Agenda item

The Senior Project Manager, Housing, introduced the report. The rationale for the report was outlined.

It was explained that the proposed contract was a stopgap in the interim and would work to potentially complement the partnering contract when mobilised. It was additionally explained that the 10% social value submission for tenders would be utilised to support local businesses and encourage the upskilling of residents of the borough.

RESOLVED:

That the Cabinet Member for Housing and Planning, and Deputy Leader of the Council:

1. That, pursuant to the Council’s Contract Standing Order (CSO) 2.01(c), approved the award of a Measured Term Contract to Contractor A in the sum of £4.8m. Contractor details were identified in Appendix A – Exempt Report. The contract was for a period of 2 years, with the option to extend by a further one year subject to budget availability.
   
   
2. That, in line with CSO 16.04, approved the issue of a Letter of Intent in the sum of £480,000.00. The value of the Letter of Intent represented 10% of the contract sum.
   
   
3. Approve professional fees in the sum of £274,576. This represented 5.72% of the contract sum.
   
   
4. Noted and approved the total project costs as set out in Appendix A – Exempt Report.

Reasons for decision

One of the key objectives of the Housing Asset Management Strategy was to bring all the Council’s Housing stock up to the Decent Homes Standard by 2028. The Decent Homes Standard was a minimum standard regulatory requirement for all social housing landlords and was established to ‘bring health benefits to tenants and reduce health inequalities’ (Decent Homes Guidance 2006).  This work was key in helping the Council maintain a principal strategy, by ensuring buildings remain safe, compliant, and watertight.

To ensured the continued improvement of our housing stock, Cabinet approval was sought, to awarded a borough-wide Measured Term Contract (MTC) for external and communal refurbishment works. This contract would cover all types of council homes, including blocks, street properties, houses, and supported housing. The initial contract period was two years, with the possibility of a one year extension, subject to budget availability.

The Measured Term Contract was designed to facilitate essential borough-wide external and communal refurbishment works prior to the activation of the partnering contract. This approach offers several key benefits:

• Interim Solution: It acts as a temporary measure, bridging the gap until the partnering contract was fully operational.
• Continuity of Repairs: It ensures the Council could continue to addressed non decency related work and repairs needs that fall outside the scope of the Haringey Repairs Service, maintaining service consistency.

Procurement Process: It was the expectation that all future major works would be delivered via our partnering contractors.

The contract would enabled essential external and communal refurbishment works such as roof replacement, landscaping, renewal of communal flooring and other essential external works to be carried out.

Following a tendering exercise via the London Construction Programme Housing Framework under the Planned Maintenance and Fire Safety Works category. The Council received eight suitable bids for the Measured Term Contract (MTC).

The tenders were received on 2nd December 2024 via the London Construction Programme Housing Framework portal. The evaluation process was then overseen and managed by the Council’s Strategic Procurement Team.

The evaluation process was carried out in accordance with the Invitation to Tender requirements and was based on 60% price and 30% quality and social value.

The pricing evaluation of the tenders was carried out by external Multi-disciplinary Consultants and Haringey Council’s Quantity Surveyor in accordance with the procedures set out in the Instructions for Tendering.  The pricing was based on a Schedule of Rates.

Tenderers were asked to submitted Quality Submissions, which accounted for 30% of the total Tender score. To qualify, tenderers needed to achieved at least 50% of the points available in this 30% portion.

A moderation meeting was held on 22nd January 2025 and chaired by Haringey Council’s Strategic Procurement. At the meeting, the panel members (comprising of officers from Haringey Council’s Asset Management Team and Multi-disciplinary Consultants) deliberated on individual scores for quality and ensured that scores awarded were based on a consensus from the majority panel members.

All tenderers successfully met the required scoring threshold of 50% within the 30% allocated for quality submissions. Consequently, their quality submissions and bids were evaluated. The table below displays the scores of each contractor based on price, quality, and social value.

Tenderers were asked to provided social value submissions, which accounted for 10% of the total Tender score. The London Borough of Haringey was dedicated to a performance and evidence-based approach to Social Value. Using the National TOMs (Themes, Outcomes, and Measures) System developed by the Social Value Portal, bidders were required to proposed credible targets for the following performance areas, which would be monitored:

• Local employment: The number of residents employed directly or through the supply chain.
• Local supply chain spend: The amount spent within the local supply chain.

The value of the Social Value commitment was detailed in Appendix A – Exempt Report.

Tenderers had been assessed on a price, quality and social value basis. With a scoring split of 60/30/10, 60% was based on price, 30% based on the tenderers quality answers and 10% based on social value responses. Contractor A were ranked first as seen in the table above. Contractor A provided the most economically advantageous tender price, qualitative delivery proposal and social value score of 85.12%.

The final combined evaluated scores for Price, Quality, and Social Value resulted in a score of 85.12%, identifying Contractor A as the preferred bidder. Their pricing was in the lower range compared to other tenderers, and their submission was within a reasonable range, which minimises any degree of risk given the currently unknown quantity and level of works.

The council had a commitment to achieved 100% compliance with the Decent Homes standard by 2028. The estimated cost of addressing all works impacting on decency over the next 2 years was £4.8m. This scheme would provided capacity to deliver external and communal works that would contribute to the achievement of that standard between now and the mobilisation of the 10-year partnering contract which was expected to commenced in January 2026. The value of the contract was intended to provided contingency in the event of any potential delay to   the mobilisation of the partnering contract.

Based on the outcome of the tender evaluation, it was recommended that the tender was awarded to Contractor ‘A’.  The details of the tender evaluation were outlined in Appendix A Exempt Report.

Properties within the project would generally included single dwellings, houses converted into self-contained units, and low and medium rise blocks. The project would enabled works to bring properties up to the Decent Homes Standard whilst also alleviating the pressure on the budget for repairs, maintenance and servicing costs.

Alternative options considered

An alternative option would had been to procure the works via the Major Works Partnering Contracts. This was considered; however, the Partnering Contracts were unlikely to be active until 2026 and waiting for this would cause the Council to failed in its duty to bring its housing stock up to the Decent Homes Standard by 2028.

Another option would be to procure individual projects rather than a measured term contract. This was considered; however, it was noted that the cost of procurement, officer time and consultant’s fees would render this option uneconomical. This was therefore discounted as a suitable alternative to the Measured Term Contract (MTC) approach. This option would also resulted in Haringey not achieving the agreed objectives within a reasonable timeframe to ensured that 100% of homes meet the Decent Homes Standard by 2028.

Both options would also resulted in increased repairs costs and potential resident dissatisfaction.