Methodology

1. On Crown Commercial Service and the Government Commercial Agency

This series refers throughout to the Crown Commercial Service, abbreviated as CCS. Readers should note that on 1 April 2026, the Crown Commercial Service was reorganised and renamed the Government Commercial Agency, abbreviated as GCA. The body, its statutory role, and its existing framework portfolio transferred to GCA on that date.

Where this series references frameworks let under CCS, for example RM6378 and its predecessors RM6089, RM6232 and RM6257, the CCS naming is retained because that is the procurement reference recognised in the contract notices, the supplier agreements, and the historical award data this analysis is built on. References to current operational activity, including framework administration, levy collection, and the management of supplier relationships, apply equally to GCA as the successor body.

The structural arguments in this series are independent of the rebrand. The aggregation model, the levy economy, the evaluation mechanics and the call-off behaviours described all transferred unchanged from CCS to GCA. The renaming did not alter the framework architecture or the commercial relationships it sustains.

Articles 1 to 4 use CCS throughout because they were written before the rebrand and their reference points are CCS-let frameworks. Articles 5 onwards use “CCS, now GCA” on first mention and either name thereafter according to context. Article 11, which addresses the Procurement Act 2023, treats the rebrand explicitly as part of the operational analysis.

2. On the £120 billion ceiling figure for RM6378

This series describes RM6378 as one of the largest framework agreements in UK public procurement, with an estimated aggregate ceiling running into nine figures over its lifetime. The figure of approximately £120 billion that appears in some industry commentary, and in the body text of Articles 1, 2 and 3 of this series, should be read with the following provenance in mind.

What the official sources state

The official agreement page for RM6378, published by the Government Commercial Agency at gca.gov.uk/agreements/RM6378, does not state a framework ceiling value. The page describes scope, lot structure under development, customer and supplier engagement history, and the timeline through to framework award in June 2026. It does not publish an aggregate spend ceiling on the agreement page itself.

The Find a Tender contract notice for RM6378, reference 070492-2025, is the authoritative source for the estimated value. The estimated total value field in Section II of the notice is the official figure. Readers seeking the precise number should consult that notice directly. Where this series uses “approximately £120 billion”, the figure is an industry-cited estimate based on the predecessor frameworks and is not a verified statement of the official ceiling.

What third-party sources state

Third-party commentary on RM6378 has circulated several figures. GovData, a commercial bid-support provider, has described the framework as having a value of £144 billion inclusive of VAT. Other industry commentary uses figures between £100 billion and £130 billion. These figures are not consistently presented on the same basis. The differences arise from whether the figure is stated inclusive or exclusive of VAT, whether it includes the full lifetime of the open framework or a sub-period, and whether it includes optional extensions.

None of these third-party figures should be treated as authoritative in place of the Find a Tender notice.

How Baachu Rain estimates the ceiling

Baachu Rain estimates the lifetime ceiling of RM6378 by aggregating the spend trajectory of the predecessor frameworks RM6232 (Facilities Management and Workplace Services) and RM6257 (Security – Physical, Technical and Support Services), adjusted for three factors:

• First, the inclusion of the wider public sector buyer base granted access under the new agreement, including local authorities and NHS bodies that had alternative routes under the predecessor frameworks.
• Second, the estimated growth in framework call-off volume driven by the Procurement Act 2023 transition and the consolidation of the security and FM frameworks into a single agreement.
• Third, inflation across the framework term using the GDP deflator series.

Our estimate sits within the range circulated in industry commentary and is consistent with the scale described by suppliers participating in the bid process. The estimate is provided as a working figure for analytical purposes and not as a substitute for the official Find a Tender notice.

Why the structural argument does not depend on the precise figure

The analytical claims in Articles 2, 3 and 4, concerning the levy economy, the supplier concentration, and the call-off mechanics, all hold across the £100 billion to £144 billion range. Whether the lifetime ceiling is £100 billion, £120 billion or £144 billion, the framework is materially larger than any other FM procurement vehicle in the UK public sector. The series does not rely on the precise ceiling for its structural arguments to stand.

3. On the count of more than one thousand active frameworks

Articles 1 and 3 describe the UK public sector as operating with a large number of active framework agreements across central government, NHS, local authority, education, housing and blue light buying organisations. The figure of “more than one thousand active frameworks” is used as an estimate. The earlier draft figure of “more than 1,600 live frameworks” has been retired in favour of the more conservative phrasing pending verified counting.

What is and is not centrally published

There is no single central register of UK framework agreements. Each framework body publishes its own catalogue. The Government Commercial Agency, formerly Crown Commercial Service, publishes its own portfolio of approximately 80 to 100 active commercial agreements at any one time across all categories, of which a subset relates to facilities management and workplace services.

NHS Shared Business Services, ESPO, YPO, Pagabo, LHC, NEPO, Procurement for Housing, Fusion21, Bloom, the Scottish Procurement frameworks and the Welsh National Procurement Service each publish separately. There is no aggregator that produces a consolidated count of active framework agreements across all framework bodies operating in the UK.

How the figure is estimated

Baachu has estimated the population of active frameworks by counting the published catalogues of the major framework bodies, adding the published frameworks of the housing association consortia and the regional purchasing organisations, and adjusting for known sub-lot structures within larger frameworks where each lot operates as a distinct procurement vehicle. The resulting figure exceeds one thousand active framework agreements available to UK public sector buyers.

The earlier figure of 1,600 has been retired because Baachu cannot point to a primary source that establishes it. The conservative phrasing of “estimated to exceed one thousand active frameworks” is used throughout Articles 1 and 3 of this series. Readers seeking a verified count should refer to the Cabinet Office Procurement Policy Notes, the National Audit Office reports on framework usage, and the published catalogues of individual framework bodies.

If a verified higher count becomes available from a Cabinet Office, NAO or Institute for Government source, this methodology page will be updated and the article body will be revised accordingly.

4. On the 15 to 30 percent rate-card to call-off discount range

Article 6 of this series describes a discount range of 15 to 30 percent between published framework rate cards and the prices actually paid at call-off. This is the load-bearing number in Article 6, and the basis for it is recorded here in full.

What the claim is and is not

The claim is that, across the contracts where Baachu Rain holds both a framework rate-card reference and a call-off price for substantially similar scope, the call-off price is observed to be between 15 and 30 percent below the published rate-card ceiling. The claim is not that every call-off discounts to this range. The claim is not that the discount is uniformly distributed across the range. The claim is not that the discount applies equally across lots, regions, or service types.

The discount range is presented as an observed range based on Baachu Rain contract intelligence, varying by lot, region, supplier, and call-off mechanism. Where Article 6 uses the figure as a statbox, the framing language attached to the figure makes clear that it is observed and not statistical.

How the range is derived

Baachu Rain holds contract records covering more than 11,000 UK FM contracts. The subset of those records where both a framework rate-card reference and a contracted call-off price are visible for substantially similar scope is the data basis for this claim. That subset is smaller than the full Baachu Rain dataset and varies in completeness across framework bodies.

The discount is calculated as the difference between the published framework rate-card ceiling for the relevant service category and the contracted call-off price for the same service category, expressed as a percentage of the rate-card ceiling. Where the call-off includes services not directly priced on the rate card, those line items are excluded from the calculation. Where the call-off pricing structure differs materially from the rate-card structure, for example a fixed-price call-off against a schedule-of-rates framework, the calculation is reported separately and not aggregated into the headline range.

The headline range of 15 to 30 percent is the inter-quartile range of observed discounts across the matched dataset. Discounts below 15 percent and above 30 percent occur in the data but represent the tails of the distribution. The headline range describes the central portion of the distribution and is the most defensible summary statistic for analytical purposes.

What the range cannot tell you

The range does not predict the discount any individual buyer will achieve at call-off. The range does not adjust for differences in scope quality, bid behaviour, supplier capacity, or local market conditions. The range does not constitute a benchmark against which buyer or supplier performance should be judged in isolation.

Readers using the range for commercial purposes, for example bid pricing strategy, framework benchmarking, or supplier evaluation, should engage Baachu Rain directly for contract-specific analysis. The published range is for analytical commentary and is not a substitute for transaction-level intelligence.

5. On the direct award versus mini-competition split

Article 4 of this series discusses the split between direct awards and further competition (also called mini-competitions) under RM6378 and its predecessor frameworks. Where Article 4 uses a percentage figure for this split, the figure is derived from the call-off route field in Find a Tender award notices for the predecessor frameworks RM6089 and RM6232.

Where the call-off route field is not present in the award notice, or is inconsistently completed, that record is excluded from the analysis. The resulting figure is therefore based on the subset of award notices that record the call-off route cleanly. Where Article 4 uses the figure, it is presented as an indication of pattern rather than as a population statistic.

Readers requiring transaction-level analysis of the direct award versus further competition split should engage Baachu Rain directly. The published figure is illustrative of the pattern and is not a substitute for buyer-specific or supplier-specific analysis.

6. On named suppliers and named individuals

Article 2 of this series names the top ten suppliers by award value across the predecessor frameworks RM6089, RM6232 and RM6257, drawn from the published Find a Tender award notices and Baachu Rain contract intelligence. These names are: Mitie, ISS, Serco, OCS, Sodexo, CBRE, EMCOR, G4S, Vinci and Equans. The list is presented in descending order of total award value across the period covered.

This series does not name individual civil servants in framework bodies. The PFI Reckoning series named investors because investors are corporate entities with public filings and disclosed shareholdings. Civil servants in CCS, GCA, NHS Shared Business Services, ESPO, YPO and the other framework bodies are individuals whose career exposure is materially different from corporate disclosure. The structural analysis in this series does not require named individuals and the editorial decision is to focus on the institutional structures rather than the individuals operating within them.

Where a named figure has spoken publicly on framework procurement in their official capacity, for example in a Public Accounts Committee hearing, a Cabinet Office statement, or a published Government Commercial Function document, the relevant statement may be cited with the official source. This is editorial citation of public record, not naming for analytical effect.

7. On Baachu Rain as the underlying contract intelligence platform

Several claims in this series are derived from Baachu Rain contract intelligence. Baachu Rain is the UK’s only dedicated FM market intelligence platform, tracking more than 11,000 UK FM contracts with an aggregate value of approximately £49.2 billion. Baachu Rain holds contract metadata, award histories, supplier holdings, framework references, expiry profiles and call-off intelligence.

Where this series uses Baachu Rain data, the methodology of derivation is recorded against the relevant claim in this page. Where the analysis would benefit from forensic FOI evidence not currently held in Baachu Rain, the article body flags the absence and the claim is framed as analytical rather than evidential. Article 7, which addresses the social value gap, is the most affected by this constraint and is framed accordingly.

Baachu Rain is available on subscription. Buyers, suppliers, advisers and investors requiring transaction-level intelligence on UK FM frameworks can request access by contacting hello@baachu.com.

8. Updates to this page

This methodology page will be updated where source documents become available that materially change the basis for any claim in this series. The most likely sources of update are the publication of the RM6378 framework award notice in June 2026 (which will confirm the official ceiling figure), the publication of any National Audit Office or Public Accounts Committee report on framework usage during the series period, and the completion of any Baachu Rain dataset analysis that tightens the rate-card to call-off discount range.

Where this page is updated, the change log below will record the date, the section affected, and the substantive change made. Article body text will be revised accordingly and a footnote added in the affected article.

Change Log