Decision details

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST FOR THIS ITEM:

 

None

 

RESOLVED

 

The Cabinet Member for Health, Social Care, and Wellbeing to

retrospectively approved the implementation of Contract Standing Orders

0.08 and 2.02 (b) and

 

1.    Varied the Service Agreement for the provision of Bundled Hours Home

Support and Reablement with Care Sante Limited for East Locality and

Verity Health Care Limited for West Locality, extending the term for up to

ten (10) months from 1st March 2026 to 31st December 2026, at a maximum

cost of £1,352,969 and £466,033 respectively.

 

2.    The total cost of the Service Agreement with Care Sante Limited would

increase from £2,750,938 to £4,058,906, and the total cost for Verity Health

Care Limited will increase from £1,930,066 to £2,895,098, compared with

the original award of the contract on 9th February 2021.

 

3.    The Cabinet Member for Health, Social Care, and Wellbeing noted that the Service Agreement for Verity Health Care Limited for West Locality varied in August 2025 to enable six months extension from 1st August 2025 to 28th February 2026 at cost of £499,000 was under delegated authority approval.

 

Reason for decision

 

The re-commissioning process was already underway, and initiating a

separate procurement exercise for a short-term period of approximately 10

months would duplicate effort, resources, and costs for both the Council

and providers.

 

A separate procurement process at this point would divert resources away

from the recommissioning programme and involve major disruption to client

care as well as the additional risk of further cost, time and resources

implementing TUPE and new care arrangments

 

The value of the proposed extension remains within the 50% threshold

permitted under Regulation 72, ensured compliance with procurement

legislation.

 

Extending with current providers maintains continuity of service delivery for

vulnerable service users during the re-commissioning period.

 

If the service agreement with Verity Healthcare and Care Sante was not

extended this would lead to further pressure on the remaining four (4)

service providers operating in those localities due to the increase in

demand and the volume of hours of support needed.

 

Both service providers would have the capacity to accept further referrals on

short response times if their service agreement is extended and the

contract value increased this would also relieve the pressure on the other

service providers operating in the same locality.

 

Key Performance Indicators and outcomes metrics had been embedded

into the current ‘bundled hours’ contracts which commissioning officers could

continue to monitor in line with our contract monitoring and quality

assurance procedures. There were no performance or safeguarding matters

outstanding with either of the service providers.

 

Alternative options considered

 

Do nothing: The Council had a statutory duty to meet residents assessed,

eligible needs as defined under the Care Act 2014, and this Service

Agreement is key to being able to deliver support to residents eligible under

the statutory framework. To allow the service agreements to expire on 28

February 2026 would undermine all the progress the Council has made

with the current providers to-date. It would also put at risk continuity of care

for clients as providers may choose to hand back packages of care.

 

Provide the service in-house: While an inhouse provision exists, it was

unable to meet demand and would not be cost effective due to the volume

of hours of support needed, and the number of staff and the management

arrangements that would be required. Furthermore, the Council was not in a

position to mobilise an in-house service prior to the conclusion of the

current Service Arrangement, mobilisation by the end of February may not

be achievable, and implementation may need to take place during the

extension period.

 

Purchase through the Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS): the DPS was

not suitable for the scale and urgency of Home Support delivery. The mini competition process required for each package introduces severe delays,

which would negatively impact hospital discharges and timely access to

care. Home Support providers operate on short response times and

require volume certainty to maintain workforce stability. The DPS does not

offer this, and many providers were unwilling or unable to engage with it for

individual packages. The Council moved away from full reliance on the

DPS for Home Support precisely to address these issues, reverting to it

now would be a step backward and counter-productive to the ongoing

service redesign work.

 

Go out to tender: While a new procurement exercise was ultimately

anticipated, launching a tender now would be premature. The current

contracts were due to expire imminently, and there was insufficient time to

complete the design of a new model, engage stakeholders meaningfully,

and run a compliant procurement process.