Procurement Reform (Scotland) Act 2014 thresholds: consultation analysis

3. Methodology and approach

3.1 Structure of the consultation

The consultation had two parts. In part one, respondents were given options for increasing the Act’s goods, services and works thresholds, while part two had options for decreasing the community benefits threshold. However, it’s important to note that there is a relationship between the goods, services and works thresholds and the community benefit threshold, a description of which was included in the consultation to inform respondents. In summary, the threshold used to determine whether a public body is required to consider including community benefits cannot be lower than the goods, services and works thresholds which are used to determine whether a contract is regulated by the Act. This could mean that not all combinations of the consultation’s options are compatible with each other. However, as outlined in the consultation document, we will take this into account when considering consultation responses and next steps.

3.2 Profile of respondents

A total of 223 responses were received; 219 were submitted though the online consultation platform, Citizen Space, while four were received by email. A total of 166 respondents gave consent for their response to be published. A total of 107 individuals and 116 organisations provided a response to this consultation.

3.3 Consultation questions

The consultation consisted of five questions:

1. Which is your preferred option in relation to the Act’s goods, services and works thresholds?

a. Option 1: Threshold values remain unchanged, i.e. £50,000 for goods and services and £2 million for works.

b. Option 2: Inflation-linked threshold values, i.e. £70,000 for goods and services and £2,800,000 for works with these thresholds being revised every two years to reflect inflation.

c. Option 3: A bigger increase, i.e. £100,000 for goods and services and £4 million for works. Please note that under this option these thresholds will not be amended every two years to reflect inflation.

d. None of the above

2. Optional. What are the reason(s) for your answer to question one?

3. Which is your preferred option in relation amending the community benefit threshold?

a. Option A: Threshold values remain unchanged at £4 million.

b. Option B: Threshold value is reduced to £3 million.

c. Option C: Threshold value is reduced to £2 million.

d. Option D: Threshold value is reduced to £1 million.

e. None of the above

4. Optional. What are the reason(s) for your answer to question 3?

5. Optional. Is there anything else you want to tell us about the goods, services, works or community benefit thresholds of the 2014 Act?

3.4 Analysis approach

The responses were downloaded into an Excel spreadsheet for analysis. Sensitive information, or information which might identify an individual was redacted for data privacy purposes. Some respondents did not provide an answer to all questions. This has been noted, where relevant, in the report.

The quantitative analysis consisted of compiling the total number of respondents who had selected each option on the two closed questions. These responses were compared with the responses to other questions.

The qualitative analysis used a coding framework to identify key themes in the responses. These themes were compared with the respondents’ answers to the two closed questions. As with the closed questions, these responses were compared with the responses to other questions.

When considering the analysis from this consultation it is important to note the following:

• Respondents to any public consultation or engagement event are self-selecting, and the responses may not be representative of the population as a whole.
• Data which has fewer than five responses may be suppressed for data privacy purposes. Furthermore, not all respondents answered every question.
• This report presents the themes identified in responses from most to least commonly mentioned. All themes, including views shared by small numbers of respondents, are covered.
• All responses have an equal weighting. We recognise this means a response from an individual has the same weight as a response from an organisation which may represent many members, but this approach ensures all views are presented.

To assist the reader in interpreting the findings, a framework is used to convey the most to least commonly identified themes in responses to each question:

• The most/second most common/prevalent theme; most frequently identified
• Many respondents, between 20 and 50 respondents
• Several respondents, between 10 and 19 respondents, a recurring theme
• Some respondents, between 5 and 9 respondents, another theme
• A few/a small number, fewer than 5 respondents, a less common theme
• Two/one respondent; a singular comment or a view identified in only one or two responses