Purpose

Seeking approval to recommission and procure a new Integrated Children’s Speech and Language Therapy (SALT) service.

Decision

RESOLVED:

To approve the procurement of a Children’s Speech and Language Therapy service via a competitive tender process using the Provider Selection Regime (PSR) for health services. The total value of the contract will be up to £12,269,984 (including VAT) over a maximum of 5 (3+1+1) years. 

Reasons For Decision

Options Appraisal 

1. An insourcing/outsourcing options appraisal has been developed and attached as Appendix 1. Insourcing is not the recommended option because of higher costs and other elements discussed at length in the insourcing/outsourcing options appraisal document.
2. The preferred option is to jointly commission a service with NEL ICB with the contingency and second recommended option being to recommission a SaLT service with an LBH-only arrangement as described in Section 4 (preferred option). Other considered and rejected options are included in Section 5 (Alternative options considered and rejected).

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected 

1. Do nothing:  A Direct Award to cover the period October 2026 to April 2027 is currently being completed, with two optional 6 month extension periods. Without triggering the optional extensions there is no provision in place for SaLT from 1st April 2027. Doing nothing would mean contracts would expire without a continued offer of SaLT services for children and young people, which would breach the Council’s statutory obligations.There would also be no mechanism to deliver the Experts At Hand requirements set out in the Council and ICB’s SEND Reforms Delivery Plan meaning that there is a risk this would not be signed off by the Department for Education (DfE). A successful submission of the SEND Reform Plan will allow the Council to receive a High Needs Stability Grant from the DfE, which will cover 90% of our existing Net SEND Deficit and is worth circa £14.85m to the Council.
2. Continue with current arrangements: Continuing with current arrangements would mean that existing issues of duplication would continue. The extension periods would need to be triggered from April 2027 to ensure that contracts did not expire and that the Council could meet its statutory obligations, however, the service specified would not be aligned with incoming SEND reforms or have EAH provision included. A procurement exercise would still be needed in time for April 2028 to ensure the Council continues to meet its statutory obligations, and the current provider has indicated that this further delay would be unpalatable for them.
3. Directly award a contract without competition: the Provider Selection Regime includes provisions to award a contract without completing a competitive procurement process. However, the circumstances in which this approach can be used are limited and there are additional transparency, evaluation and market testing requirements that apply.  For a contract of this scope and value, the administrative burden of following this option would be significantly higher and increase the time required to complete the procurement process. Pursuing this option would also require use to publicly declare our intentions in advance and complete detailed market research and engagement to identify all potential suppliers before we began the process to award the contract. We would still be required to publicise our intention to award the contract and to evaluate a bid from our chosen supplier as well as any other suppliers that expressed an interest. This option would also forgo the potential benefits of a competitive process in demonstrating value for money and testing the quality of the service.
4. Insource service: insourcing is not the recommended option because of the specialist nature of the service and cost. A full Insourcing/Outsourcing options appraisal has been completed and attached as Appendix 1.