{ "name": "RM6397 lot structure", "description": "Lot breakdown for RM6397 Clinical and Non-Clinical Temporary and Permanent Staff, the NHS Workforce Alliance framework.", "publisher": "Glaxtons Consulting Limited", "license": "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/", "licenseLabel": "CC BY 4.0", "attribution": "Glaxtons Consulting, https://www.glaxtons.co.uk", "url": "https://www.glaxtons.co.uk/data/rm6397-lots.json", "documentation": "https://www.glaxtons.co.uk/data/", "dateModified": "2026-09-13", "recordCount": 12, "disclaimer": "Compiled by Glaxtons Consulting from primary sources and checked on the date shown. Procurement dates and lot structures change. Always verify against the contracting authority's own notice before relying on any figure here for a submission.", "records": [ { "slug": "nursing-and-midwifery", "lotNumber": 1, "name": "Nursing and Midwifery", "shortName": "Nursing and Midwifery", "supplierLimit": "Indicated as unlimited", "shortDescription": "Registered nurses, midwives, healthcare assistants and specialist nursing across NHS trusts and the wider public sector.", "whoBids": "Nursing agencies, framework incumbents on RM6281, specialist nursing providers covering theatre, ITU, paediatrics, mental health and community, and agencies supplying healthcare assistants at volume.", "staffGroups": "Registered general nurses, mental health and learning disability nurses, midwives, theatre and critical care nursing, paediatric and neonatal, community and district nursing, healthcare assistants and nursing associates.", "complianceFocus": "NMC registration and revalidation tracking is the discriminator here in a way it is nowhere else on the framework. Evaluators want to see how you evidence live registration status rather than annual checks, how lapsed registrations are caught before a shift, and how mandatory training and Care Certificate progress is recorded against each worker.", "evidenceThatScores": "Fill rates broken down by specialty rather than a single blended figure, time-to-supply for urgent and same-day requests, escalation handling when a shift cannot be filled, and audit outcomes from trust-side compliance checks. Named trusts with contract values and referees carry far more weight than volume claims.", "pitfall": "Presenting one blended fill rate across all nursing. Trusts buy by specialty, and a 96 percent blended figure that hides 70 percent on theatre reads as either evasive or as evidence you do not measure at the granularity the buyer manages. Break it down, including where it is weak, and explain what you are doing about the weak line.", "faqs": [ { "q": "Do I need to hold RM6281 to bid the RM6397 nursing lot?", "a": "No. RM6397 is a fresh competition and prior framework membership is not a condition of bidding. Incumbency helps only because your fill-rate and compliance performance data under RM6281 is verifiable evidence a new entrant cannot produce, but a well-evidenced challenger with named trust contracts competes on equal terms." }, { "q": "Can an agency bid nursing and healthcare assistants together?", "a": "Yes, both sit within the nursing and midwifery scope. The question worth asking is whether your evidence supports both at the depth the evaluator wants. An agency strong on healthcare assistants and thin on registered nursing usually scores better presenting that honestly with a credible development plan than claiming uniform capability it cannot reference." } ] }, { "slug": "medical-staffing", "lotNumber": 2, "name": "Medical Staffing", "shortName": "Medical Staffing", "supplierLimit": "Indicated as unlimited", "shortDescription": "Locum doctors from foundation level through to consultant, across every specialty and NHS grade.", "whoBids": "Locum medical agencies, consultant-grade specialists, agencies supplying substantive and fixed-term medical appointments, and providers covering hard-to-fill rotas in psychiatry, radiology, emergency medicine and anaesthetics.", "staffGroups": "Foundation and core trainees, specialty and associate specialist doctors, registrars, consultants across all specialties, and GPs supplying primary care and out-of-hours.", "complianceFocus": "GMC registration with licence to practise, revalidation and appraisal status, and scope-of-practice evidence per specialty. Medical staffing also carries the heaviest indemnity and pre-employment burden on the framework, and evaluators probe how you verify a consultant's actual recent practice rather than their registered specialty.", "evidenceThatScores": "Time-to-supply against hard-to-fill specialties is the single strongest evidence in this lot, because it is where trusts feel the most pain and where most agencies are weakest. Evidence rota continuity on long placements, consultant-grade fill rates specifically, and how you handle a cancellation inside 24 hours.", "pitfall": "Competing on rate. Medical staffing bids that lead on price signal that the agency does not understand what a trust is buying, which is a filled rota and a doctor whose scope of practice matches the role. Lead on supply reliability in the specialties that are hardest to fill and price competitively without making it the argument.", "faqs": [ { "q": "Does the medical lot cover GPs and primary care?", "a": "Medical staffing scope covers doctors across grades and specialties, and primary care supply is bought by NHS and public sector organisations through these routes. Confirm the exact scope boundaries in the ITT specification, because primary care and out-of-hours coverage is one of the areas where lot descriptions and buyer practice have historically differed." }, { "q": "How important is agency price cap compliance?", "a": "It is a condition of operating rather than a scoring differentiator. Evaluators assume compliance with NHS agency rules and rate caps; what they score is whether you can supply reliably while working inside them. An agency whose fill-rate evidence quietly depends on breaching caps is describing a model the framework will not buy." } ] }, { "slug": "ahp-hss-and-emergency-services", "lotNumber": 3, "name": "AHP, HSS and Emergency Services", "shortName": "AHP and Emergency", "supplierLimit": "Indicated as unlimited", "shortDescription": "Allied health professionals, healthcare science staff, and emergency and ambulance service personnel.", "whoBids": "AHP specialist agencies, healthcare science suppliers, ambulance and emergency service staffing providers, and therapy-focused agencies supplying physiotherapy, occupational therapy, radiography and pharmacy.", "staffGroups": "Physiotherapists, occupational therapists, speech and language therapists, dietitians, radiographers and sonographers, operating department practitioners, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, biomedical and clinical scientists, paramedics and emergency care assistants.", "complianceFocus": "HCPC registration for the regulated professions, GPhC for pharmacy, and profession-specific competency evidence. This lot spans more regulators than any other, and a submission that treats it as one homogeneous group tends to expose that it has not supplied across the range it is claiming.", "evidenceThatScores": "Depth per profession beats breadth across professions. Radiography and sonography supply in particular is a chronic NHS shortage, so demonstrable capability there is disproportionately valuable. Evidence named trust contracts by profession, and how you assess competency for roles where registration alone does not establish it.", "pitfall": "Claiming the whole lot on the strength of two professions. Evaluators read the professional range you evidence, not the range you list, and a submission naming eleven professions while referencing contracts in physiotherapy and radiography only reads as overreach. Bid the professions you can name contracts for.", "faqs": [ { "q": "Is this lot worth bidding if we only supply two or three AHP professions?", "a": "Usually yes, and specialist depth is often a stronger position than claimed breadth. Trusts buy therapy and healthcare science supply profession by profession, so an agency that clearly evidences strong physiotherapy and radiography capability is a useful supplier. Overclaiming range is what damages scores, not having a focused offer." }, { "q": "Does this lot include ambulance and paramedic supply?", "a": "Emergency services personnel fall within this lot's scope alongside AHP and healthcare science staff. Ambulance supply carries its own driving, vehicle and clinical governance requirements that differ materially from therapy supply, so evidence those separately rather than folding them into a general clinical compliance narrative." } ] }, { "slug": "social-care-staffing", "lotNumber": 4, "name": "Social Care Staffing", "shortName": "Social Care Staffing", "supplierLimit": "Indicated as unlimited", "shortDescription": "Social workers, care staff and social care professionals for local authorities, NHS bodies and the wider public sector.", "whoBids": "Social work agencies, care staffing providers, agencies supplying children's and adults' services, and providers covering residential, supported living and community care roles.", "staffGroups": "Qualified social workers across children's and adults' services, approved mental health professionals, social work assistants, care workers and support workers, registered managers and team managers.", "complianceFocus": "Social Work England registration, enhanced DBS with the correct workforce barred list checks, and safeguarding training currency. Safeguarding is scored more heavily in this lot than anywhere else on the framework, and evaluators are alert to submissions that describe a policy rather than evidence how it operates when a concern is raised about a placed worker.", "evidenceThatScores": "Retention on long placements, because local authority children's services in particular suffer badly from churn and value continuity above almost everything. Evidence how you handle a safeguarding allegation against a placed worker end to end, and name the authorities you supply with contract durations.", "pitfall": "Writing safeguarding as a policy statement. Every bidder has a safeguarding policy. What differentiates is a described, dated example of how a real concern was handled, escalated and closed, with the referral route and the outcome. Anonymise it, but make it concrete.", "faqs": [ { "q": "Do local authorities buy social work supply through this NHS framework?", "a": "Yes. The framework is available to public and third sector organisations well beyond NHS trusts, including local government, and social care staffing is one of the areas where local authority use is heaviest. Write your submission for a local authority children's services buyer as much as for an NHS one." }, { "q": "Does this lot cover care workers as well as qualified social workers?", "a": "Social care staffing scope covers the range from care and support workers through to qualified and senior social work roles. The compliance and evidence expectations differ sharply between them, so treat them as distinct supply propositions within your response rather than describing a single recruitment process covering both." } ] }, { "slug": "corporate-functions-supply", "lotNumber": 5, "name": "Corporate Functions Supply", "shortName": "Corporate Functions", "supplierLimit": "Indicated as unlimited", "shortDescription": "Administrative, finance, HR, procurement and business support staff across NHS and public sector organisations.", "whoBids": "Generalist commercial recruiters entering public sector supply, business support agencies, finance and accountancy staffing specialists, and HR and procurement recruitment providers.", "staffGroups": "Administrators and medical secretaries, finance and accountancy staff, HR and payroll, procurement and commercial, project and programme support, and general business support roles.", "complianceFocus": "This is the lot where commercial agencies most often underestimate the public sector layer. Baseline Personnel Security Standard checks, IR35 status determination for contractor supply, and NHS Employment Check Standards still apply even to non-clinical roles. Evaluators notice quickly when a submission has been adapted from private sector recruitment material.", "evidenceThatScores": "Public sector contract references specifically. A strong commercial track record with no public sector delivery is the weakest common position in this lot. If your public sector evidence is thin, lead with adjacent regulated-sector work and be explicit about the transition rather than hoping the gap is not noticed.", "pitfall": "Treating this as the easy lot. It has the lowest clinical barrier and therefore the highest bidder count, which makes evidence quality the only separator. Generic recruitment capability statements score poorly against agencies naming NHS trusts, roles filled and time-to-supply figures.", "faqs": [ { "q": "We are a commercial recruiter with no NHS clients. Is this lot realistic?", "a": "It is the most realistic entry point on the framework for a commercial agency, but realistic is not the same as easy. The barrier is evidence rather than accreditation: you will be scored against agencies naming NHS trusts and public sector contracts. Lead with your strongest regulated or public-adjacent delivery, be direct about the absence of NHS references, and evidence the compliance infrastructure you have built to operate to NHS standards." }, { "q": "Does IR35 apply to supply through this lot?", "a": "Off-payroll working rules apply to public sector engagements, and status determination sits with the client organisation. What the evaluator scores is whether you understand the process, support the determination properly and administer supply compliantly. A submission that is vague on this signals inexperience in public sector contractor supply more clearly than almost anything else." } ] }, { "slug": "it-professionals-and-digital-workers", "lotNumber": 6, "name": "IT Professionals and Digital Workers", "shortName": "IT and Digital", "supplierLimit": "Indicated as unlimited", "shortDescription": "Technology, digital and data staff for NHS and public sector transformation, infrastructure and service delivery.", "whoBids": "Technology recruitment agencies, digital and data staffing specialists, cyber security contractor suppliers, and agencies supplying NHS digital transformation programmes.", "staffGroups": "Software engineers and developers, infrastructure and network engineers, cyber security specialists, data engineers and analysts, business analysts, digital project and programme staff, and service desk and support roles.", "complianceFocus": "Security clearance handling and IR35 administration dominate here. Contractor supply is the norm rather than the exception, so status determination support, right-to-work and clearance verification, and how you handle a contractor moving between public sector engagements all get probed.", "evidenceThatScores": "Named NHS or public sector digital programmes with roles filled and durations. NHS digital work has specific context, from clinical systems and interoperability standards to information governance, and agencies that can evidence supply into that context rather than generic tech recruitment separate themselves immediately.", "pitfall": "Bidding on the strength of a commercial technology desk with no public sector delivery, and describing candidate quality rather than supply reliability. The buyer's problem is a vacant role on a funded programme, not a shortage of good CVs, and the submission should answer the problem they have.", "faqs": [ { "q": "Is security clearance required for NHS digital contractor supply?", "a": "It varies by role and by organisation rather than applying uniformly. Baseline Personnel Security Standard checks are common, and clearance requirements rise for roles touching national systems or sensitive data. What matters in the submission is evidencing that you verify and track clearance properly, and that you can supply cleared people without the clearance process becoming the delay." }, { "q": "Does this lot compete with G-Cloud or Digital Outcomes routes?", "a": "They serve different purchases and are not alternatives. This lot supplies people into a client-managed team. G-Cloud buys hosted services and Digital Outcomes and Specialists buys delivered outcomes and specialist roles under supplier management. A technology business selling both staff augmentation and delivered outcomes usually needs positions on more than one route." } ] }, { "slug": "legal-supply", "lotNumber": 7, "name": "Legal Supply", "shortName": "Legal Supply", "supplierLimit": "Indicated as unlimited", "shortDescription": "Solicitors, barristers, paralegals and legal support staff for NHS and public sector legal functions.", "whoBids": "Legal recruitment agencies, locum solicitor providers, paralegal staffing specialists, and agencies supplying in-house public sector legal teams.", "staffGroups": "Solicitors and barristers across public, employment, clinical negligence, commercial and property law, legal executives, paralegals, and legal secretaries and support staff.", "complianceFocus": "SRA or Bar Standards Board registration and practising certificate currency, conflict-of-interest handling, and confidentiality arrangements. Legal supply into NHS bodies frequently touches clinical negligence and employment matters where conflict checking across concurrent placements is a real operational requirement rather than a formality.", "evidenceThatScores": "Specialism depth in the areas NHS and public sector legal teams actually buy: clinical negligence, employment, procurement and commercial, information governance and property. Evidence named in-house teams supplied, placement durations, and how you conflict-check across a client base that includes opposing parties.", "pitfall": "Presenting a general legal recruitment offer. Public sector legal buyers have narrow, specific gaps, usually in clinical negligence or employment, and an agency that leads with breadth rather than the two or three specialisms it genuinely supplies reads as a switchboard rather than a specialist.", "faqs": [ { "q": "Is the legal lot worth bidding for a small specialist agency?", "a": "Often yes. Legal supply is a comparatively low-volume, high-specificity lot, and buyers value depth in a narrow specialism over general coverage. A small agency with genuine clinical negligence or NHS employment law supply and named references can compete well against larger generalists here." }, { "q": "How do conflicts of interest get handled across public sector clients?", "a": "This is an operational question the evaluator expects a real answer to, not a policy statement. Describe how you identify a potential conflict before a placement, what you do when a placed lawyer's client is in dispute with another of your clients, and who makes the decision. Vagueness here is read as inexperience in legal supply specifically." } ] }, { "slug": "scientific-technical-and-clinical-coding-supply", "lotNumber": 8, "name": "Scientific, Technical and Clinical Coding Supply", "shortName": "Clinical Coding", "supplierLimit": "Indicated as unlimited", "shortDescription": "Clinical coders, laboratory and scientific staff, and technical specialists supporting NHS clinical and data functions.", "whoBids": "Clinical coding agencies, laboratory and pathology staffing providers, medical physics and engineering suppliers, and health informatics specialists.", "staffGroups": "Clinical coders and coding auditors, biomedical scientists and laboratory staff, medical physicists and clinical engineers, health informatics and data quality specialists, and decontamination and technical services staff.", "complianceFocus": "Clinical coding accreditation and audit standards, HCPC registration for the applicable scientific roles, and IBMS registration for laboratory staff. Clinical coding carries a direct financial consequence for trusts through the tariff, so accuracy evidence is scored in a way it is not for other technical roles.", "evidenceThatScores": "For coding specifically, audited accuracy rates and the effect of your coders on a trust's data quality or income are the strongest evidence available, and almost no bidder presents them. For laboratory and scientific supply, evidence UKAS-accredited environment experience and the specialties you can genuinely cover.", "pitfall": "Treating clinical coding as administrative supply. It is a technical, audited discipline with measurable financial impact, and a submission that describes coders as data entry staff will score badly against one that presents audited accuracy figures and named coding audit outcomes.", "faqs": [ { "q": "Why is clinical coding on a staffing framework rather than a service framework?", "a": "Trusts buy coding both ways. Managed coding services are bought as an outsourced service, while coder supply into a trust's own coding department is a staffing purchase and sits here. If you offer both, be clear in your submission which you are bidding, because conflating them makes the offer harder for an evaluator to score." }, { "q": "What accuracy evidence do coding buyers expect?", "a": "Audited accuracy against national clinical coding audit standards, ideally with the trust-side audit outcome rather than your own internal figure. Where you can show a measurable improvement in a trust's data quality or coded income following your supply, that is the most persuasive evidence available in this lot and it is very rarely presented." } ] }, { "slug": "estates-facilities-management-and-ancillary-staff-supply", "lotNumber": 9, "name": "Estates, Facilities Management and Ancillary Staff Supply", "shortName": "Estates and Facilities", "supplierLimit": "Indicated as unlimited", "shortDescription": "Estates, maintenance, facilities, catering, cleaning, portering and security staff for NHS sites.", "whoBids": "Facilities and estates staffing providers, industrial and blue-collar recruiters, security staffing suppliers, and agencies supplying catering, domestic and portering staff at volume.", "staffGroups": "Estates maintenance and building services engineers, electricians and mechanical trades, domestic and cleaning staff, catering and hospitality, porters, security officers, and transport and logistics staff.", "complianceFocus": "Trade competency and ticket verification, SIA licensing for security roles, food hygiene certification for catering, and infection control training for staff working in clinical areas. Estates roles on healthcare sites also carry authorised person and competent person requirements for specialist systems such as medical gases, ventilation and water safety.", "evidenceThatScores": "Volume supply reliability and rapid mobilisation, because this lot is bought for coverage. Evidence how you cover a large-site cleaning or portering contract at short notice, how trade tickets and SIA licences are verified and tracked to expiry, and where you have supplied specialist authorised persons.", "pitfall": "Underestimating the clinical-environment layer. Supplying a cleaner to an office and to an operating theatre are different propositions, and a submission that does not address infection control, clinical area induction and the specific competency requirements of healthcare estates reads as a generic industrial recruiter.", "faqs": [ { "q": "Do estates staff need healthcare-specific competencies?", "a": "Frequently yes, and this is where general industrial recruiters lose marks. Healthcare estates carry authorised and competent person requirements for medical gas, ventilation, water safety and electrical systems, and staff working in clinical areas need infection control awareness and appropriate induction. Evidencing that you understand and verify these separates a healthcare-capable supplier from a general one." }, { "q": "Is this lot mainly about price?", "a": "Price matters more here than in the clinical lots because volumes are high and margins are thin, but it is not the whole decision. Trusts have been burned by suppliers who won on rate and could not cover, so demonstrable coverage reliability at the quoted rate is what actually wins. Bidding a rate you cannot staff is the fastest route to a framework place that generates no call-offs." } ] }, { "slug": "permanent-recruitment", "lotNumber": 10, "name": "Permanent Recruitment", "shortName": "Permanent Recruitment", "supplierLimit": "Indicated as unlimited", "shortDescription": "Permanent and fixed-term appointments across clinical and non-clinical roles for NHS and public sector employers.", "whoBids": "Executive search firms, permanent recruitment agencies, international recruitment providers, and agencies running campaign-based hiring for NHS employers.", "staffGroups": "Substantive clinical appointments including consultants and senior nursing, executive and board-level appointments, corporate and technical permanent roles, and fixed-term appointments across all groups.", "complianceFocus": "International recruitment ethics is the distinguishing issue in this lot. Adherence to the UK code of practice for international recruitment of health and social care personnel, including the red and amber country lists, is scored rather than assumed, alongside sponsorship handling and the pre-employment check regime for substantive NHS appointments.", "evidenceThatScores": "Retention at twelve and twenty-four months, not placement volume. A permanent appointment that leaves inside a year has cost the trust more than the vacancy did, and buyers know it. Evidence retention rates, time-to-hire for hard-to-fill substantive posts, and campaign outcomes with named employers.", "pitfall": "Selling on candidate volume or database size. Permanent NHS hiring is a retention problem dressed as a supply problem, and the agencies that win here are the ones presenting retention evidence. A submission built on reach and speed with no retention data answers a question the buyer is not asking.", "faqs": [ { "q": "How is international recruitment treated in this lot?", "a": "It is legitimate and widely used, but it is governed by the UK code of practice for international recruitment of health and social care personnel, which restricts active recruitment from listed countries. Evaluators expect an explicit account of how you apply the code, how you check the country lists, and how sponsorship and pastoral support are handled. Treating it as a routine sourcing channel without addressing the ethical framework is a scoring risk." }, { "q": "Do permanent placement fees sit within framework rate rules?", "a": "Permanent recruitment is priced through the framework's own commercial mechanism rather than through temporary staffing rate caps. Price your submission from the published pricing schedule in the ITT and do not carry assumptions across from your temporary supply rates, because the two are structured differently." } ] }, { "slug": "msp-neutral-vendor", "lotNumber": 11, "name": "MSP Neutral Vendor", "shortName": "MSP Neutral Vendor", "supplierLimit": "Limited", "shortDescription": "Neutral vendor managed service provision, coordinating a supply chain of agencies on behalf of an NHS or public sector client.", "whoBids": "Established managed service providers, vendor management system operators, and workforce technology providers with proven neutral vendor delivery at NHS scale.", "staffGroups": "Not direct supply. The service is management of a multi-agency supply chain, technology provision, compliance assurance and management information across all staff groups.", "complianceFocus": "Neutrality is the whole proposition and evaluators test it hard. You must evidence that you do not preferentially route requisitions to a related supply business, how the technology enforces that, and how disputes between chain agencies are resolved. Data security and information governance obligations are also heavier here because you are handling workforce data across many organisations.", "evidenceThatScores": "Named NHS or large public sector MSP contracts with scale, duration and measurable outcomes: fill rate improvement, agency spend reduction, off-framework leakage eliminated, and compliance audit results across the managed chain. Technology capability matters, but delivered client outcomes decide it.", "pitfall": "Bidding this lot because you are large. It is limited in supplier numbers, which means a ranked competition rather than a compliance threshold, and an adequate submission loses. If you cannot name comparable NHS-scale MSP delivery, the effort is usually better spent winning direct supply lots properly.", "faqs": [ { "q": "What is the difference between neutral vendor and master vendor?", "a": "A neutral vendor manages the supply chain without supplying workers itself, so it has no incentive to favour its own fulfilment and is judged on impartial distribution and chain performance. A master vendor fills requisitions first from its own supply and passes the remainder to a second tier. Neutrality versus first-fill capability is the strategic difference, and the two lots reward genuinely different businesses." }, { "q": "How limited is this lot?", "a": "The managed service lots are limited in supplier numbers, unlike the direct supply lots which have been indicated as unlimited. That changes the bid or no-bid calculation fundamentally: on a limited lot you are ranked against competitors rather than assessed against a standard, so a merely compliant submission does not secure a place. Confirm the stated supplier numbers in the ITT before committing." } ] }, { "slug": "msp-master-vendor", "lotNumber": 12, "name": "MSP Master Vendor", "shortName": "MSP Master Vendor", "supplierLimit": "Limited", "shortDescription": "Master vendor managed service provision, filling requisitions from own supply first and managing a second tier for the remainder.", "whoBids": "Large staffing groups with both direct supply capability and managed service infrastructure, and established master vendor providers with NHS delivery history.", "staffGroups": "Not a single staff group. The service combines first-tier direct fulfilment across clinical and non-clinical groups with second-tier chain management.", "complianceFocus": "First-fill rate and second-tier fairness are examined together. Evaluators want evidence that your own fulfilment genuinely reduces cost and time rather than simply capturing margin, and that second-tier agencies are treated fairly enough to stay engaged, because a chain that disengages leaves the client exposed on the requisitions you cannot fill.", "evidenceThatScores": "First-fill percentage by staff group, second-tier agency retention and satisfaction, total cost outcomes against the client's prior arrangement, and compliance audit results across both tiers. Naming the client organisations and the scale of spend managed is essential.", "pitfall": "Presenting first-fill rate as an unambiguous good. A high first-fill figure paired with a disengaged second tier is a fragile model and experienced NHS evaluators know it. Present first-fill alongside second-tier health, and explain how you keep chain agencies willing to work with you when you are also their competitor.", "faqs": [ { "q": "Can we bid both MSP lots?", "a": "Check the ITT for any restriction before assuming it. Even where both are permitted, bidding both requires two genuinely distinct propositions, because neutrality and first-fill capability are contradictory selling points. A submission that argues for impartial supply chain management in one lot and preferential own-supply fulfilment in the other, without addressing the tension, invites the evaluator to doubt both." }, { "q": "Can we bid an MSP lot and direct supply lots?", "a": "This is common for large staffing groups and is the natural position for a master vendor, since first-tier fulfilment depends on direct supply capability. Confirm in the ITT whether holding both creates any conflict-of-interest declaration requirement, and be prepared to explain how requisition routing works when you sit on both sides." } ] } ] }