Purpose

The council’s current contract for the
provision of the contact centre applications is due to expire on
1st March 2026. To ensure continuity of telephony support services,
a procurement exercise must be undertaken to appoint a supplier for
the services currently provided under the existing
contract.

Decision

1.    
To agree that Appendix A and B is not for publication on the basis
that they contain information relating to the financial or business
affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding
that information) as set out in paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the
Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).
 
2.    
To approve the procurement strategy for a new
contract for the provision of a contact centre applications system.
The procurement will be through a call off from RM6285 under a
direct award process.
 
3.    
To note that the contract will be for an initial
period of 5 years commencing on 2 March 2026 with the option to
extend for a period of up to 3 further years. Indicative
costs are outlined in the exempt Appendix A – Tables 1 and 2,
and Appendix B – Tables 1 and 2.
 
 

Reasons for the decision

1.    
The LBHF intends to procure a modern, cloud-based contact centre
platform that is secure, flexible, and capable of scaling to meet
future service demands. This solution will play a key role in
enhancing the Council’s digital service delivery, ensuring
seamless integration with existing systems, and maintaining
uninterrupted support for residents beyond the current
contract’s end in March 2026. The procurement will also
consider user experience, accessibility, and alignment with
LBHF’s broader digital and customer service transformation
objective.
 
2.    
The council is procuring a unified, AI-powered digital engagement
platform that supports LBHF’s strategic goals for digital
transformation, operational efficiency, and enhanced resident
experience.
 
3.    
The platform will need to consolidate contact centre operations,
case management, process automation, and citizen self-service into
a single, integrated solution. The platform must support
omnichannel communication, intelligent automation, and seamless
integration with existing systems to future-proof the
council’s digital infrastructure.

Alternative options considered

Option 1:
Decommission the service or requirement – Not
recommended.
 
1.    
Decommissioning the contact centre platform is not recommended due
to the       
critical role they
play in enabling responsive and inclusive services to residents.
This platform manages high volumes of enquiries efficiently and
supports timely responses to residents across various council
services.
 
Risks include:
 
·      
Reduced accessibility for vulnerable residents
with urgent or complex needs, including those who are digitally
excluded.
·      
Increased pressure on frontline teams due to
the absence of automated communication tools.
·      
Disruption to service continuity, particularly in
departments reliant on integrated contact centre
functions.
·      
Decline in resident satisfaction, due to slower
response times and reduced service quality.
 
2.    
Retaining and enhancing this service aligns with the
council’s strategic objectives to foster equity and ensure
inclusive access to council services without disruption.
 
Option 2: Deliver
the supplies, services, and/or works in-house (make/buy decision)
– Not recommended.
 
3.    
Internal delivery of a contact centre platform is not recommended
due to several limitations:
 
·      
Insufficient in-house expertise, and resources to
support the required scale and complexity.
·      
Operational risks, including potential service
disruptions, reduced performance, and slower response
times.
·      
Cost inefficiencies associated with recruitment,
training, infrastructure, and ongoing support.
·      
Limited scalability and innovation in house compared
to external suppliers with a proven track record in delivering
these solutions.
·      
Misalignment with strategic priorities which favour
technology-enabled service delivery through specialist cloud
suppliers, allowing internal teams to focus on core service
delivery.
 
Continuing with an
experienced external supplier ensures service continuity, quality,
continuity, and alignment with strategic goals.
 
Option 3: Use an
existing contract, established by the Council, to provide the
supplies, services, and/or works – Not recommended.
 
4.    This option is not recommended as there is
currently no existing Council  
       contract that
offers a comparable scope or service provision to meet the
specific
       requirements of the
contact centre platform.
 
Option 4: Undertake
a fully regulated competitive and compliant procurement process,
advertised to the market – Not recommended.
 
 
5.  
  Undertaking a fully regulated
competitive tendering exercise would require the
        Council to
conduct extensive due diligence to ensure full compliance
with  
        procurement
regulations. This process is resource intensive and would.
        introduce time
and capacity pressures and, ultimately, disrupt contact centre
        services.
 
6.  
  In contrast, calling off from an
existing compliant framework offers a more 
        efficient
route to market. These frameworks have already undergone
        competitive
tendering, compliance checks, and quality assurance, thereby
        reducing
procurement risks, ensuring value for money, and enabling
timely
        supplier
appointment. On this basis, a fully regulated competitive process
is not
       
recommended.
 
Option 5: Procure
using a compliant framework, Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS), or
Dynamic Market – Recommended.
 
7.  
  This option of using a compliant
framework is recommended as it offers a
        compliant,
efficient, and strategically aligned route to market without the
risk of   
        impact to
service continuity.