Case Study · Essex County Council · Framework
Essex Live at Home Domiciliary Framework 2025 : Five Tier 2 Lots, Documented Tier 1 Path
Five Tier 2 lots secured after a procedural Tier 1 miss, with a documented Tier 1 path for the next refresh.
From a procedural Tier 1 miss → awarded 5 Tier 2 lots, Tier 1 path documented.
The Award Letter
Verified Source
Source: Essex County Council outcome letter via Essex Supplier Portal, reference 1038 / 2025/S 000-019527.
Section 01Case Overview
This case study analyses the route Livingstone Health Care Limited took onto Essex County Council's Live at Home domiciliary framework, securing Tier 2 places across five priority districts in a single submission window after a procedural Tier 1 miss. Q9 Video evidence had not been submitted at first close. The clarification window passed without response, forcing a Tier 2 outcome on CQC scoring. The provider's underlying CQC profile was strong enough for Tier 1 had the video evidence been submitted in window.
Section 04Starting Gaps & Limitations
The Q9 Video evidence miss was procedural, not substantive — the provider's CQC record was strong. But the clarification non-response had closed the Tier 1 route for this window. Below the tier ceiling, the digital systems contracts had not been packaged for evaluator review, and the branch coordinate data that forms part of the geographic coverage requirement had not been formatted to the specification. These were the remaining gaps to address for the Tier 2 submission.
Section 08Our Role
We took the engagement to maximise the Tier 2 score and build the Tier 1 evidence pack for the next refresh. The digital systems evidence was packaged from the provider's operational contracts. Branch coordinates were formatted to specification. The Q9 video evidence was documented and prepared for the next window. The quality method statements were written against the scoring rubric.
Working from a similar starting point?
Free consultation. We will read the specification, identify the deterministic and discretionary points, and tell you whether the win is realistic.
Section 12What Changed the Trajectory
Packaging the digital systems contracts and the branch coordinate data against the scoring specification moved the Tier 2 score above threshold across all five districts. The Tier 1 path — Q9 video evidence, digital systems contracts and CQC documentation — was locked for the next refresh before the current window closed, so the provider entered the next cycle with a complete Tier 1 submission already built.
Section 13Outcome Achieved
Five Tier 2 framework places were confirmed: Basildon, Brentwood, Chelmsford, Epping Forest and Harlow. Tier 1 status was not awarded due to the outstanding Q9 Video evidence. The Tier 1 improvement plan — with Q9 evidence, digital systems contract proof and refreshed branch coordinates — sits inside the organisation for the next refresh window.
Measurable Uplift
| Lot | District | CQC Score | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lot 1 | Basildon | 24.5/35 | Tier 2 Awarded |
| Lot 3 | Brentwood | 24.5/35 | Tier 2 Awarded |
| Lot 5 | Chelmsford | 24.5/35 | Tier 2 Awarded |
| Lot 7 | Epping Forest | 24.5/35 | Tier 2 Awarded |
| Lot 8 | Harlow | 24.5/35 | Tier 2 Awarded |
The provider had no live framework presence in Basildon, Brentwood, Chelmsford, Epping Forest or Harlow. Q9 Video evidence had not been submitted in window, the clarification non-response had forced a Tier 2 outcome, and the digital systems contracts had not been packaged.
The provider holds a five-district framework footprint under Tier 2 with direct call-off access, and a documented Tier 1 improvement plan with Q9 evidence, digital systems contract proof and refreshed branch coordinates ready for the next refresh window.