NHSWYICB - 24 Hour Mental Health Crisis Support Line

Adult 24 Hour Mental Health Support Line providing NHS 111 mental health option for Barnsley, Calderdale, Kirklees, Leeds and Wakefield.

The Contract Authority; NHS West Yorkshire Integrated Care Board intends to award a contract to an existing provider following Direct Award Process C. The authority is publishing this notice in Find a Tender in accordance with the NHS Provider Selection Regime.

Contract Period: 01/01/2027 - 31/03/2028

with and extension option of 1 Year form 01/04/2028 - 31/03/2029

Contract Value: £1,645,746. Additional information: 1. Eligibility for Direct Award Process C

The Record of Decision Making created at the time of the decision confirms that the service:

is an existing service;

is delivered by an existing provider Nottingham Community Housing Association;

is replacing a contract that is due to expire; and

is therefore eligible in principle for Direct Award Process C.

The Record also identifies the named decision‑maker, senior approving bodies, contract value and term, and confirms that no conflicts of interest were declared. This document evidences that the decision was taken consciously and contemporaneously within the PSR framework, rather than by default or assumption.

2. No Considerable Change to Contracting Arrangements

The 24 Hour Mental Health Crisis Support Line Service Specification demonstrates that the proposed contract does not introduce any considerable change when compared with the existing arrangements.

In substance:

the service model remains an integrated pathway within crisis mental health;

the population, geography, referral routes, and eligibility criteria are unchanged;

delivery remains with the same incumbent provider, using the same delivery model;

there is no expansion, reconfiguration, or transfer of material risk.

The ICB actively reviewed the proposed scope, duration, outcomes, delivery model, and risk profile against the existing contract and concluded that none of these elements met the PSR “considerable change” threshold. While the specification is presented in an updated format, the underlying service is materially consistent with the existing contract.

3. Provider Performance and Likely Future Performance

The Service Review Template – PSR Key Criteria provides detailed, narrative‑based evidence demonstrating that the existing provider:

is satisfying the current contract to a sufficient standard; and

is likely to satisfy the proposed contract to a sufficient standard.

The Service Review assesses performance against all PSR key criteria, including:

Quality and innovation – supported by/evidenced by service outcomes including benchmarked performance against NHS England mental health 111 Key Performance Indicators.

Value and stewardship of public funds – demonstrated through
return on investment, efficiency gains, cost effectiveness and system savings which have in some areas increased the resource available to in person mental health support.

Integration, collaboration, and sustainability – reflected in partnership working across the mental health crisis pathway, alignment with wider pathways, embedded delivery and training development across relevant parts of the system.

Access, inequalities, and choice – supported by targeted interventions to support frequent users, inclusive or adapted provision and reach into underserved or priority populations.

Social value – including
prevention activity, community capacity building, wider economic or social benefits.

The ICB considered not only historic performance, but also whether the provider’s established workforce, governance arrangements, and delivery model provide assurance of continued performance under the proposed contract. The proposed contract does not introduce new delivery requirements, expanded cohorts, or increased demand beyond that already successfully managed by the provider.

4. Proportionality and Overall Assurance

In determining the appropriate procurement route, the ICB considered whether a competitive process would deliver additional benefit. Given the continuity of need, the absence of material change, the provider’s performance, and the risks associated with service disruption, the ICB concluded that a competitive process would not be proportionate to the time, cost, and delivery risk involved.

Taken together, the three documents; Record of Decision Making, Service Specification and Service Review Template provide a coherent and auditable justification for the use of Direct Award Process C, demonstrating that:

the regulatory conditions for Process C are met;

the decision was taken lawfully, transparently, and proportionately;

the existing provider sufficiently meets the PSR criteria; and

continuity of a clinically effective and system‑beneficial service is in the best interests of patients and the wider system.

WY ICB therefore remains satisfied that the requirements of the Provider Selection Regime have been pro