Awarded to Made Tech Ltd

Start date: Wednesday 3 March 2021
Value: £240,500
Company size: SME
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG)

MHCLG Case Level Data Submission Alpha (and optional Beta) CPD4121146

14 Incomplete applications

10 SME, 4 large

16 Completed applications

13 SME, 3 large

Important dates

Thursday 7 January 2021
Deadline for asking questions
Thursday 14 January 2021 at 11:59pm GMT
Closing date for applications
Thursday 21 January 2021 at 11:59pm GMT


Summary of the work
An Alpha team to work on how MHCLG can get case level data into the department in a more efficient and user centred way.
Latest start date
Wednesday 10 February 2021
Expected contract length
Max 24 months - initial Alpha Phase 8 weeks
No specific location, for example they can work remotely
Organisation the work is for
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG)
Budget range
Up to £300k excluding VAT for the alpha (beta costs are not signed off and would be dependent on the outcome of the alpha, but could be around £1m).

About the work

Why the work is being done
MHCLG requires accurate, complete and timely case level data to be able to give a national picture of issues such as homelessness, social housing and building safety, and be able to drive and influence policy decisions in these areas through statistical reporting, and in future, predictive analysis and machine learning.

The current web application for collecting case level data on social housing (CORE) is no longer viable to support financially and technically, presenting an opportunity to rethink the data that’s collected and how the department acquires it.

Existing methods are largely manual and burdensome for both data providers and analysts in MHCLG. We’re also looking at opportunities to automate through APIs and consolidate datasets where possible.

The work reflects the department’s automation strategy which supports increasing efficiencies and reducing burdens where possible to allow teams to focus on service delivery and digital innovation.
Problem to be solved
How might MHCLG acquire accurate and timely case level data on social housing in ways that are less burdensome for data providers and data analysts?

Hypotheses to explore:
• If we build a service that meets a genuine user need, more accurate data will be submitted on time.
• If we build an API that Housing Management Systems can send data to directly then we can reduce time spent on manual data entry resulting in more timely data.
• If we link social housing data to other data sets then we can ask less through CORE, reducing the burden on data providers.
• If we build a tool which allows data providers to compare their data with others and create reports, then their engagement with the collection process will increase along with data quality.
Who the users are and what they need to do
• As an MHCLG analyst I need to get accurate and timely case level data so that I can perform the statistical analysis the department requires to make policy decisions.
• As a front line worker I need case level data provision to be effortless, or automated, so that I can spend more time on getting vulnerable people into sustained housing.
• As a local authority manager I need to ensure the data we provide to MHCLG is accurate and timely so that I can fulfil our data provision obligation.
• As a local authority manager I need to ensure my team are working efficiently so that we can meet our organisation’s housing targets.
• As a 3rd party case management system supplier I need to integrate our modules for Local Authorities with government APIs, so that we can make data validation and submission easier for our customers.
• As an analyst in a Local Authority/Housing Association I need insights on social housing so that we can reduce void periods, match the right people to the right properties and help households sustain their tenancies.
Early market engagement
No early market engagement has been done.
Any work that’s already been done
A Discovery took place in January 2020,looking at CORE: a data-collection system, which is reaching end of life and aims to be a national record of social housing sales and lettings.

The discovery found that data providers:
-have to collate information from multiple systems before manually submitting case level data to MHCLG via a bespoke website.
-just wanted to “get the submission over the line” and sometimes bypassed or gamed form validations to do so.

The discovery found that the collection team:
-is required to spend several weeks chasing data providers for missing data or corrections on data submitted.
Existing team
MHCLG Product Manager, Service Designer / Business Analyst, MHCLG user researcher, SMEs from the Analysis and Data directorate are in place.

We need a full Alpha team to deliver alongside them. We’d expect this in line with GDS guidelines so a Delivery Manager, User Researcher, Content Designer, Designers, a Developer and Technical Lead with access to supporting roles such as performance analysts. However, we're open to recommendations including Data Engineers/Scientists.

We expect flexibility in any proposed service and financial model to replace supplier team members with internal team members during the lifetime of the project.
Current phase

Work setup

Address where the work will take place
The team will be working remotely.
Working arrangements
We will be working remotely according to COVID 19 guidelines, however we still expect to work with agile/scrum principles and would require workshops and meetings to take place over MS Teams using collaboration tools such as Slack, Trello, Miro/Mural /Jamboard etc.
Security clearance
All team members will need BPSS clearance or above before starting.

Additional information

Additional terms and conditions
1. All materials/outputs derived from the contract shall be the property of MHCLG.

2. GDPR requirements will be discussed and agreed once the successful supplier has been notified (as part of discussions to agree the wording of the call-off contract).

3. Continuation into beta will be contingent on alpha findings and subject to a service assessment/spend control including budget approval. 

4. A short break should be allowed for between alpha and beta for a review of the alpha phase, including a service assessment and review of findings to confirm the work should proceed to beta.

Skills and experience

Buyers will use the essential and nice-to-have skills and experience to help them evaluate suppliers’ technical competence.

Essential skills and experience
  • Experience of exploring data exchange solutions with APIs, open source technology and open data standards
  • Experience of delivering Alpha phases for a highly regulated organisation.
  • Experience of working with the GOV.UK prototyping toolkit
  • Experience of working in Design Sprints
  • Experience delivering against government’s digital service standard and technology code of practice
Nice-to-have skills and experience
  • Experience of working with case management databases
  • Experience in predictive analytics and machine learning and understanding of the requirement of these practices

How suppliers will be evaluated

All suppliers will be asked to provide a written proposal.

How many suppliers to evaluate
Proposal criteria
  • Approach and methodology
  • How the approach or solution meets user needs
  • How the approach or solution meets MHCLG's goal
  • Estimated timeframes for the work
  • Team structure (incl day rates/duration for each/CVs & work history)
  • NOTE: Standard price calculation for evaluation purposes assuming a 60 day assignment for 7 roles.
  • EXAMPLE-Role 1:£600p.d x 60 = £36k: Role 2:£600p.d x60 = £36k:Role3:£600p.d x 60 = £36k:Role 4:£600p.d x60 = £36k; Role 5:£600p.d x60=£36k;Role 6:£600p.d x60=£36k;Role 7:£900p.dx60=£54k- total price to evaluate £270k.
  • Please note the above is an example, it is for suppliers to propose the team structure/number of roles/days but the evaluation calculation will assume 60days for each.
  • Presentation (estimated to take place early-February 2021)
  • Scoring Criteria for the Written proposal -Technical Competence and Cultural Fit will be scored individually using the following Criteria:
  • Score 0 = Failed to provide confidence that the proposal will meet the requirements. An unacceptable response with serious reservations.
  • Score 25 = A Poor response with reservations. The response lacks convincing detail with risk that the proposal will not be successful in meeting all the requirements.
  • Score 50 = Meets the requirements – the response generally meets the requirements, but lacks sufficient detail to warrant a higher mark.
  • Score 75= A Good response that meets the requirements with good supporting evidence. Demonstrates good understanding.
  • Score 100=An Excellent comprehensive response that meets the requirements. Indicates an excellent response with detailed supporting evidence and no weaknesses resulting in a high level of confidence
  • In the event of a tie the highest score in the Technical Competence section will be used to award
Cultural fit criteria
  • Be transparent and collaborative when making decisions
  • Challenge the status quo
  • Be comfortable standing up for their discipline
Payment approach
Capped time and materials
Additional assessment methods
  • Case study
  • Presentation
Evaluation weighting

Technical competence


Cultural fit




Questions asked by suppliers

1. Please could the authority confirm who completed the Discovery?
Please use the link below to access a summary of the Discovery Report (undertaken by Softwire Technology Ltd).
2. Who’s on the panel?
We do not provide this information. However we can confirm it will be undertaken by permanent civil servants with relevant knowledge of the requirement plus a commercial representative to oversee the process.
3. Who’s in the incumbent and how long they have been the incumbent?
There is no incumbent.
4. We have knowledge of the GOV.UK prototyping toolkit but do not have direct experience using it in our projects. Does it preclude us from bidding for this opportunity?
It does not preclude you. However other suppliers who do have direct experience may score more highly on this question. This could therefore in turn reduce your chances of being shortlisted.
5. Can Client/Project name be anonymised in our responses or it precludes us from bidding for this opportunity?
It does not preclude you. Knowing who the client is gives more context to your responses and whether is it a good comparison to MHCLG. This may mean that you do not score as well as others and could therefore reduce your chances of being shortlisted.
6. Can we use more than one case study in our answer?
It would be better to focus on one case study at the 1st stage to support the essential/nice-to-have skills and experience, referring to others only to support the primary example.