Evidence
The public procurement record: actual school energy routes and adviser involvement
Original procurement notices show how schools and education buyers have used advisers, a legacy DPS, a dynamic market and an open broker competition. They establish processes and reported awards, not independently measured savings.
What a published procurement notice establishes
We examined the original published notices below on 2 November 2026. An official notice is stronger evidence of what the buyer publicly recorded than a supplier marketing case. It is still not the complete procurement file, an independent legal audit or a measurement of subsequent performance. No school was contacted and no school interview or private confirmation is implied.
These examples deliberately retain their different dates and routes. A legacy dynamic purchasing system is not a Procurement Act dynamic market or a framework. A procurement of broker services is not necessarily the same contract as energy supply. None of these records alone demonstrates an academy’s compliance with the October 2026 equivalent-value exception.
Tudor Grange: a named adviser managing a legacy DPS competition
Tudor Grange Academies Trust’s F03 award notice 001158-2025 explicitly identifies Equity Energies as managing the tender. It records three energy lots, awarded to Shell Energy UK, through a legacy DPS process. This is direct public evidence that adviser involvement and formal public procurement can coexist.
| Field | Recorded evidence | Boundary |
|---|---|---|
| Publication and award | Published 14 January 2025; conclusion dates 21 October 2024. | This predates the October 2026 academy energy requirement. |
| Route and scope | PCR DPS; procedure field restricted; electronic auction identified; HH electricity, NHH electricity and gas. | Do not relabel it as an ordinary framework or a Procurement Act open procedure. |
| Reported award | £3,070,112 excluding VAT in total; six tenders for each electricity lot, seven for gas; price award criterion. | Contract value is not a saving, commission amount or annual bill. |
| Public ambiguity | Lot fields say no options; additional information reserves up to 36 months of extension. | The notice does not settle the exact operative extension terms. |
| Result status | Published award record with named adviser and supplier. | No complete fees, competing schedules or realised performance evidence. |
What a school can learn from that record
Ask the proposed TPI to explain the exact commercial tool and its role, then obtain the original reference. Preserve the distinction between legal route, competition design and commercial result. A claim that a broker obtained several prices becomes more useful when the reader can see which suppliers could participate, what was assessed and who actually received the award.
Do not turn the Tudor Grange value into a benchmark for your school or infer that the arrangement was outside DfE-approved options. The public source does not establish that classification. It also does not reveal whether the adviser’s fee was separately paid, embedded in supply or calculated in another way.
Redhill: a 2026 school energy competition through a dynamic market
Redhill Academy Trust’s UK4 notice 007247-2026 records an above-threshold electricity procurement using a competitive flexible procedure by reference to its dynamic market. It is useful evidence of a school trust using an alternative statutory commercial tool. The retrieved notice is an edited version and contains a procurement contact at a Cost Advice email address; that alone does not establish the full adviser appointment.
| Field | Recorded evidence | Boundary |
|---|---|---|
| Publication and scope | Published 27 January 2026; HH and NHH electricity for several trust schools. | This is a tender-stage record, not evidence of contract delivery. |
| Route | Competitive flexible procedure through the Redhill electricity and gas dynamic market, referring to establishment notice 006585-2026. | The process is not an open procedure or ordinary framework call-off. |
| Estimated commitment | £668,400 excluding VAT; £701,820 including VAT; estimated supply 1 April 2026–31 March 2028. | An estimate is not an eventual award price or an outcome. |
| Tender timetable | Deadline 10 February 2026; reduced period based on dynamic-market use. | Do not copy that reduced timetable into an unrelated open competition. |
| Result status | Actual published tender and stated route. | No award, full evaluation, adviser fee or measured saving established here. |
Questions to ask after reading the Redhill notice
A leader can ask an adviser whether its proposed process is an existing framework, a legacy DPS, a dynamic market competition or a standalone procedure. The answer should point to the relevant rules and a documented supplier-access mechanism. The example also shows why a notice’s timing cannot be lifted out of context: a period justified by one commercial tool is not a universal energy-market exception.
We have not established whether Redhill’s eventual supply was classed as an approved DfE energy option, whether it was awarded as proposed or how the board compared value. Those are research questions, not gaps to be filled by inference.
An open competition for broker services in further education
The Education Training Collective is a college group, not a school academy trust. Its linked UK4, UK6 and UK7 records are included for the visible procurement sequence, not as a school-specific legal precedent. They concern utilities broker services covering energy and water, so their recorded value must not be treated as a school electricity tariff or a pure commission figure.
| Record | What it establishes | Boundary |
|---|---|---|
| UK4 077363-2025 | Published 26 November 2025; deadline 22 December; open procedure; quality 70%, price 30%. | The full tender and evaluation documents were not reviewed. |
| UK6 006771-2026 | Published 26 January 2026; seven assessed tenders; assessment summaries sent that day; eight-working-day standstill ending 4 February. | An intention-to-award notice precedes binding entry. |
| UK7 011237-2026 | Contract signed 9 February 2026 with SMS Energy Services Limited; £3,813,500 including VAT; three years plus possible two-year extension. | Public contract record, not evidence that a net saving was realised. |
| Classification caution | Notices label a Utilities special regime; supplier SME field differs between UK6 and UK7. | Do not assume the classification or data fields establish a universally correct model for school purchases. |
Use the record to request the evidence that is still missing
For a school-confirmed investigation we would need the authorised brief, actual supplier coverage, contemporaneous price schedules, service and commission disclosure, complete contract, governance evaluation and implementation results. For a current academy alternative, add its approved-deal comparison and equivalent-value reasoning. For a claimed saving, obtain the baseline, period, adjustment method and confirmed net result.
The present records strengthen the programme’s account of real routes and adviser use. They do not close the independent-school case-study gap or prove that outside-framework purchasing generally outperforms approved routes. Until comparable school-level evidence is available, the responsible conclusion is narrower: several lawful procurement structures exist, advisers are visibly involved, and each proposed arrangement still requires its own suitability, value and compliance assessment.