial outcome & contract awards
Nothing awarded yet- Awards (0)
- No award published
- Contracts (0)
- No contract published
- Bid statistics
- No aggregate bid statistics published
Contracting authority & participating public bodies
2 public bodies on the noticeOther public bodies
- MOXTON EDUCATION LTDProcess contact pointProcuring entityProcurement Management
Official documents & specifications (3)
Official links; attachments are not copiedTender pack and attachments
- Bidding documents and specifications PSQ in PDF Format
- Bidding documents and specifications PSQ in Word format
Notices published for this procedure
- Tender notice Tender notice on Find a Tender