V Hansen
17 August 2010
Our Ref: Information Request CQC IGT 041
Dear V Hansen,
Thank you for your email dated 27 July 2010 to the Commission requesting, under the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act 2000, information regarding agency spend for administrative support staff over the past two years. Your request has been passed to me for reply.
More specifically, you requested:
(1)I would like to request information in relation to Agency spend for Administrative Support staff over the past two years and which recruitment agencies this spend was with.
Please find attached (CQC IGT 041_appendix 1.pdf) information detailing the agency spend for administrative support staff over the past two years. Please be advised that I have interpreted your request to encompass all admin support staff, but have not included details of analyst roles, as the Commission does not construe these roles as admin support.
The Recruitment Agencies that this spend was with are:
o Brook Street UK Ltd
o Northern Recruitment Group (NRG) Ltd
o Carlisle Managed Services (CMS)
(2)I would like information regarding any "Preferred Supplier Lists" or "Supplier Level Agreements" theCommission has in place.
(a) Including when this is up for renewal and
(b) who would organise it?
Since April 2009 our preferred supplier of Temporary Admin Staff has been our Shared Service Supplier, Carlisle Managed Solutions (CMS). Beyond this we have used Brook Street and NRG, which areboth authorised suppliers.
Please find attached (CQC IGT 041_appendix 2.pdf) the Conditions of Contract for the Recruitment of Temporary and Contract Staff. Please be advised that the Commission considers part of this information exempt under section 43 of the FOI Act. Section 43(2) of the FOI Act provides that information is exempt if its disclosure under the Act would, or would be likely, to prejudice the commercial interest of any person. The Commission has applied this exemption in order to withhold part of the requested information on the basis that to disclose it would harm the commercial interests of CMS; as this information details the pricing schedule, service level agreement and continuous plan that CMS have in place.
As Section 43 is a qualified exemption, the Commission is obliged to consider the public interest test, set out in s 2(2)(b) of the FOI Act. There are benefits of disclosure to the wider public, in relation to raising the profile of this issue, in order to encourage public debate. However, it is the Commission’s opinion that there are strong arguments that weigh in favour of maintaining the exemption.
The Commission considers that release of this information would harm the commercial interests of CMS, as it details the techniques, methods, systems etc that they propose to work to, which are commercially sensitive and that CMS may not wish to put in the public domain. Therefore, it is the Commission’s opinion that in relation to s 43 (2), the public interest is weighed in favour of maintaining the exemption.
The initial start date of the contract with CMS was 5th November 2007 for a 3 year period, with an option to extend for a further year. If the Commission still requires the service at that time,the formal procurement process will be managed by the Procurement Team on behalf of HR.
I do hope that you have found this information helpful. If you are dissatisfied with the handling of your request, you have the right to ask for an internal review. These should be addressed to:
Information Governance Team
Care Quality Commission
Finsbury Tower
103-105 Bunhill Row
London
EC1Y 8TG
A further right of appeal exists to the Information Commissioners Office once the internal reviews process has been exhausted.
Yours sincerely,
Rebecca-Jane Turner
Information GovernanceOfficer
Secretariat- Information Governance Team
Care Quality Commission
Finsbury Tower
103-105 Bunhill Row
London
EC1Y 8TG
Email:
Direct Tel: 020 7448 9417