The Procurement Act places greater emphasis on transparency, value for money, and accountable decision-making, alongside clearer guidance on supplier capability. For public sector buyers, this means supplier evaluation needs to be clearer, fairer and easier to evidence. For suppliers, this means that bids that go beyond price and show how they will deliver measurable outcomes, manage risk and support wider public value are more likely to succeed.
The Procurement Act 2023 came into force in February 2025, changing the guidance that shapes how public bodies buy goods, services and works. New procurement governance advice describes the Act as a way to improve and streamline procurement, with particular benefits for small businesses, start-ups and social enterprises wishing to engage with the public sector. The Act supports transparency, flexibility and a greater focus on outcomes than previous iterations. Buyers are encouraged to think about social alongside monetary value, as well as overall delivery and accountability.
Of course, public procurement has always carried a high level of responsibility. Public money needs to be spent well. Decisions need to be fair. Suppliers need to be assessed consistently. The Procurement Act strengthens this by reminding buyers of the importance of transparency across a project’s commercial lifecycle and of overall value as a core procurement objective.
For suppliers, this means demonstrating more than compliance with the basic requirements of a tender. They need to show how they will deliver and how their offer supports the buyer’s wider objectives. Today, simply submitting the lowest bid is unlikely to be sufficient to win a piece of work.
Today’s public sector contracting authorities, in line with Procurement Act goals, are typically looking for credible partners who can deliver the required outcomes, provide clear proof of impact, and operate in ways that support good procurement governance. This does not mean suppliers need to overcomplicate their responses. In many cases, the strongest bids are the clearest. However, they do need to fully explain the value being offered, connect that value to the buyer’s requirements, and provide documented support for any assertions they make. Specific buyer requirements include the following features.
Value-for-money procurement is not the same as lowest-cost procurement. Under the Procurement Act, buyers are still encouraged to consider what will deliver the best overall result for the public sector body, its service users, and the taxpayer. Decisions ought to include price, but should also consider quality, risk, whole-life cost, delivery model, supplier capability, and measurable outcomes. This focus means a supplier does not need to offer the lowest-cost option to provide the best overall value. This is especially true where published award criteria take account of factors such as quality, risk, whole-life cost and measurable outcomes.
This means bids aiming for Procurement Act compliance should try to avoid vague language such as “excellent value” or “cost-effective service.” Buyers will want to understand what the price includes, why the delivery approach is realistic and how outcomes will be measured. Suppliers operating under the Act are likely to see more success from providing transparent evidence of value and making it easier for buyers to justify their decisions.
The Procurement Act asks contracting authorities to consider how procurement can maximise public benefit. Depending on the contract and the buyer’s priorities, measures may include community impact, local supply chain engagement, environmental considerations, skills development, inclusion, and support for SMEs and VCSEs. Where these factors form part of the procurement, clear evidence becomes particularly important. Public sector contracting authorities are unlikely to be persuaded by broad promises that are not tied to the contract. Suppliers who demonstrate what they will do, when they will do it and how the impact will be measured are more likely to win contracts. For suppliers, this means thinking carefully about the connection between contracts and their potential wider benefits. The Act encourages buyers to look for realistic offers tied to firm, tangible results.
Transparency is one of the most important themes running through the new procurement governance regime. Government guidance calls for transparency by default throughout full commercial lifecycles, with a greater focus on the information published during procurement and contracting. This affects both buyers and suppliers. Buyers are encouraged to ensure they have a clear, transparent, defensible procurement audit trail showing how they developed requirements, assessed suppliers, and made decisions. Suppliers are encouraged to provide information in a way that supports this process, including clear pricing, realistic delivery assumptions, and robust explanations of risk management and quality control. Where claims are made, buyers need to be able to question them, and suppliers need to provide credible answers.
Understanding buyers’ public sector supplier requirements is particularly important in professional services procurement, where outputs can be complex, and success may depend on nuanced expertise, knowledge, and judgment. A well-evidenced supplier response to a procurement opportunity provides buyers with material they can use to make a defensible decision.
Today, public sector buyers are responding to the Act’s emphasis on transparency, value, and accountable decision-making, which places greater pressure on buyers to test relevant experience and delivery capability. As a result, buyers are increasingly being tasked with looking beyond previous client lists and credentials, and suppliers, especially in professional services, should therefore be clear about who will deliver the work, what similar projects they have completed, and how they will manage quality, risk, and communication directly related to the opportunity at hand. Buyers are often looking for suppliers who understand the specific practical realities of delivery, not just those who can write an ambitious proposal and make general claims about their suitability for the task.
Public sector environments change quickly, so buyers often look for suppliers who can respond to shifting requirements, timelines and priorities. This is particularly true when professional service procurement is linked to transformation, service improvement, operational pressures, or time-sensitive funding.
To be successful, suppliers need to demonstrate an adaptable delivery approach that remains clear, governed, and measurable. Suppliers are increasingly being asked to demonstrate they can mobilise resources and maintain quality in an evolving environment. Buyers will want to see that responsiveness is supported by process, not left to chance. This aligns closely with one of the biggest procurement challenges facing the public sector: how to move at pace without increasing risk.
The Procurement Act places greater emphasis on early market visibility and creates a clearer framework for preliminary market engagement. This gives suppliers more opportunities to understand forthcoming requirements, engage with contracting authorities before a formal procurement begins, and prepare stronger, more relevant responses.
Where contracting authorities choose to engage with the market, they often use one of two mechanisms. A UK2 Preliminary Market Engagement Notice can signal future activity. Larger contracting authorities may also publish UK1 Pipeline Notices where the relevant spending thresholds are met, giving suppliers earlier visibility of planned procurement activity.
For suppliers, these notices are useful sources of intelligence rather than formal requirements to participate. Monitoring them can help businesses identify opportunities earlier, understand likely buyer priorities and make more informed decisions about where to focus their resources. This supports the Act’s wider aim of creating a more transparent and accessible procurement environment.
Today, suppliers may struggle to meet buyers’ expectations if they approach engagement with public sector buyers as a reactive tick-box exercise. By simply answering questions with generic responses, submitting documents without supporting information, and focusing heavily on price, they can miss out.
Many suppliers also miss out by focusing more on inputs than outcomes, describing their services in a way that does not clearly connect to the buyer’s priorities. This can make it challenging to prove the monetary and social value of their offering, which, as we’ve established, is increasingly important under the governance expectations created by the Procurement Act.
Often, working under the Procurement Act, suppliers make errors in responding to opportunities. In the rush to sell their services, suppliers can overlook the Act’s increased focus on transparency, justifiable decision-making, and auditable documentation. A gap between what suppliers claim and what buyers need to justify can weaken the whole procurement process. It always pays to understand the buyer's requirements and respond fully in line with their expectations, including all the information they request.
For public sector buyers, strong supplier expectations create an opportunity to improve procurement outcomes, but only when those expectations are clearly defined from the start. Buyers typically benefit from setting out what they are purchasing, why it matters, what outcomes are required, and how success will be measured. Being clear about procurement requirements is especially important when buying professional services. This is because quality, capability, risk, methodology, and delivery confidence can be harder to compare than price alone. If buyers are not clear about what matters most, suppliers may respond with generic proposals that are difficult to score or defend.
Being clear about procurement requirements is especially important when buying professional services. This is because quality, capability, risk, methodology, and delivery confidence can be harder to compare than price alone. If buyers are not clear about what matters most, suppliers may respond with generic proposals that are difficult to score or defend.
Setting clear expectations also supports better procurement governance, without slowing procurement down or adding to purchasing administration. It should create the structure that helps teams move faster, evaluate fairly, and make decisions that are compliant, measurable, and defensible.
Bloom helps buyers turn supplier expectations into a clear, compliant and manageable procurement process. Through NEPRO Three and our managed procurement support, buyers can define requirements, run fair competition, assess suppliers consistently and maintain a stronger audit trail from requirement through to delivery. This gives suppliers a clearer and fairer way to respond, while helping buyers move at pace without compromising transparency or control.
Our services, tools and framework support fair and transparent public procurement in alignment with the Act, from requirement development to delivery oversight. This is particularly valuable in professional services procurement, where buyers often need access to specialist, innovative and transformative capabilities that can be difficult to reach through traditional routes alone.
If your team needs to procure professional services under the Procurement Act, Bloom can help you move with clarity, confidence and control. Speak to Bloom about building a compliant, transparent and defensible route to market.