Request for information - Ref No: FOI231193
Request
We received your request on 11 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 - Road Routing Information and Change Intelligence Data, Notice Reference - 2023/S 000-016378
- Copy of successful tender (by removing confidential information)
- Scoring table of all bidders, split by scores awarded for each question of bid.
- Approximate date that the tender will be reissued towards the end of the current contract period.
- How many bidders submitted responses?
- Name of all bidders who submitted responses.
- 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.  After consultation with Landmark Information Group, we consider certain information to be exempt from disclosure. Where the information is not held or exempt from disclosure this is stated and explained further in our response to each question below. 
Taking each request in turn, I confirm the following:
1. Copy of successful tender (by removing confidential information)  
We hold a copy of the successful tender, please find attached the following documents:
The Cyber Security and GDPR Questionnaire have been released to you in redacted form, we consider the following exemptions to apply:
Section 40 (2) (Personal Information)
We consider the name of the Information Security or Data Privacy Officer 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 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 GDPR Due Diligence Questionnaire since they refer to the supplier’s 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 supplier’s security systems would be more vulnerable for example, to a malicious attack / data breach, 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 supplier’s security systems by withholding the information under this exemption.
We have provided you with a copy of this, please note that copies should be available to view on NCSC Certificate Search - Iasme
- Environmental Management Policy
Section 21 (Information accessible to the applicant by other means)
We hold a copy of the Environmental Management Policy however this is exempt from disclosure under section 21 of the FOIA. This is because it is accessible to you, as it is already in the public domain, on Landmark’s website here: The Landmark Information Group Policies - Landmark Information Group.
Section 21 is an absolute exemption therefore no public interest test is applicable.
- Landmark Information Security Risk Management Policy
- Data Protection Statement
Section 41(1) (confidential information)
We consider the Security Risk Management policy and Data Protection Statement to be exempt from disclosure under section 41 of FOIA, public authorities are not obliged to comply with any request for disclosure which would constitute a breach of confidence actionable by the person to whom a confidentiality obligation is owed.  The documents are marked as internal use only and confidential internal documents, which have been drafted for the suppliers own business and used to support their internal workings of their business.
This is an absolute exemption and therefore no public interest test is required .
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 personal details on the basis that it is 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.
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 Landmarks sub-contractors and details of contracts Landmark hold with other customers. It would give their competitors access to the work that they are doing within their customer portfolio and knowledge of the services they provide. It may potentially damage their working relationships with those contractors and/or customers with an expectation that such information is not made publicly available due to the obligations placed on other organisation under the FOIA.
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.
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)
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 information in 5.3 relating to Landmarks critical supply strategy since it details the suppliers they work with and how they manage this type of situation, this information is not publicly available and may potentially damage their working relationships with those suppliers with an expectation that such information is not made publicly available due to the obligations placed on other organisation under the FOIA.
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.
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.
The information has been released to you in redacted form, we consider the following exemption to apply:
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 Landmarks methodology and business approach since this information is core to their commercial business and would be of value to a competitor. It would give their competitors access to the work that they are doing and knowledge of the processes and approaches they use in delivering the work. 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 other third parties 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)
Landmark have referred to the pricing information that makes up their bid in their FOI form as commercially sensitive information. We consider that the release of pricing information would be likely to cause commercial prejudice to the Supplier, as it comprises commercial information, which could be used to the disadvantage of the Supplier in its negotiations with other customers and could also be used by the competitors of the Supplier.  In addition, disclosure of this information would be likely to have an adverse impact on Ordnance Survey’s ability to negotiate the best price for future services.  
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.
This information has been released to you in redacted form, we consider the following exemption to apply:
Section 40 (2) (Personal Information)
I consider Section 40(2) Personal Information applies in relation to the signature of the person who signed this form on behalf Landmark.
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.
Please note, although the FOI form refers to pricing information as commercially sensitive, we have consulted with Landmark who confirmed that in addition to this information, they consider personal details of Landmark employees and certain commercial information contained within the tender should not be disclosed in response to this FOI request.
This information has been released to you in redacted form, we consider the following exemption to apply:
Section 40 (2) (Personal Information)
We consider the information of the person signing the form 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.
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.
- Data collected by Landmark
This information has been not been released to you, we consider the following exemption to apply:
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.
The data collected by Landmark is exempt from disclosure since disclosure of this information would expose their methodology and business approach. This information is unique to Landmark and core to their commercial business and would be of value to a competitor. It would give their competitors knowledge of the processes and approaches including the tool used to collect and supply such data. In addition, it may harm OS commercially, since this is unlicensed data and could be used to compete with 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 other third parties’ commercial position. In addition, it may negatively impact OS, as the data could be used to compete with OS.
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.
2. Scoring table of all bidders, split by scores awarded for each question of bid.  
I confirm we hold this information, please see the attached Evaluation Report (.pdf).
3. Approximate date that the tender will be reissued towards the end of the current contract period.
Information not held.
Under section 16 (Advice and Assistance): Typically, tenders are re-issued 6 months before the contract end date.
4. How many bidders submitted responses?  
I confirm OS received two bidders.
5. Name of all bidders who submitted responses.  
Landmark Information Group
Yellow Line Parking trading as AppyWay
6. Rank of all bidders who submitted responses I would prefer to receive the information electronically.  
Landmark Information Group were the successful bidder.
Yellow Line Parking trading as AppyWay were the unsuccessful bidder.
Advice and Assistance
Details for this contract is published on Contracts Finder and in due course the name of the winning bidder and the contract value will be published.
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
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 you are still dissatisfied after our internal review, you can complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). You should make complaints to the ICO within six weeks of receiving the outcome of an internal review. The easiest way to lodge a complaint is through the ICO website.