Request for information - Ref No: FOI231219
Request
We received your request on 19 January 2024.
We have handled your request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 2000.
A copy of your request is set out in the extract below:
“Project Name: Supply of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Services
Reference number: IT-556-69-OP2517.2023
Link: Contracts Finder (www.gov.uk)
- Copy of successful tender – we want this information under Freedom of Information Act 2000
- Scoring table of all bidders, split by scores awarded for each question of bid
- Price/Cost Proposed by each Bidder – we want this information for all the bidders who submitted the response.
- Name of the Winning Bidder.
- Name & Rank of all bidders who submitted responses.
- Approximate date that the tender will be reissued towards the end of the current contract period.”
Our response
I confirm that Ordnance Survey does hold some of the information you have requested. Please note, we have consulted with the bidders in relation to your request. Where the information is not held or exempt from disclosure this is stated. Taking each request in turn, I confirm the following:
1. Copy of successful tender – we want this information under Freedom of Information Act 2000
I confirm that we hold a copy of the successful tender. Please find attached the following documents:
Part 1 Selection Questionnaire
This information has been released to you in redacted form: Part 1 Selection Questionnaire (.pdf). We consider that the following exemptions apply.
Section 40 (2) (Personal Information)
We consider certain information to be exempt from disclosure under section 40(2) (personal information) of the FOIA, as the information constitutes personal data which is not already in the public domain.
We have redacted the phone number, email address and signature at Section 1, Para 2.6 and the personal details of the person(s) with significant control, whilst the name of the person(s) is already in the public domain the redacted information is not.   
Section 40(2) provides that personal data is exempt information if one of the conditions set out in section 40(3) is satisfied. In our view, disclosure of this information would breach the data protection principles contained in the General Data Protection Regulation and Data Protection Act 2018.   
Section 40(2) is an absolute exemption and therefore not subject to the public interest test.
Section 43(2) (Commercial Interests)
Information is exempt if its disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interest of any person, including the public authority. The ICO generally recognises information about the procurement of goods and services as being commercially sensitive balanced against the public interest test.
We have redacted certain information relating to the relevant experience and contract examples in Section 3, Para 6.1 and the internal policies of the successful supplier. The names of customers and contracts of the successful supplier is core to the successful bidder’s commercial business and would be of value to a competitor. It would give their competitors access to the work that they are doing within their client portfolio and knowledge of the services they provide and their approaches in delivering those services to them. It may potentially damage their working relationships with those clients with an expectation that such information is not made publicly available due to the obligations placed on other organisation under the FOIA. The internal policies referenced at 1.11.1 and 7.4 of the successful supplier’s questionnaire are commercially sensitive to the supplier and how its business is operated.
In addition, it may harm OS’s ability to ensure fair procurement processes and third parties may lose trust in OS’s integrity causing a detrimental impact on the reputation of OS.
This is a qualified exemption, and we are required to consider the public interest.
Public Interest Test
OS recognises the need for transparency; however, this must be balanced against the public interest in allowing the organisation and third parties to protect their commercial information, and not be placed at a disadvantage in the competitive marketplace in which they operate. Bidding organisations must not be disadvantaged when taking part in a procurement process, with the release of materials impacting their own and their customer’s commercial position.
Section 43(2) is a prejudice-based exemption, and there is a public interest inherent in avoiding the harm specified. In this case, OS considers that the prejudice would be likely to occur. Having considered the above, we are satisfied that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure.
Part 2 Due Diligence
The form is supplied to you in redacted form: Part 2 Due Diligence (.pdf), together with supporting documents: Appendix 4.2.1 Business Development Manager Job Advert (.pdf) and Appendix 4.2.1 Experience UAV Pilot Job Advert (.pdf).
Section 43(2) (Commercial Interests)
We have redacted the supporting documents and internal policies provided by the successful supplier for this tender pursuant to Section 43(2) (Commercial Interests). We have redacted the supplier’s internal business policies that it uses to support the internal workings of their business as this could prejudice their own commercial interest. S43(2): Supporting documents and internal policies are drafted for the suppliers own internal business and use to support the internal workings of their business, could prejudice their own commercial interests. This is a qualified exemption, and we are required to consider the public interest.
Public Interest Test
Ordnance Survey recognises the need for transparency; however, this has to be balanced against the public interest in allowing the organisation and third parties to protect their commercial information. In this case, we are satisfied that there is greater public interest in withholding the information under this exemption.
Section 43(2) is a prejudice-based exemption, and there is a public interest inherent in avoiding the harm specified. In this case, OS considers that the prejudice would be likely to occur. Having considered the above, we are satisfied that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure.
Part 3 Technical Questionnaire
This information has been released to you in redacted form: Part 3 Technical Questionnaire (.pdf).
Section 43(2) (Commercial Interests)
This section has been redacted under Section 43(2). This is due to the information contained in this section relating to customers, client portfolio, methodology, approach to delivering the service, technology that the supplier will use that is core to their business. Competitors would seek to gain an advantage in the competitive market by having sight of these and this may prejudice future tender processes.
This is a qualified exemption, and we are required to consider the public interest.
Public Interest Test
Ordnance Survey recognises the need for transparency; however, this has to be balanced against the public interest in allowing the organisation and third parties to protect their commercial information. In this case, we are satisfied that there is greater public interest in withholding the information under this exemption.
Section 43(2) is a prejudice-based exemption, and there is a public interest inherent in avoiding the harm specified. In this case, OS considers that the prejudice would be likely to occur. Having considered the above, we are satisfied that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure.
Part 4 Pricing
The total price bid by the successful supplier was £1,092,200. This information has been released to you in redacted form: Part 4 Pricing (.pdf).
Section 43(2) (Commercial Interests)
The breakdown of the total price and the day rates has been redacted since this information would expose the supplier’s pricing strategy as it would expose their pricing offering and their commercial position which allows them to participate competitively in commercial tendering activities.
This is a qualified exemption, and we are required to consider the public interest.
Public Interest Test
Ordnance Survey recognises the need for transparency; however, this has to be balanced against the public interest in allowing the organisation and third parties to protect their commercial information. In this case, we are satisfied that there is greater public interest in withholding the information under this exemption.
Section 43(2) is a prejudice-based exemption, and there is a public interest inherent in avoiding the harm specified. In this case, OS considers that the prejudice would be likely to occur. Having considered the above, we are satisfied that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure.
Cyber security questionnaire
The cyber security questionnaire has been withheld under Section 31(1)(a).
Section 31(1) (a) (Law Enforcement)
Information is exempt if its disclosure would or would be likely to prejudice the prevention and detection of crime. In this case, we have withheld this information since it is not known to the wider public and relates to their internal processes and business procedures and technical security information. Disclosure of this information could expose any potential vulnerabilities to the systems and processes they have in place to protect their information.
This is a qualified exemption, and we are required to consider the public interest.
Public Interest Test
OS recognises the need for transparency; however, disclosure of this information would mean that suppliers security systems would be more vulnerable to a malicious attack, therefore facilitating the possibility of crime.
FOI Form
This information has been released to you in redacted form: FOI Form (.pdf).
We consider the following exemption to apply:
Section 40 (2) (Personal Information)
I consider Section 40(2) Personal Information applies in relation to the signature of the person who signed this form on behalf the supplier.
Whilst their name may already be in the public domain, personal data of a third party can be withheld if disclosure of this information would breach any of the data protection principles contained in the UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and Data Protection Act (DPA) 2018.
In this instance the disclosure of the signature would contravene the first data protection principle, which provides that personal data must be processed fairly and lawfully, versus the reasonableness and expectations of employees to have their personal information disclosed.
Non-canvassing form
This information has been released to you in redacted form: Non-canvassing form (.pdf), we consider the following exemption to apply:
Section 40 (2) (Personal Information)
I consider Section 40(2) (Personal Information) applies in relation to the signature of the person who signed this form on behalf the supplier.
Whilst their name may already be in the public domain, personal data of a third party can be withheld if disclosure of this information would breach any of the data protection principles contained in the UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and Data Protection Act (DPA) 2018.
In this instance the disclosure of the signature would contravene the first data protection principle, which provides that personal data must be processed fairly and lawfully, versus the reasonableness and expectations of employees to have their personal information disclosed.
GDPR Form
The information has been released to you in redacted form: GDPR Form (.xlsx), we consider the following exemptions to apply:
Section 40 (2) (Personal Information)
We consider the names of the Information Security or Data Privacy Officer be exempt from disclosure under section 40(2) (personal information) of the FOIA, as the information constitutes personal data.
Section 40(2) provides that personal data is exempt information if one of the conditions set out in section 40(3) is satisfied. In our view, disclosure of this information would breach the data protection principles contained in the General Data Protection Regulation and Data Protection Act 2018.    In reaching this decision, we have particularly considered:   
- the reasonable expectations of the individuals; given their positions, Ordnance Survey considered that none of the individuals would have a reasonable expectation that their personal data would be disclosed; 
- the consequences of disclosure; and
- any legitimate public interest in disclosure.
Section 40(2) is an absolute exemption and therefore not subject to the public interest test.
GDPR Appendices
The supplier’s Cyber essentials certificate (.pdf) is supplied. However, the supplier’s IT organisation chart, IT Responsibilities document and IT Policy are not being supplied pursuant to Section 43(2).
Section 43(2) (Commercial Interests)
The supplier’s IT organisation chart, IT Responsibilities document and IT Policy are not being supplied since this information would expose the supplier’s internal IT policy and strategy as it would pose a risk to their IT operations.
This is a qualified exemption, and we are required to consider the public interest.
Public Interest Test
Ordnance Survey recognises the need for transparency; however, this has to be balanced against the public interest in allowing the organisation and third parties to protect their commercial information. In this case, we are satisfied that there is greater public interest in withholding the information under this exemption.
Section 43(2) is a prejudice-based exemption, and there is a public interest inherent in avoiding the harm specified. In this case, OS considers that the prejudice would be likely to occur. Having considered the above, we are satisfied that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure.
Test data and case studies
Section 43(2) (Commercial Interests)
We have withheld information relating to test data and case studies pursuant to Section 43(2) (Commercial Interests). The names of customers and case studies of the successful supplier is core to the successful bidder’s commercial business and would be of value to a competitor. It would give their competitors access to the work that they are doing within their client portfolio and knowledge of the services they provide and their approaches in delivering those services to them. In addition, it may harm OS’s ability to ensure fair procurement processes and third parties may lose trust in OS’s integrity causing a detrimental impact on the reputation of OS.
This is a qualified exemption, and we are required to consider the public interest.
Public Interest Test
OS recognises the need for transparency; however, this must be balanced against the public interest in allowing the organisation and third parties to protect their commercial information, and not be placed at a disadvantage in the competitive marketplace in which they operate. Bidding organisations must not be disadvantaged when taking part in a procurement process, with the release of materials impacting their own and their customer’s commercial position.
Section 43(2) is a prejudice-based exemption, and there is a public interest inherent in avoiding the harm specified. In this case, OS considers that the prejudice would be likely to occur. Having considered the above, we are satisfied that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure.
2. Scoring table of all bidders, split by scores awarded for each question of bid
We have withheld the scoring table pursuant to S43(2).
Section 43(2) (Commercial Interests)
The breakdown of the scores has been withheld. Disclosing the detailed scoring table of all bidders, including the scores awarded for each question of the bid, compromises the integrity of the competitive tender process. Such disclosure could lead to a strategic manipulation of future bids, as competitors might tailor their responses based on the scoring insights gained, rather than on their genuine capabilities or competitive advantages. This undermines the principle of creating a level playing field, where each bidder is assessed solely based on their merit and the quality of their proposal. Furthermore, the revelation of scoring criteria and outcomes could dissuade companies from participating in future tenders, fearing that sensitive strategic information could become public, which would limit the diversity and quality of bids received.
This is a qualified exemption, and we are required to consider the public interest.
Public Interest Test
Ordnance Survey recognises the need for transparency; however, this has to be balanced against the public interest in allowing the organisation and third parties to protect their commercial information. In this case, we are satisfied that there is greater public interest in withholding the information under this exemption.
Section 43(2) is a prejudice-based exemption, and there is a public interest inherent in avoiding the harm specified. In this case, OS considers that the prejudice would be likely to occur. Having considered the above, we are satisfied that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure. as release of this information is prejudicial to the commercial interests of Ordnance Survey and the bidders.
3. Price/Cost Proposed by each Bidder – we want this information for all the bidders who submitted the response.
This information has been withheld pursuant to section 43(2).
Section 43(2) (Commercial Interests)
Disclosure of pricing data would expose the pricing strategy of those bidders and prove advantageous to competitors when bidding for other opportunities. Bidding organisations must not be disadvantaged in the procurement process through the release of advantageous commercial materials. In relation to Ordnance Surveys commercial interests, disclosure of pricing information could harm our ability to negotiate in future procurement exercises with other organisations.
In particular, the disclosure of financial bids submitted by all participants is a sensitive matter that goes beyond public interest and into the realm of protecting commercial interests. Publishing this information could have severe repercussions on the competitive dynamics within the industry. It would not only infringe upon the confidentiality expected in such submissions but also potentially distort market pricing, as competitors may adjust their pricing strategies not based on market conditions or cost structures but on the disclosed bid amounts. This could lead to a race to the bottom, where the focus shifts from quality and innovation to merely undercutting competitors on price, ultimately harming the consumer by reducing the diversity and quality of services available.
Companies may lose confidence in Ordnance Survey, compromising Ordnance Surveys’ integrity and causing a detrimental impact on the reputation of Ordnance Survey
In relation to the successful bidder, further information is published on Supply of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Services - Find a Tender (find-tender.service.gov.uk)
4. Name of the Winning Bidder.
Skeye ASI Ltd
5. Name & Rank of all bidders who submitted responses.
For the same reasons as set out in our response to Question 2, we are withholding the rank of the bidders. Releasing rankings of all bidders could unfairly prejudice the market perception of companies based on a single procurement exercise. Such disclosure might not reflect the overall capabilities or the quality of services provided by the companies but could nonetheless influence potential clients' perceptions. It risks creating an unjust competitive advantage or disadvantage based solely on one aspect of a company's operations. Moreover, the public ranking could discourage companies from bidding on future projects if they fear that not securing a top position could harm their reputation and business prospects.
For the reasons above, the names of the bidders are set out in alphabetical order below:
- Angell Surveys Ltd
- APEM Ltd
- Bluesky International
- Drone Photogrammetry
- ICR Integrity
- ISTAR Ltd ta Team UAV
- L&G Rail t/a Skyview Mapping
- Malcolm Hughes
- Skeye ASI
- Texo Group
6. Approximate date that the tender will be reissued towards the end of the current contract period.
September 2027.
Internal review
Your enquiry has been processed according to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 2000. If you are unhappy with our response, you may request an internal review with our Internal Review Officer by contacting them, within two months of receipt of our final response to your Freedom of Information (FOI) request, as follows:
Internal Review Officer
Customer Service Centre
Ordnance Survey
Adanac Drive
Southampton
SO16 0AS
Please include the reference number above. You may request an internal review where you believe Ordnance Survey has:
- Failed to respond to your request within the time limits (normally 20 working days)
- Failed to tell you whether or not we hold the information
- Failed to provide the information you have requested
- Failed to explain the reasons for refusing a request
- Failed to correctly apply an exemption or exception
The Internal Review Officer will not have been involved in the original decision. They will conduct an independent internal review and will inform you of the outcome of the review normally within 20 working days, but exceptionally within 40 working days, in line with the Information Commissioner’s guidance.
The Internal Review Officer will either: uphold the original decision, provide an additional explanation of the exemption/s applied or release further information, if it is considered appropriate to do so.
Appeal to Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO)
If you are still dissatisfied after our internal review, you can complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). You should make complaints to the ICO within six weeks of receiving the outcome of an internal review. The easiest way to lodge a complaint is through the ICO website.