UNIVERSITY OF DERBY: Contract Register & Procurement Profile

Companies House: PRI/LBG/NSC (Private, Limited by guarantee, no share capital, use of 'Limited' exemption)DfE school register: Higher education institutionsEducationEast MidlandsDerby

Companies House03079282 ↗Websitederby.ac.uk ↗

Open now0no live notices
i

Tenders you can still bid for.

Notices at tender stage whose deadline has not passed, counted the way the search counts them: a notice shows under every code and region it names.

Notices, last 12 months11+120% vs prior 12 months (5)
i

Notices published in the last 12 months.

Counted per tender, not per lot, against the 12 months before where shown.

Typical bids per lot40% single-bid · 3 bid reports
i

How many companies usually bid when this buyer runs a tender.

Middle value of the bid counts on its award notices, one per lot. Only real competitions count: direct awards and framework places are left out.

Based on 3 lots from this buyer’s competitions, last 24 months. Small sample.

Last 24 months, all categories.

Top-3 supplier share6%of 32 awarded procedures · 85 suppliers
i

How much of this buyer’s work goes to its three most frequent suppliers.

Share of its awarded tenders that name at least one of the top three. Each tender is counted once.

32 awarded tenders, 85 different suppliers.

Describes the record. It is not a sign of favouritism.

All awards we hold.

Contracts ending ≤18 months2120 within 6 months · 21 estimated
i

Contracts that finish in the next 18 months.

Contracts ending in that window by the published end date or, where only a duration is published, an estimate from signature plus duration (marked). Neither, not counted.

An end date does not confirm a new procurement.

Published award value, 24m£1.6mnet · on 5 of 5 published values · top 5 = 100%
i

How much this buyer has awarded recently, by published values.

Sum of published VAT-exclusive awards to single suppliers, last 24 months. Left out: concession revenue, framework ceilings, repeated notices, equal-value duplicates.

Published values, not actual spend. The biggest rows are listed so you can check.

What they buy
i

What kind of work is bought here.

Notices by procurement category (CPV). A notice with several categories counts in each.

Last 24 months · CPV divisions on published procedures · a notice with several divisions counts in each

How they buy
i

How work here is packaged.

Notices by commercial tool: a single contract, a framework, or a dynamic purchasing system.

Last 24 months · 16 notices · commercial tool and route as published on the notice, not a legal-regime claim

Commercial tool
i

How work here is packaged.

Notices by commercial tool: a single contract, a framework, or a dynamic purchasing system.

  • Contract94%(15 notices)
    15 of 16 notices are Contract (94%).
  • Framework6%(1 notice)
    1 of 16 notices is Framework (6%).
Procedure route
i

Which procedures buyers here use.

Notices by the procedure they declare: open, selective, limited or direct. Open and selective are competitions; limited and direct are not.

  • Direct award38%(6 notices)
    6 of 16 notices are Direct award (38%).
  • Open38%(6 notices)
    6 of 16 notices are Open (38%).
  • Selective13%(2 notices)
    2 of 16 notices are Selective (13%).
  • Route not published13%(2 notices)
    2 of 16 notices are Route not published (13%).
Typical bids per lot
i

How many companies usually bid when this buyer runs a tender.

Middle value of the bid counts on its award notices, one per lot. Only real competitions count: direct awards and framework places are left out.

Based on 3 lots from this buyer’s competitions, last 24 months. Small sample.

Last 24 months, all categories.

4moderate · n=30% of lots drew a single bid
Deadline → award
i

How long this buyer takes to decide after bids close.

Middle value in days from the bid deadline to the award date, on this buyer’s own tenders.

Based on 3 decided tenders across all categories, last 24 months.

Last 24 months.

95 daysmoderate · n=3
Notice amendments
i

How often this buyer changes a notice after publishing it.

Middle number of amendments per notice. Deadline extensions and corrections both count.

Based on 16 notices across all categories, last 24 months.

Last 24 months.

06 of 16 notices amended
Award vs estimate
i

Do this buyer’s awards land above or below its own estimates.

Each lot’s published estimate against its award, on this buyer’s competitions, like for like.

Based on 2 lots with both an estimate and an award, last 24 months. Small sample.

A past pattern, not a price to bid.

Last 24 months.

0% at estimateindicative · n=2

Who wins here
i

Which suppliers win the most here.

Suppliers ranked by the number of tenders won, not by money. A supplier on one big framework with many call-offs does not outrank one that won many separate competitions.

All published awards naming a supplier · ranked by distinct procedures, not pounds · panel and call-off entries inflate award records

SupplierProceduresShareLast 24mAward recordsLast activity
Express Recruitment Ltdframework/DPS on 126.3%02—
Perrett Laver Ltdframework/DPS on 126.3%02—
GatenbySanderson Limitedframework/DPS on 126.3%02—
James Andrews Recruitment Solutions Ltdframework/DPS on 126.3%02—
GLOBAL FIRE SYSTEMS LIMITED13.1%1127 Mar 2026
A to E Training & Solutions Ltd13.1%1128 Aug 2026
BLACKPOOL DESIGN COACHBUILDERS LIMITED13.1%1117 Mar 2026
Axis Recruitment Limitedframework/DPS on 113.1%11—

The three most frequent suppliers are named on 6% of 32 awarded procedures (each procedure counted once, so a panel shared by several of them is not double-counted); 85 distinct suppliers hold at least one. Descriptive concentration of published awards, not a statement of preference.

Published award value (24m)
i

How much this buyer has awarded recently, by published values.

Sum of published VAT-exclusive awards to single suppliers, last 24 months. Left out: concession revenue, framework ceilings, repeated notices, equal-value duplicates.

Published values, not actual spend. The biggest rows are listed so you can check.

£1.6mSum of published VAT-exclusive values on 5 of 5 published single-supplier values; the five largest make 100%; a further 5 published a VAT-inclusive amount only, kept apart.
Typical single-supplier award (24m)
i

The middle published award value for this buyer.

Middle value of the same awards as the total above.

Last 24 months.

£324k middle valuerobust · n=5Middle half £240k–£325k.
Largest published awards
i

The biggest published awards.

Awards to a single supplier with a published value, largest first, so you can check the totals against the notice.

A repeated framework total can appear here. Open the notice to check.

SupplierAwardedTermPublished value
HUDL Sports Performance and Analysis Software (Enhanced)Hudl—3 yrs£524,732
≈ £175k/yr
Consultancy ProjectCBRE Limited—1 yrs£325,000
≈ £325k/yr
PebblePad ePortfolio systemPEBBLE LEARNING LTD—2.7 yrs£323,505
≈ £121k/yr
Managed Email Delivery PlatformQuba Digital Limited—3.8 yrs£240,000
≈ £63k/yr
eTracker eSuite eSignVLE SUPPORT LIMITED—3.3 yrs · up to 5.3 yrs£149,467 †
≈ £45k/yr

Contracts ending
i

Contracts that finish in the next 18 months.

Contracts ending in that window by the published end date or, where only a duration is published, an estimate from signature plus duration (marked). Neither, not counted.

An end date does not confirm a new procurement.

39 of 77 contracts carry an end date, 34 estimated from the duration · not a retender forecast

ContractHolderEndsPublished value
One to one Executive CoachingAdvance HE16 Dec 2026 estimated£250,000
One to one Executive CoachingMelissa Roberts Ltd16 Dec 2026 estimated£250,000
One to one Executive CoachingNew Level Results Ltd16 Dec 2026 estimated£250,000
One to one Executive CoachingNotion Limited16 Dec 2026 estimated£250,000
One to one Executive CoachingOn The Up Consulting Ltd16 Dec 2026 estimated£250,000
One to one Executive CoachingPrimeast Ltd16 Dec 2026 estimated£250,000
One to one Executive CoachingRosia Bay Ltd16 Dec 2026 estimated£250,000
One to one Executive CoachingThe Workforce Development Trust Ltd16 Dec 2026 estimated£250,000
One to one Executive CoachingUrsula Cameron Limited16 Dec 2026 estimated£250,000
One to one Executive CoachingBusiness Reimagined Ltd16 Dec 2026 estimated£250,000

Soonest 10 of 21 contracts ending within 18 months.

Recent procedures

Latest 50 of 53 procedures where this authority buys, is the authority the work is for, or runs the procurement

ProcedureStatusPublishedPublished value
Internal & External Audit ServicesFramework2 lotsFinancial auditing servicesAwarded / complete5 Apr 2022£1,900,000
Payment Processing AgentsFinancial transaction processing and clearing-house servicesAwarded / complete25 Mar 2022—
Student Bus ServicesFramework2 lotsRoad transport servicesAwarded / complete14 Feb 2022£5,000,000
Sports Centre ManagementSport-related servicesAwarded / complete7 Jan 2022£600,000
Mechanical & Electrical Goods and Services2 lotsElectrical installation workAwarded / complete4 Jan 2022£4,000,000
Security ServicesSecurity servicesOpen10 Nov 2021—
Fire Detection & Safety Systems Servicing &MaintenanceFire-detection systemsAwarded / complete5 Nov 2021£600,000
Library Systems ReplacementIndustry specific software packageAwarded / complete13 Oct 2021£500,000
Occupational Health Services for StudentsHealth servicesOpen22 Sept 2021—
Servicing & Maintenance of CCTV, Door access, Barriers and Automatic DoorsRepair and maintenance services of security equipmentAwarded / complete2 Sept 2021—

Search all 53 procedures for this authority →

About this data
  • Source. Official UK public procurement notices (Find a Tender), reused under the Open Government Licence v3.0. New notices arrive through the day; the figures are rebuilt nightly.
  • One profile per authority. Different spellings and registration numbers of the same body are merged into this profile. It includes tenders the authority ran for other bodies and tenders run on its behalf; spend is credited to the body that pays.
  • Values are published values. Award values are what the authority published, excluding VAT and framework ceilings. They are not a budget or total spend.
  • Contract end dates. 39 of 77 published contracts have an end date; 34 of those are estimated as the signature (or publication) date plus the published duration and are marked “estimated”. They feed “Contracts ending”, the same rule as the retender radar.
  • Every figure shows what it rests on. Not every notice publishes a bid count, a value or a delivery region, so each figure carries the number of records behind it, and one built on few records is marked as such. The on a figure explains it; the counting rules are in the methodology. Spotted something wrong? Tell us.