You are viewing 1 of your 1 free articles
We need greater clarity on what “good” looks like when it comes to how frameworks are designed, mobilised and used, writes Matt Jarratt, operations lead at Procure Plus
Across the housing sector, there is increasing attention on how procurement frameworks can best support landlords, local authorities and, ultimately, residents.
Done well, frameworks speed up delivery while improving transparency and better protecting budgets. In contrast, poorly designed or inefficiently run frameworks can reduce transparency and create costly delays, undermining the very outcomes they are meant to support.
Frameworks exist to make procurement faster and more effective, helping landlords and local authorities deliver better value and outcomes. To achieve this, we need greater clarity on what “good” looks like in practice and a shared understanding of what landlords and local authorities should reasonably expect from the organisations that run frameworks.
As a not-for-profit framework provider working closely with housing associations and local authorities, we recognise many of the challenges being raised across the sector. The issue is not the existence of frameworks themselves. It’s how they are designed, mobilised and used.
A strong framework starts with speed to mobilisation. If it takes months to move from contract award to activity on site, then the framework has already failed in its core purpose.
When funding timelines are tight and delivery windows are short, pace matters. Framework providers must be ready to act, with clear call-off routes, the right documentation in place and proactive support that helps projects move quickly from approval to delivery.
“Effective frameworks consistently balance cost with quality, supported by robust benchmarking and a willingness to challenge assumptions”
Transparency must also be real and visible. If frameworks are intended to improve oversight, landlords should expect clear benchmarking and up-to-date reporting. Genuine visibility over costs and performance includes having honest conversations about capacity constraints and supply chain pressures. Without this, accountability weakens and trust breaks down.
Value for money is another fundamental principle. Effective frameworks consistently balance cost with quality, supported by robust benchmarking and a willingness to challenge assumptions. Providers that actively test value and performance are better placed to protect budgets while ensuring there is sufficient quality and capacity on the ground to deliver at scale.
Landlords should select frameworks based on their ability to demonstrate they can deliver what matters most to the organisation and not base strategic decisions simply on headline cost. While price is a factor, focusing only on a low access fee can be misleading, as a framework that is cheap to join but results in higher delivery costs still represents poor value for money.
Local authorities and housing providers are operating under intense pressure, balancing rising demand against limited resources and facing increased regulatory and public scrutiny. In this context, framework providers should take a hands-on, collaborative approach, offering practical support at every stage, from early engagement through to mobilisation and delivery. This enables landlords to focus their stretched internal capacity where it is needed most.
Social value should be deeply embedded as a core part of delivery. When frameworks genuinely align delivery with local priorities, whether through local apprenticeships and employment or support for community organisations, confidence is strengthened among residents and communities.
This requires active co-ordination and consistent monitoring. Increased accountability from providers will make sure social value commitments don’t fade into the background once contracts are awarded.
“Framework providers must stay close to delivery by tracking performance and supporting continuous improvement”
When frameworks are designed and run well, they do what they are intended to do. They provide oversight without unnecessary bureaucracy, supporting faster delivery and creating fair and competitive markets that reward quality. The challenge is ensuring frameworks do more than simply sit between landlords and contractors.
Framework providers must stay close to delivery by tracking performance and supporting continuous improvement, resulting in a supply chain that remains aligned with the realities on the ground.
Beyond the targets and programmes, there are people who care about whether their homes are safe and properly maintained. Stronger outcomes come from focusing less on the mere existence of frameworks and more on making sure they work consistently and at pace for the people they are meant to serve.
Done properly, frameworks should use their aggregation of volume and relationships within the marketplace to secure better outcomes and value than individual landlords could achieve alone, helping them deliver more improvements with greater confidence and clarity. That is how frameworks earn their place in the system, by consistently adding value where it matters most.
Matt Jarratt, operations lead, Procure Plus
Sign up to Inside Housing’s Daily News bulletin, featuring the latest social housing news delivered to your inbox.
Already have an account? Click here to manage your newsletters.
Related stories