UK procurement: SMEs, lots and collaboration Q&A

Question 1

Must every large public procurement be divided into lots?

Accepted Answer

No. The Act requires the authority to consider whether the requirement could reasonably be supplied under more than one contract and whether awarding by lots would be appropriate.

There can be reasons to retain a combined requirement.

Suppliers should distinguish the duty to consider from an absolute right to demand a particular lot structure.

Where lot size creates a barrier, provide specific evidence about market capacity and a practical alternative during engagement or formal clarification.

Question 2

Why can lotting improve access for small suppliers?

Accepted Answer

Lots can divide a large requirement by geography, service or another sensible boundary, allowing suppliers to compete for work that fits their capability.

The official guidance identifies SME access and supply-chain diversity among potential benefits.

Smaller lots still need suitable interfaces and viable delivery economics.

A bidder should select those it can resource and price credibly, rather than pursuing every lot simply because separate applications are allowed.

Question 3

Does splitting a procurement into lots make each lot below threshold?

Accepted Answer

Not automatically. The valuation rules require the relevant aggregated requirement to be considered; dividing the procurement does not by itself remove the applicable obligations.

For a supplier, each lot may nevertheless lead to a separate contract or award decision.

Keep the legal valuation question separate from the commercial decision about which lots to bid for.

If the documentation seems to rely on artificial disaggregation, ask for clarification of the route rather than assuming the threshold is avoided.

Question 4

Can the buyer limit the number of lots one supplier wins?

Accepted Answer

Yes, the guidance recognises that an authority can limit the number of lots awarded to one supplier using an objective mechanism.

The relevant restriction and selection method should be transparent in the procurement documents.

Check how your preferences, rankings or combination offers will be treated.

A supplier that is highest-scoring on several lots should not assume it will receive all of them if the disclosed rules deliberately spread awards.

Question 5

Should the same technical response be copied into every lot?

Accepted Answer

Only where it accurately answers each lot’s requirements, and even then check the specific delivery facts.

Lots can differ in geography, volumes, staffing, risks, mobilisation or evaluation details.

Use a common evidence base where appropriate but make the solution and commitments clear for each lot.

Also model the combined resource demand if several are won.

The procurement rules permit lotting; they do not make a generic answer equally suitable for every resulting contract.

Question 6

Can small businesses combine capabilities for a larger tender?

Accepted Answer

Yes, collaboration and reliance on relevant third-party capacity can be possible, subject to the procedure’s requirements and the Act’s participation and exclusion rules.

Make the bidding structure, responsibility for performance and evidence clear.

A consortium name alone does not establish that the required people, finances or technical resources will be available.

Agree leadership, liability, delivery interfaces, pricing and information-sharing arrangements early enough for the bid to reflect the actual commitment.

Question 7

Does being an SME automatically excuse a missing mandatory requirement?

Accepted Answer

No. Authorities must consider SME barriers and keep participation requirements proportionate, but a supplier still has to satisfy the applicable conditions and tender requirements.

If a condition appears unnecessarily restrictive, raise the issue with supporting evidence before the deadline.

Do not submit an unsupported declaration on the assumption that small-business status will cure it.

The useful distinction is between challenging an inappropriate barrier and ignoring a requirement that remains part of the published procurement.

Question 8

How can an SME challenge an unnecessarily burdensome qualification request?

Accepted Answer

Identify the specific condition, explain why it appears disproportionate to the contract and propose evidence that would address the buyer’s legitimate risk more proportionately.

Examples include alternative financial evidence where audited accounts are not legally required or a relevant equivalent qualification.

Use the formal clarification route and keep the answer.

Avoid a general complaint that the tender is too difficult; a concrete alternative makes it easier for the authority to assess and respond to the issue.

Question 9

What should a lead bidder document when relying on a partner’s experience?

Accepted Answer

State which partner performed the cited work, what part is relevant to the proposed contract and how that capability will actually support delivery.

Obtain permission and reliable evidence rather than presenting another organisation’s history as your own.

Align the arrangements with participation requirements and any associated-person checks.

The evaluator needs to understand the available capability, while the contract team needs confidence that the promised partner involvement survives beyond the proposal stage.

UK procurement: SMEs, lots and collaboration Q&A

Must every large public procurement be divided into lots?＋

Why can lotting improve access for small suppliers?＋

Does splitting a procurement into lots make each lot below threshold?＋

Can the buyer limit the number of lots one supplier wins?＋

Should the same technical response be copied into every lot?＋

Can small businesses combine capabilities for a larger tender?＋

Does being an SME automatically excuse a missing mandatory requirement?＋

How can an SME challenge an unnecessarily burdensome qualification request?＋

What should a lead bidder document when relying on a partner’s experience?＋