Official UK procurement notice
Catering Consultancy Framework Agreement
Authority: Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh
What is being bought
Published requirement descriptionFramework Agreement for specialist catering consultancy services, including catering strategy, market analysis, commercial modelling, procurement support, contract and concession development, implementation and performance review.
CPV: Business development consultancy services
The lotProcurement structure
single lot · no lot value publishedLot #1The Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh (RBGE) is undertaking preliminary market engagement…Planned
The Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh (RBGE) is undertaking preliminary market engagement in relation to the possible establishment of a Framework Agreement for the provision of specialist catering consultancy services.
RBGE and its wholly owned subsidiary, Botanics Trading Company (BTC), periodically require independent expert support in the development, procurement, implementation, review and management of catering and hospitality arrangements across a diverse portfolio of visitor, staff and commercial catering operations.
The proposed Framework Agreement would provide access to suitably experienced consultancy providers capable of delivering strategic, commercial, financial, operational and procurement-related advice. Call-off requirements may include, but are not limited to:
Catering strategy development and options appraisal;
Market research, benchmarking and soft market testing;
Financial and commercial modelling;
Catering service reviews and business case development;
Procurement strategy and route-to-market advice;
Development of specifications, service descriptions and pricing models;
Support for the procurement of catering service contracts and concession agreements;
Evaluation, clarification and contract award support;
Mobilisation, implementation and transition planning;
Contract and concession performance review, audit and improvement support.
The Framework Agreement is intended to provide flexible access to specialist expertise as requirements arise.
RBGE is seeking feedback from the market on supplier capacity and level of interest prior to determining the final procurement strategy for our catering consultancy needs.
Interested organisations are invited to express their interest within a month if they are interested in the opportunity. We will inform those interested prior to publishing upon approval and finalisation of tender documentation.
What it takes to wini
How this buyer will score bids.
The evaluation criteria and weights exactly as published on the notice, grouped by family (price, quality, social value and so on).
Evaluation split and conditions of participation as published; the tender pack may add morei
How this buyer will score bids.
The evaluation criteria and weights exactly as published on the notice, grouped by family (price, quality, social value and so on).
- “Catering Consultancy Framework Agreement” is a framework: the contest is a place on its panel, not a single contract.
Pipeline intelligence · planning stage: how this market runs before the tender is published
How Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh buys Business and management consultancy services (CPV 7941), and who usually turns up
Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh has little published record in this market. Compared with other frameworks and DPS only. Whole-market view: Business and management consultancy services (CPV 7941) →
How the contest usually goes
Winner shares use published awards; bid and price charts use contested lots.
i
How often small and medium firms win.
Share of awards where the winner’s size is known.
The counts under this question show how many awards have a known supplier size.
Across this market, small firms won 100% of awards with a known supplier size.
i
How often local firms win similar work.
Winners with a registered address in the delivery region, out of awards with a known address.
Local means the winner is registered in the region where that award was delivered.
A local branch does not count if the registered address is elsewhere.
Across this market, 58% of winners were registered in the delivery region.
i
How long buyers here take to decide after bids close.
Middle value in days from the bid deadline to the award date, on competitions that published both.
Only decided tenders count, so slow ones still waiting are not in.
Half of these awards have an award date within 63 days of the bid deadline.
i
How often work is awarded with no recorded rival.
Direct awards and tenders where every published lot count shows one bid.
Thin markets produce this too; it is not proof of a tailored specification.
Across this market, 40% of awarded procurements had no recorded rival.
How many bids did past lots attract?
i
How many bids past lots received.
Each colour is a bid-count range. Only competed lots with a published count are included.
Past bids do not predict this tender.
1 bid18%
2–318%
4–618%
7+45%
How did awards compare with estimates?
i
Where winning prices landed against estimates.
Each colour shows awards below, close to or above the published estimate, one lot at a time.
On a framework or DPS, prices are agreed when work is called off.
Past prices are a guide, not a bid price.
Not comparable on a framework or DPS: the price is set later, on each call-off.
Assess each lot i
What past awards tell you about each lot.
See the forecast, this buyer’s earlier suppliers and firms with relevant wins.
No supplier is confirmed as a bidder.
i
What past awards tell you about each lot.
See the forecast, this buyer’s earlier suppliers and firms with relevant wins.
No supplier is confirmed as a bidder.
Open a lot for its forecast, this buyer’s previous supplier and possible competitors, from published award history, not a bid list
Lot #1The Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh (RBGE) is undertaking preliminary market engagement…CPV 7941Estimate not published
i
How many bids this lot may attract.
The forecast uses similar past competitions. The bar shows either that forecast or past bid counts; the line below says which.
Each lot shows its own forecast based on its own category; forecasts for different lots of the same notice are not comparative. The bar shows 11 past lots.
A forecast, not a list of bidders.
1 bid18%
2–318%
4–618%
7+45%
i
Where the award price may land.
The forecast uses similar awards and the buyer’s estimate. The band covers the middle half of likely prices.
No comparable awards for this lot yet.
A statistical guide from past awards, not a price to bid.
Who has supplied this buyer on similar work? i
Who has done similar work for this buyer.
Past contracts are matched by buyer, title and type of work.
A past supplier may not bid again.
i
Who has done similar work for this buyer.
Past contracts are matched by buyer, title and type of work.
A past supplier may not bid again.
No earlier contract of this buyer matches this lot on the published record.
Who could compete for this lot? i
Who could compete for this lot?
Firms with relevant past wins. On a framework, we show firms on that agreement.
None is confirmed as a bidder.
i
Who could compete for this lot?
Firms with relevant past wins. On a framework, we show firms on that agreement.
None is confirmed as a bidder.
Candidate suppliers for this notice have not been worked out yet, so this is not a verdict that nobody fits.
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.
- Two views, kept apart. The authority’s own track record and the wider market for the same kind of work sit side by side and are never mixed. Where the local picture is too thin, a figure widens to a broader market and says which one it used.
- Forecasts are labelled. The price forecast and its range, possible competitors and the earlier-work matches are our estimates from past awards: not published facts, not win chances and not price advice. Official notices do not say who is bidding.
- 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.
Procedure terms & legal framework
From the official record · publisher note attached- Legal basis
- CELEX · 32014L0024 Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (Directive 2014/24/EU)
- Procurement category
- Services
- Notice status
- Planned procurement
- Procurement threshold
- Unspecified in notice
- Regulatory regime
- Standard
- Commercial structure
- Framework agreement
- Who may use this agreement
- Not stated in the notice; call-off rights may be limited to the establishing authority
- Competition type
- Competitive procedure
- GPA / WTO covered
- Yes (GPA)
- Recurring procurement
- Unspecified in notice
- First published
- 6 Oct 2026, 16:49 BST
- Last source update
- 6 Oct 2026, 16:49 BST
- Authority reference
RBGE-2026-052- FTS notice number
2026/S 000-094442- Classification (CPV)
- Delivery area
- Official registry OCID
ocds-h6vhtk-07820aFind a Tender
Publisher note: NOTE: To register your interest in this notice and obtain any additional information please visit the Public Contracts Scotland Web Site at https://www.publiccontractsscotland.gov.uk/Search/Search_Switch.aspx?ID=844999. (SC Ref:844999)
How it was run
Official notice- Appointment period ends
- —
Timeline
6 Oct 2026 → 11 Jan 2027 · 2 dates- Notice published20 days ago6 Oct 2026, 16:49 BST
- Today27 Oct 2026
- Tender notice expectedin 75 days11 Jan 2027
Commercial outcome & contract awards
Pipeline notice- Awards (0)
- No award published
- Contracts (0)
- No contract published
- Bid statistics
- No aggregate bid statistics published
Contracting authority & participating public bodies
Official documents & specifications
Official links; attachments are not copiedNo document links were published on the notice.