Why this matters now
Frameworks are often seen as the safer route in public procurement. They can reduce procurement timescales, provide access to pre-appointed suppliers and offer a structured way to award contracts without running a full standalone tender every time.
That convenience is precisely why councils need to be careful.
Under the Procurement Act 2023, frameworks and open frameworks continue to play an important role, but they are not compliance shortcuts. Authorities using a framework still need to understand the framework's scope, value, call-off rules, award mechanism, user eligibility, contract terms, fees, notice requirements and whether the route represents value for money for the specific requirement.
The Cabinet Office guidance on frameworks, updated on the 5th of May 2026, defines a framework as a contract between a contracting authority and one or more suppliers that provides for future award of contracts. It also introduces open frameworks as a scheme of successive frameworks on substantially the same terms.
For councils, the most important point is practical: using a framework transfers some procurement activity into a pre-established structure, but it does not remove the council's responsibility to make a lawful, proportionate and evidenced call-off decision.
Why councils use frameworks
Frameworks can be commercially useful.
They can provide speed where a requirement is urgent but not suitable for direct award.
They can reduce duplication by relying on a procurement already undertaken by a centralised procurement authority or another contracting authority.
They can give access to specialist suppliers in markets where councils procure intermittently.
They can support standardised terms, pricing mechanisms and procurement documents.
They can create opportunities for smaller authorities that lack capacity to run full procedures for every requirement.
They can support aggregation where there is a clear and lawful framework structure.
These benefits are real. However, they depend on the framework being suitable for the requirement and used correctly. A poor framework decision can create risk even if the framework itself was properly established.
A council should therefore treat framework use as a route-to-market decision requiring a record, not as an automatic answer.
The first question: is the council allowed to use it
Before using a framework, an authority must confirm that it is within the group of contracting authorities permitted to call off from it.
This sounds basic, but it is a common source of risk. Some frameworks are available to defined named bodies. Others refer to categories of public bodies. Some are restricted geographically. Others have sector, service or value limitations.
A council should not rely only on the framework marketing page. The authority should check the framework documents and establish user eligibility against the actual contract notice, tender documentation and terms.
Where the framework was established by another authority or centralised procurement body, the council should also understand who is responsible for compliance of the framework itself. The Cabinet Office guidance identifies the principal contracting authority's responsibility in relation to third-party frameworks and notes that principal contracting authorities should be aware of liability as central procurement authorities.
For a council using a third-party framework, that does not mean all risk disappears. The council remains responsible for its own call-off decision and should retain evidence showing why it believed the framework could lawfully be used.
The second question: is the requirement within scope
A framework may appear relevant by title but still be unsuitable for the specific requirement.
The scope should be checked carefully against the services, goods or works required, the lots available, the permitted users, the geography, the estimated value, the contract duration, the call-off terms and the procurement route used to establish the framework.
A generic professional services framework may not cover every consultancy need.
A construction framework may not cover a specialist works package if the lot description is too narrow.
A technology framework may not support the type of implementation, support or data service actually required.
A social care or community services arrangement may sit outside a framework designed for standardised services.
A framework should not be stretched to avoid running a more appropriate procurement. If the authority cannot explain how the requirement falls within the framework scope, the route is vulnerable.
The procurement file should record the scope analysis rather than merely stating that the framework was available.
The third question: has the framework value been considered
The Procurement Act 2023 framework guidance confirms that the estimated value of a framework must be included in the tender notice and the framework and must not be exceeded, subject to any permitted modification route.
When estimating the value of a framework, the authority establishing it must estimate the value of all call-off contracts to be awarded under it. Where a framework is divided into lots and estimated values are included for each lot, those values also matter.
This is important for councils using frameworks because framework capacity is not unlimited.
A call-off that appears lawful in isolation may contribute to a wider framework value issue. Authorities using a framework should understand whether the framework owner provides information on cumulative value, remaining capacity or lot limits. Where information is unavailable, the council should record what checks it made and what assurance was relied upon.
Value discipline also matters for the council's internal governance. A call-off under a framework still commits public expenditure. The authority should estimate the total contract value, including options, extensions, VAT where relevant for threshold purposes, and any known additional requirements.
The fourth question: what call-off process applies
A framework is only useful if the council follows the process it requires.
Some frameworks permit direct award in defined circumstances. Others require competitive selection or further competition. Some include ranked supplier mechanisms, rotation, capability assessment, pricing formulas or project-specific tendering requirements. Some frameworks permit both direct award and competition, but only where the relevant conditions are met.
The Cabinet Office guidance makes clear that when awarding a call-off contract, the contracting authority must comply with the selection process set out in the framework, including when it is permissible to award without following a competitive selection process.
This is a critical point for councils. A direct award under a framework is not lawful simply because the council prefers the supplier or has used them before. The framework must permit direct award for the circumstances, and the authority should record why those circumstances apply.
Where a mini-competition or competitive selection is required, the council should manage it properly. The criteria, weighting, documents, clarifications, evaluation records, moderation process and award decision should be capable of audit.
A framework call-off can still be challenged if the authority applies the wrong process, changes the evaluation basis, treats suppliers inconsistently or awards outside the framework rules.
Open frameworks require particular attention
Open frameworks are a newer feature under the Procurement Act 2023. They allow successive frameworks to be awarded on substantially the same terms, creating opportunities for suppliers to join at later stages rather than being locked out for the entire framework life.
This can support market access and competition, particularly in markets where supplier capability evolves quickly or where long closed frameworks may restrict new entrants.
For councils, open frameworks may offer benefits, but they also require careful understanding.
Which generation of the framework is being used?
Which suppliers are appointed to the relevant framework at the relevant time?
What are the applicable terms for the call-off?
Has the framework remained on substantially the same terms?
Does the call-off process differ from earlier or later framework stages?
Are there any timing or notice implications?
The phrase open framework should not create an assumption that the route is more flexible for the calling authority. It is a defined structure under the Act and should be treated with the same discipline as any other procurement route.
Framework fees should be understood before award
Some frameworks include fees payable by suppliers where they are awarded call-off contracts. The Cabinet Office guidance states that such fees can only be charged to suppliers awarded a call-off contract and must be set as a fixed percentage of the estimated value of the call-off contract awarded to the supplier.
Framework fees can affect supplier pricing. If a supplier must pay a management charge from the value of the call-off, it may price accordingly. Councils should therefore understand how the framework is funded and whether fees create any pricing or transparency implications for the requirement.
This is not necessarily a reason to avoid a framework. It is a reason to ensure the full commercial position is understood before the route is selected.
Framework use should still test value for money
The fact that suppliers have been appointed to a framework does not guarantee that every call-off provides best value.
A framework may have been competed in a different market condition.
Framework rates may not reflect current local requirements.
A direct award may be faster but less competitive than a mini-competition.
The framework terms may not fit the service well.
A supplier on the framework may have limited current capacity.
A local SME or VCSE market may be excluded if the authority relies too heavily on a national framework.
The council should therefore consider whether the framework route is the best available option for the particular requirement. This does not need to be a lengthy exercise for every low-risk purchase, but high-value or complex call-offs require a proper route-to-market note.
A good record should explain why the framework is suitable, why the selected lot applies, what call-off mechanism is being used, how value for money is assessed, what alternatives were considered and what risks remain.
Contract management after a framework call-off
Framework use can create a false sense that contract management will be easier.
In reality, the council must still manage the call-off contract. The supplier's framework appointment does not guarantee performance on the local requirement. The authority needs clear deliverables, KPIs, mobilisation arrangements, reporting expectations, payment processes, issue escalation, social value monitoring and exit planning.
Where the framework contract terms are standardised, the council should still ensure that the call-off order form, specification and schedules are completed accurately. Ambiguous call-off documents can cause payment disputes, performance problems and difficulty enforcing obligations.
Contract managers should know whether issues must be reported to the framework owner, whether framework-level remedies exist, and how supplier performance affects future use of the arrangement.
What councils should do now
Create a framework use checklist.
The checklist should cover user eligibility, lot scope, value, term, permitted call-off mechanism, direct award conditions, fees, contract terms, framework owner guidance, notice requirements and internal approvals.
Require a route-to-market note for material call-offs.
For high-value, sensitive or complex requirements, a short written route-to-market decision should explain why the framework is suitable compared with other options.
Train officers on framework and open framework differences.
Officers should understand that open frameworks, closed frameworks, dynamic markets and direct procurement routes have different rules and risk profiles.
Check direct award authority carefully.
A direct award under a framework should be supported by the framework terms and a clear record of why the conditions are met.
Review call-off documentation quality.
Specifications, pricing, KPIs, payment arrangements and contract management responsibilities should be complete before the contract is entered into.
Monitor cumulative framework reliance.
Councils should consider whether repeated use of the same framework is delivering competition, market access and value for money, or whether it is becoming a default route without sufficient review.
Use practical tools and support where needed.
Framework checks, route-to-market records and evaluation support can be developed through Prestige Commercial Consulting's services. Templates and practitioner resources may also be supported through the Prestige Commercial Consulting support hub.
The supplier perspective
For suppliers, frameworks can be valuable but demanding.
Winning a place on a framework is not the same as winning work. Suppliers need to understand call-off mechanisms, buyer expectations, mini-competition requirements, pricing structures, response deadlines and performance obligations.
Suppliers should also be realistic about framework fees and resource commitments. A framework place can create opportunity, but it can also require regular bid effort with no guaranteed revenue.
For SMEs and VCSEs, open frameworks may help reduce the problem of being locked out for long periods. However, suppliers still need to monitor opportunities, maintain evidence and respond to buyer requirements with discipline.
Bid-side learning through the PCC Learning Platform can support suppliers that need stronger public-sector tender confidence.
Closing takeaway
Frameworks remain an important part of public procurement, but they should not be treated as a universal safe route.
Councils need to understand whether they can use the framework, whether the requirement is in scope, whether the call-off mechanism has been followed, whether value remains available and whether the contract can be managed effectively after award.
The right framework can save time and improve access to suppliers. The wrong framework, or the right framework used badly, can create compliance, value for money and delivery risk.
For support with framework route selection, call-off documentation, mini-competition support or procurement assurance, contact Prestige Commercial Consulting Limited.