Skip to content

Tender information for Project - PSGA Communications Consultancy Services (FOI231188)

This Freedom of Information request asks for details about the Project - PSGA Communications Consultancy Services tender.

Request for information - Ref No: FOI231188

Request

We received your request on 6 October 2023.

We have handled your request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 2000.

A copy of your request is set out in the extract below:

“I am writing to you under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to request the following information for the "Project - PSGA Communications Consultancy Services, Notice Reference - IT-556-45-BS2552.2023"

  1.  Copy of successful tender (by removing confidential information)
  2. Scoring table of all bidders, split by scores awarded for each question of bid.
  3. Approximate date that the tender will be reissued towards the end of the current contract period.
  4. How many bidders submitted responses?
  5. Name of all bidders who submitted responses.
  6. Rank of all bidders who submitted responses I would prefer to receive the information electronically.”

Our response

I confirm that Ordnance Survey does hold some of the information you have requested. Where the information is not held or exempt from disclosure this is stated. Taking each request in turn, I confirm the following:

1. Copy of successful tender (by removing confidential information)

I confirm we hold a copy of the successful tender, please find attached the six following documents:

This information has been released to you in redacted form. We consider the following exemptions to apply:

Section 40 (2) (Personal Information)

We consider certain information to be exempt from disclosure under section 40(2) (personal information) of the FOIA, as the information constitutes personal data which is not already in the public domain.

We have redacted the phone number, email address and signature at section 4 and the personal details of the person(s) with significant control, whilst the name of the person(s) is already in the public domain the redacted information is not.     

 Section 40(2) provides that personal data is exempt information if one of the conditions set out in section 40(3) is satisfied. In our view, disclosure of this information would breach the data protection principles contained in the General Data Protection Regulation and Data Protection Act 2018.   

Section 40(2) is an absolute exemption and therefore not subject to the public interest test.    

The information has been released to you in redacted form, we consider the following exemptions to apply:

Section 40 (2) (Personal Information)

We consider the names of Inform Teams / third party employees, and the CV’s of the Inform Teams employees to be exempt from disclosure under section 40(2) (personal information) of the FOIA, as the information constitutes personal data.

Section 40(2) provides that personal data is exempt information if one of the conditions set out in section 40(3) is satisfied. In our view, disclosure of this information would breach the data protection principles contained in the General Data Protection Regulation and Data Protection Act 2018.    In reaching this decision, we have particularly considered:   

  •   the reasonable expectations of the individuals; given their positions, Ordnance Survey considered that none of the individuals would have a reasonable expectation that their personal data would be disclosed;   
  • the consequences of disclosure; and 
  • any legitimate public interest in disclosure.   

Section 40(2) is an absolute exemption and therefore not subject to the public interest test.

Section 43(2) (Commercial Interests)

Information is exempt if its disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interest of any person, including the public authority. The ICO generally recognises information about the procurement of goods and services as being commercially sensitive balanced against the public interest test.

We have redacted certain information relating to the case studies and customers of The Inform Team, testimonials and the Inform Teams methodology and business approach since this information is core to The Inform Teams commercial business and would be of value to a competitor. It would give their competitors access to the work that they are doing within their client portfolio and knowledge of the services they provide and their approaches in delivering those services to them. It may potentially damage their working relationships with those clients with an expectation that such information is not made publicly available due to the obligations placed on other organisation under the FOIA.

In addition, it may harm OS’s ability to ensure fair procurement processes and third parties may lose trust in OS’s integrity causing a detrimental impact on the reputation of OS.

This is a qualified exemption, and we are required to consider the public interest.

Public Interest Test

OS recognises the need for transparency; however, this must be balanced against the public interest in allowing the organisation and third parties to protect their commercial information, and not be placed at a disadvantage in the competitive marketplace in which they operate. Bidding organisations must not be disadvantaged when taking part in a procurement process, with the release of materials impacting their own and their customer’s commercial position.

Section 43(2) is a prejudice-based exemption, and there is a public interest inherent in avoiding the harm specified. In this case, OS considers that the prejudice would be likely to occur. Having considered the above, we are satisfied that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure.

This information has been released to you in redacted form, we consider the following exemptions to apply:

Section 43(2) (Commercial Interests)

The day rates for the various roles within the Inform Team’s organisation has been redacted since this information would expose The Inform Teams pricing strategy as it would expose their pricing offering and their commercial position which allows them to participate competitively in commercial tendering activities.

This is a qualified exemption, and we are required to consider the public interest.

Public Interest Test

Ordnance Survey recognises the need for transparency; however, this has to be balanced against the public interest in allowing the organisation and third parties to protect their commercial information. In this case, we are satisfied that there is greater public interest in withholding the information under this exemption.

Section 43(2) is a prejudice-based exemption, and there is a public interest inherent in avoiding the harm specified. In this case, OS considers that the prejudice would be likely to occur. Having considered the above, we are satisfied that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure.

Section 41(1) (confidential information)

The Inform Team have referred to the pricing information that makes up their bid to be confidential information. Although, we have not relied on this exemption in this response.

This information has been released to you in redacted form, we consider the following exemption to apply:

Section 40 (2) (Personal Information)

We consider Section 40(2) Personal Information applies in relation to the signature of the person who signed this form on behalf The Inform Team.

Whilst their name may already be in the public domain, personal data of a third party can be withheld if disclosure of this information would breach any of the data protection principles contained in the UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and Data Protection Act (DPA) 2018.

In this instance the disclosure of the signature would contravene the first data protection principle, which provides that personal data must be processed fairly and lawfully, versus the reasonableness and expectations of employees to have their personal information disclosed.

This is an absolute exemption and requires no public interest test.

The information has been released to you in redacted form, we consider the following exemptions to apply:

Section 40 (2) (Personal Information)

We consider the names of the Information Security or Data Privacy Officer be exempt from disclosure under section 40(2) (personal information) of the FOIA, as the information constitutes personal data.

Section 40(2) provides that personal data is exempt information if one of the conditions set out in section 40(3) is satisfied. In our view, disclosure of this information would breach the data protection principles contained in the General Data Protection Regulation and Data Protection Act 2018.    In reaching this decision, we have particularly considered:   

  • the reasonable expectations of the individuals; given their positions, Ordnance Survey considered that none of the individuals would have a reasonable expectation that their personal data would be disclosed;   
  • the consequences of disclosure; and 
  • any legitimate public interest in disclosure.   

Section 40(2) is an absolute exemption and therefore not subject to the public interest test.

Section 31(1) (a) (Law Enforcement)

Information is exempt if its disclosure would or would be likely to prejudice the prevention and detection of crime. In this case, we have redacted certain comments in the Cyber Security Questionnaire and the General Due Diligence Questionnaire since they refer to The Inform Teams company information, which is not known to the wider public and relates to their internal processes and business procedures and technical security information. Disclosure of this information could expose any potential vulnerabilities to the systems and processes they have in place to protect their information.

This is a qualified exemption, and we are required to consider the public interest.

Public Interest Test

OS recognises the need for transparency; however, disclosure of this information would mean that The Inform Teams security systems would be more vulnerable to a malicious attack, therefore facilitating the possibility of crime.

Section 31(1)(a) is a prejudice-based exemption, and there is a public interest inherent in avoiding the harm specified. OS considers that the prejudice would be likely to occur, and we are satisfied there is a greater public interest in protecting the security systems by withholding the information under this exemption.

2. Scoring table of all bidders, split by scores awarded for each question of bid.

The Inform Team was the only bid received therefore we only hold the scores for the Inform Team.

The Inform Team’s scores are available in Part 1: ITT Evaluation and Questionnaire disclosed to you in question 1 above.

As The Inform Team were the only bidder they were not evaluated, as such we do not hold a breakdown of the scoring.

3. Approximate date that the tender will be reissued towards the end of the current contract period.

We do not hold this information.

It is not currently intended that the opportunity will be retendered.

4. How many bidders submitted responses?

I confirm OS received one bidder.

5. Name of all bidders who submitted responses

The Inform Team.

6. Rank of all bidders who submitted responses I would prefer to receive the information electronically.

This information is not applicable since OS only received one bid.

Internal review

Your enquiry has been processed according to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 2000. If you are unhappy with our response, you may request an internal review with our Internal Review Officer by contacting them, within two months of receipt of our final response to your Freedom of Information (FOI) request, as follows:

Internal Review Officer
Customer Service Centre
Ordnance Survey
Adanac Drive
Southampton
SO16 0AS

Contact us via our FoI form

Please include the reference number above. You may request an internal review where you believe Ordnance Survey has:

  • Failed to respond to your request within the time limits (normally 20 working days)
  • Failed to tell you whether or not we hold the information
  • Failed to provide the information you have requested
  • Failed to explain the reasons for refusing a request
  • Failed to correctly apply an exemption or exception

The Internal Review Officer will not have been involved in the original decision. They will conduct an independent internal review and will inform you of the outcome of the review normally within 20 working days, but exceptionally within 40 working days, in line with the Information Commissioner’s guidance.

The Internal Review Officer will either: uphold the original decision, provide an additional explanation of the exemption/s applied or release further information, if it is considered appropriate to do so.

Appeal to Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO)

If, following the outcome of the internal review you remain unhappy with our response, you may raise an appeal, within three months of receiving our response, with the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Further information can be found on the ICO website.