Procurement in a Nutshell: Independent Patient Choice and Procurement Panel: Decision CR0046-26
1st May, 2026
The Provider Selection Regime (PSR), set out in the Healthcare Services (Provider Selection Regime) Regulation 2023, came into force on the 1st January 2024.
The PSR removes the procurement of health care services from the scope of the Procurement Act 2023, which came into force from 24th February 2025.
The PSR applies to NHS England, Integrated Care Boards, NHS Trusts, NHS Foundation Trusts, local authorities and combined authorities when they are procuring relevant healthcare services.
To access the full decision, please click here.
Background
The Independent Procurement Panel (the Panel) provides advice under the PSR to relevant authorities in circumstances where a provider is aggrieved by an award decision, and the provider believes the PSR Regulations have not been complied with.
The role of the Panel is to provide independent expert advice (as referred to in Regulation 23 of the PSR Regulations) and publish this advice for each review it undertakes.
Relevant authorities should note that, while the advice of the Panel is not legally binding, it is highly persuasive.
The facts
On 20 January 2026, North Hampshire Urgent Care Limited (NHUC) asked the Panel to advise on the provider selection process conducted by Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (HHFT) for its Urgent Treatment Centre Clinical Service Provision (UTC service) at Basingstoke and North Hampshire Hospital (Basingstoke Hospital) and at Royal Hampshire County Hospital (Royal Hampshire Hospital) in Winchester.
HHFT is seeking to award a contract for a UCT service. The UTC service at Basingstoke Hospital was established in November 2024, while the UCT service at Royal Hampshire Hospital will be a new service.
NHUC is the incumbent provider of the UCT service at Basingstoke Hospital and its contract comes to an end 31 March 2026. HHFT published a notice on 26 September 2025 setting out its intention to follow the Most Suitable Provider (MSP) process and to award a contract on that basis.
Eleven providers expressed interest in HHFT’s notice and, on 4 November 2025, a “Provider Assessment Pack” was shared with these providers. The PAP identified two lots. Lot 1 referred to the UTC at Basingstoke Hospital and Lot 2 was for the yet to be established UCT at Royal Hampshire Hospital.
On 29 December 2025, HHFT wrote to Atumed saying it was the preferred provider for Lots 1 and 2. That same day, HHFT published an intention to award notice suggesting they only intended to award a contract for Lot 1.
The decision
The Panel found that a number of significant breaches of the PSR Regulations had occurred. As a result, the potential effect on the outcome of the provider selection process means there can be no confidence that HHFT would have selected the same provider had it conducted the process in accordance with the PSR Regulations. Accordingly, the breaches were highly material, and HHFT should abandon the current provider selection process.
The breaches were as follows:
- Breach of PSR Regulation 6(6)(c), which requires commissioners to take into account all relevant provider information.
- Breach arising from the failure to keep adequate records of decisions to use the MSP process.
- In carrying out the MSP process, breaches of PSR Regulations 10(1)(b) and 10(6) occurred, which require commissioners to assess potential providers without holding a competition or undertaking a comparative assessment.
- Breach of PSR Regulation 4(1)(b), which requires commissioners to act fairly and transparently.
- By failing to determine basic selection criteria and assess providers against those criteria, HHFT breached PSR Regulations 10(4), 10(6), 19(1) and 19(3).
- Breach of PSR Regulation 24(e) due to the failure to keep proper records.
- Breach of PSR Regulation 4(1)(b) resulting from the failure to share the evaluation methodology with providers.
- Breach of PSR Regulation 12(4)(b) by failing to provide a complete response to NHUC’s request for information during the representative review process.
- Further breach of PSR Regulation 12(4)(b) by responding to NHUC’s information requests at the same time as communicating its further decision on provider selection.
What does this mean?
This case makes it clear that while discretion in the tendering process is permitted, the PSR Regulations must be adhered to in their entirety to ensure a fair process. In addition, when using MSP it must be supported by a clear justification, a defined selection criteria, structured assessment of providers and robust documentation.
For further information please contact Melanie Pears or Tim Care in our Public Sector Team.
Procurement and public law update
Date: 14 May 2026
Time: 9.am – 11.30 am
Location: Ward Hadaway, 10 Chapel Walks, Manchester, M2 1HL, UK
Our in-person Procurement and Public Law Update covers the new procurement rules and their increased transparency requirements.
This seminar will look at what those changes have meant in practice since both the new Act and the new NHS regime came into force. We will give practical tips on how to manage procurements now and how to deal with the risks of challenge when the timescales are so tight.
Register here to join this free session with procurement law experts Tim Care and Matthew Brady.
Please note that this briefing is designed to be informative, not advisory and represents our understanding of English law and practice as at the date indicated. We would always recommend that you should seek specific guidance on any particular legal issue.
This page may contain links that direct you to third party websites. We have no control over and are not responsible for the content, use by you or availability of those third party websites, for any products or services you buy through those sites or for the treatment of any personal information you provide to the third party.
