GATE 4(a) - CONTRACT EXTENSION / VARIATION
THIS
REPORT MUST BE COMPLETED BY THE CONTRACT MANAGER
|
Extend the contract until 30.9.2024.
Following the current ongoing restructure of Housing Services, the
management of these 7 schemes will move to Landlord Services. We
need to ensure we have a robust contract in place that is
responsive to NYC’s needs particularly at a time when they
may be different managers and officers dealing with this contract.
This gives peace of mind and takes away uncertainty for staff
including site wardens.
Established systems and procedures are in place. Secureshield know
all the 7 sites well.
|
1.1.
Is the Contract Extension / Variation related to
Covid-19? ☐Yes
☒ No
|
Current Annual Budget:
|
£20,388
|
|
Estimated Future Annual Cost:
|
£19,156
|
|
Estimated Whole Life Cost:
|
£281,229 (excluding VAT)/ £337,475 (including VAT)
|
|
Budget / Cost Centre (which will pay for this Contract)
|
|
100.RH.84102.3005.00000
|
|
100.RH.84101.3005.00000
|
|
100.RH.84100.3005.00000
|
|
100.RH.84099.3005.00000
|
|
100.RH.84098.3005.00000
|
|
100.RH.84097.3005.00000
|
|
100.RH.84096.3005.00000
|
|
Note: one cost centre per site so repair costs
can be closely monitored, and replacement need identified
|
|
|
Budget Manager:
|
Sophie Johnson / John Turnbull
|
|
Forecast Saving:
|
N/A
|
|
Saving Type:
|
N/A
|
1.2.
Has there been a recent financial assessment of the
Supplier?☒Yes
☐ No
FINANCIAL STATUS OF THE SUPPLIER
|
CompanyWatch Assessment
-
As of 31 March 2022, the Provider’s H Score is 23 out of 100
– the higher H-Score the healthier the Provider. The
company has filed an exemption from full accounts and the accounts
filed are not audited. The next accounts for the year to 31/3/23 do
not have to be filed until 31/12/23.
-
POD (Probability of Distress) The POD Score is 11.2% out of 100%.
This has been determined by CompanyWatch based on market
information and financial details available within 3 years. The
Lower the percentage the less risk of distress.
-
The risk rate is 8 out of 10. This is the risk of failure, the
lower the number the lesser the risk. The filed accounts show
that the company factor their debts via Aldermore Bank to provide
working capital and the bank have a fixed charge over the debts and
floating charge over other assets.
-
The Chart below outlines the comparison to industry average for the
Provider. The Provider is operating below the industry
average for the market.
-
Profit levels for most recent year available have decreased
slightly using the CompanyWatch interpretation of the abbreviated
accounts, which lack a Profit and Loss statement and thus any
detail to provide an explanation.
Companies House shows a change in significant control on 02/06/2023
between 2 individuals with John Gerard Hunter owning between 50 and
75% of the company.
|
|
1.3.
LGR (Local Government Reorganisation) IMPACT
|
|
Consideration has been given to other
technology related contracts in place within NYC. It is felt that
this contract is currently unrelated to the NYC Assistive
Technology contract but that the contracts could align in future,
and this should be considered when this contract is re-procured
after the proposed final extension ends on 30/9/24.
|
Contracts can only be extended or
varied where permitted by the terms and conditions of contract, and
the wording on the Find a Tender Service (FTS) contract notice if
the contract resulted from a tender procurement
exercise.
Extending a contract is only an
option. Officers should use this section to discuss the
various options for on-going service delivery (e.g. extend the
contract, obtain requirements from another framework, commence a
new procurement etc.). Officers should discuss the strengths
and weaknesses of each option before concluding upon the
recommended course of action.
In respect of the option to extend or
vary the contract, Officers should comment upon how the contract is
performing. Is the contract performing to expectations?
Are Service Level Agreements and Key Performance indicators being
met? In addition, Officers should highlight any other
business reasons for proceeding with the proposed contract
extension / variation. Officers should clearly state the
consequences of the extension / variation in terms on cost and
service delivery.
This contract is
performing really well. Secureshield know the systems in place in
the 7 sheltered housing schemes providing reassurance that they can
deal with maintenance issues quickly. They have attended
maintenance issues within contract timescales and there have been
no issues with the quality of work. They are very responsive and
attend even if Out of Hours (OOH). They have carried out both minor
maintenance and also installed new equipment required.
Secureshield are experts
in the equipment used and able to and happy to give advice over the
phone. This saves unnecessary call out charges and delays in travel
time.
Other contractors have
been used as part of different contracts (e.g., conversion of
flats) and Secureshield have been used to rectify the work done as
the original lacked understanding of the specification.
The contract meets the
contract management team’s expectations fully.
|
Due Diligence
|
Please tick as appropriate
|
|
Yes
|
No
|
N/A
|
|
Is the proposed
extension / variation outside the scope of the Terms and
Conditions? If “Yes”, provide details in section
2.6
|
☐
|
☒
|
☐
|
|
If a variation, is
the proposed change greater than 50% of the original contract
value? If “Yes”, provide details in section
2.6.
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Is the supplier
performing in line with the contract requirements? (if No, provide
details in section 2.4, below)
|
☒
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
If a variation, will
the proposed change create a cost pressure on the budget? (i.e. an
overspend against the budget allocated within Oracle)
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Does the contract
relate to delivery of a Statutory requirement for the
Authority?
|
☒
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
Has the contract been
varied to ensure GDPR compliance? (where appropriate)
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Please provide
details of and reasons for the extension / variation.
For example: market forces; currency-based increase; cost pressure
within the supply chain; tariffs; import duties; securing supply;
National Living Wage etc.
If a variation, will it result in an increase
or a decrease in price? How it will it impact the delivery of
the contract. What evidence has been provided to support the
variation?
(Evidence should be
obtained directly from the Supplier but may be backed up by
information from other sources e.g. a Framework Manager).
|
|
The bulk of the lifetime contract value was
spent within the first year on the asset and installation cost of
replacing analogue systems with digital. The portion of spend
on annual maintenance and repair is relatively low. The
contract managers believe that the service level being provided by
Secureshield is good and a significant improvement on prior
provision.
|
|
For a contract variation, outline any supplier
actions related to the variation.
Where the variation relates to a price
increase, detail any mitigating actions the Supplier has considered
or taken prior to requesting an increase from the Authority
(this could include absorbing increases or taking measures to
avoid increases for a period, switching suppliers, implementing
efficiency saving measures).
|
|
Provide details of the Supplier’s
performance against the contract. If the Supplier is not
performing in line with the contract, provide details including how
this is being managed.
|
Secureshield are performing in line with the
contract and there are no concerns.
Equipment provided is as required and to
specification linking into the current systems already in
place.
The provider is considered to go above and
beyond by providing additional support by phone which can provide a
very quick and free response in comparison with a site visit.
|
|
Detail the overall
impact of the extension / variation.
·
If a variation, will it impact on the level of service available?
If so, provide details.
·
If there is a service reduction what impact will this have? How
will it be managed?
Where a variation
relates to a price change, outline the impact on available
budget.
·
Does it create a cost pressure? If yes, how will this be
addressed?
·
Are further price changes anticipated during the term? If yes,
provide details.
What is the
implication if the Authority cannot accept the extension /
variation?
|
|
The cost of the extension is estimated at
£19k for maintenance and service. This level is
variable based on the number of callouts beyond routine
maintenance. These are charged at £45 per hour during
normal working hours and £65 outside this.
There are concerns that alternate providers
are unfamiliar with the current systems and equipment. Getting
contractors to tender for works in Richmondshire has been a
significant issue over last 2 or 3 years, sometimes with no tenders
submitted.
|
|
For contract extensions out of scope of the
original contract, or for all contract variations, Legal advice
must be sought prior to submitting this Gateway to Procurement
Assurance Board.
Will the variation put the Authority at risk
of challenge?
|
3.
GATE 4(a) AUTHORISATION
If the relevant sign off is given
by an email, this should be referenced. For example, the
signed box should state “authorised by (name)”.
The date box would be the date of that email.
|
Procurement Assurance Board
|
Signed
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comments:
|
|
Corporate Director (or delegated Assistant Director)
|
Signed
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comments:
|
|
Finance (Corporate Director – Strategic Resources or
delegated Assistant Director)
|
Signed
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comments:
|
|
Assistant Chief Executive (Legal & Democratic Services)
where required
|
Signed
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comments:
|
