If you’ve been exploring public sector commissioning, you’ll have come across both framework agreements and Dynamic Purchasing Systems (DPS). Both are legitimate and widely used routes into council and NHS contracting for care providers but they work differently, suit different types of organisations, and carry different expectations.
The Core Difference
A framework agreement is a closed, pre-approved supplier list. A council runs a competitive process, approves a small group of providers, and works exclusively with that group for the duration of the framework typically three to five years. Once the window closes, no new providers can join until the framework is retendered.
A Dynamic Purchasing System is an open, rolling system. Providers can apply to join at any point while the DPS is live, the approved list is larger, and the barrier to entry is generally lower. If your application is unsuccessful the first time, you can refine it and reapply.
Both routes lead to call-off contracts and mini-competitions the mechanisms through which actual work is awarded. The difference is in how you get onto the list and what that list looks like once you’re on it.
Application Difficulty and What to Expect
This is where the two routes differ most significantly in practice.
Framework applications in social care tend to be more rigorous. Word counts are higher, quality questions are more detailed, and the level of scrutiny is greater because the council is approving a small group of providers for a long-term commitment and wants to be confident in every organisation on that list. Financial checks, supporting documentation, and detailed evidence of practice are all common.
DPS applications are typically more straightforward. The questions are still meaningful and need to be answered well, but the overall demand is lower. For providers earlier in their tendering journey, a DPS is often a more manageable starting point and the rolling application window means there is no pressure to be ready by a fixed deadline.
Provider List Size and What It Means for You
One of the most practical differences between the two is the size of the approved list — and what that means for the volume of work available to each provider.
Frameworks operate with a small, deliberately limited pool of approved suppliers. This means less competition per call-off and, for providers who are selected, a more predictable and potentially more consistent pipeline of work.
A DPS operates with a larger approved list. Getting on is more accessible, but you are competing with more providers for each package that comes through. This doesn’t make a DPS less valuable — it simply means that strong, well-prepared call-off responses matter even more.
Pricing
On a framework, pricing is typically guided or set by the local authority. Councils use frameworks to establish consistent rates across their approved suppliers, which means less flexibility for individual providers but a level playing field across the list.
On a DPS, there is often more room for providers to propose their own rates, particularly at call-off stage. This can work in your favour if your pricing is competitive, but it also means the cost element of your response carries more weight.
Flexibility and Timing
A DPS is inherently more flexible. It stays open, providers can join at any point, and participation in individual call-offs is typically optional. If a referral isn’t the right fit for your organisation, you can decline without it affecting your place on the system.
A framework is less flexible by design. The application window is fixed — miss it and you may be waiting several years for the next opportunity. Once approved, councils expect consistent performance and responsiveness. Providers who repeatedly decline packages or underperform risk being deprioritised when work is allocated.
A Simple Comparison
| DPS | Framework | |
| Application window | Rolling — open anytime | Fixed — miss it and wait |
| Application difficulty | Moderate | More rigorous |
| Word count | Lower | Higher |
| Approved provider list | Larger | Smaller |
| Competition per call-off | Higher | Lower |
| Pricing | Provider led | Council guided |
| Best suited to | Newer or smaller providers | Established providers |
| Flexibility | High | Lower |
Which Is Right for Your Organisation?
For providers who are newer to public sector tendering, still building their documentation and evidence base, or testing a new service area, a DPS is usually the more appropriate starting point. The rolling application window removes the pressure of a fixed deadline, and the lower word count makes it a more manageable first step into commissioning.
For providers with an established service, strong CQC standing, a solid track record, and the capacity to commit to a council area for several years, a framework is worth the additional effort. The more rigorous application process is a barrier — but for those who clear it, the smaller provider list and longer contract duration can make it a more rewarding route in the longer term.
In practice, many care providers pursue both — using a DPS to build experience and generate a pipeline of work while preparing for framework applications as their organisation grows.
A Note on Readiness
Whichever route you pursue, the quality of your application matters. A DPS may be more accessible, but a weak submission will still be unsuccessful. A framework may be more demanding, but a well-prepared provider with strong evidence has every reason to be confident.
BidElevate works with care providers at both stages supporting DPS applications for providers building their presence in public sector markets, and managing framework submissions for established organisations ready to take the next step. Get in touch and we’ll help you work out which route is right for your organisation right now, and manage the end-to-end process for you.