Agenda and decisions

RESOLVED

To agree the award of contract for provision of Passenger Transport Services for Vulnerable Children, Young People and Adults on a 4 year framework agreement to Providers, as set out in Table 1 in exempt Appendix A to the report, in the following categories:

• LOT 1 – Home-to-school transport provision for children and young people with Special Educational Needs and/or Disabilities (SEND);

• LOT 2 – Ad-hoc journeys (may include some scheduled bookings) for vulnerable children, young people and adults;

• LOT 3 – Bus, mini-bus and coach hire services for ad-hoc journeys (e.g. school trips).

REASONS FOR DECISION

1.2.1  To support the demand for specialist transport services across the three Council departments, HLT, CYPS and HCS who are seeking to implement a joint passenger transport service framework.

1.2.2  The Council has a statutory obligation to provide home to school transport for a child or young person who is eligible and must be free of charge. The transport service for vulnerable children, young people and adults is a key service provided by the Council. The implementation of a corporate passenger services framework underlines commitment to achieving best value for the Council.

1.2.3  This report will outline the process undertaken to procure a framework of Providers to deliver a safe Passenger Transport Service for vulnerable service users.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS (CONSIDERED AND REJECTED)

  Four options were considered for this procurement – as outlined below:

1.3.1  Option 1: Deliver the provision in-house

This option would consider the possibility of employing personnel on a full-time basis, and leasing vehicles to provide all required in-house taxi services.

Advantages

-  This would give the Council ready access to the services required, removing the need outsource taxi requirements.

Disadvantages

-  The Council is likely to receive a high level of media interest and political pressure as a result of running its own taxi fleet.

-  The exceptionally high cost of salaries, especially as constant demand for services during the day cannot be guaranteed and may result in many hours down-time for drivers.

-  Due to the peaks and troughs of service requirements, the in-house service may not be able to meet all requirements during peak-hours resulting in an external service still being required.

-  It is not cost effective.

1.3.2  Option 2: Tender the transport service to one lead provider

Advantages

-  Saving on resources required to manage single supplier’s performance for delivery of all taxi services

-  Ease of booking taxi services with one approved provider

Disadvantages

-  Lack of competitive booking process - the Council would not receive value for money.

-  If the main provider cannot meet all the requirements during peak-hours, the Council would have to use other unapproved operators. 

-  This option would pose a high risk in the event of the supplier going into administration. Croydon and Sutton Councils generated adverse media attention in early 2014 when their sole transport provider for SEN children went bust.

-  This option is likely to disadvantage smaller, local businesses that are well placed to  ...  view the full decision text for item 1.