Schools rely on printing and scanning far more than many people outside education expect. Exercise books still meet worksheets, safeguarding paperwork still exists, parent communications still need hard copies in many settings, and staff still need reliable access to scanned documents for evidence and record keeping. When printing works well, it fades into the background. When it fails, it becomes an everyday disruption that steals time from teaching and learning. The purpose of this article is to help UK schools and trusts plan and run a managed print services tender in a controlled, compliant, and realistic way, with a clear focus on value for money, safety, and dependable service.
I believe it is worth saying upfront that a tender is not just a formality. It is an opportunity to decide what you actually need, what you can sensibly stop doing, and what risks you must reduce. A managed print services arrangement can either quietly solve problems for years, or it can lock a school into the wrong kit, the wrong contract terms, and the wrong service model. What I would say is that the difference usually comes down to preparation and clarity rather than clever procurement language.
This piece is written in a checklist style, but in a flowing format rather than a list of tick boxes. That is deliberate. In my experience, schools do not fail tenders because they forgot a minor document. They struggle because the scope is vague, the volumes are guessed, the service expectations are assumed, or key stakeholders are not aligned. If you treat the sections below as the practical checkpoints that shape your tender, you will be in a strong position.
What Managed Print Services Means In A School Context
Managed print services, often shortened to MPS, is a service model where a supplier takes responsibility for some or all of your printing and scanning environment. That typically includes supplying or managing devices such as multifunction printers and copiers, maintaining them, providing consumables like toner, monitoring usage, and delivering support when something goes wrong. Many arrangements also include software for secure print release, centralised reporting, and scan workflows that send documents to email, folders, cloud services, or management systems.
In my view, the key point is that MPS is not only about devices. It is about outcomes. The outcomes a school usually cares about are predictable costs, reduced downtime, fewer emergencies, safe handling of information, and consistent access across departments and sites. A school may also want to reduce waste, improve accessibility for staff, and support a broader digital strategy where scanning is as reliable as printing.
It is also important to understand that MPS can be structured in different ways. Some contracts are simple, covering device hire and maintenance with a cost per printed page. Others are more comprehensive and include software, governance reporting, and planned optimisation over the life of the agreement. Your tender needs to define which model fits your situation.
Who This Tender Checklist Is For
This checklist is designed for maintained schools, academies, multi academy trusts, and school business leaders who need to procure printing services responsibly. It is also relevant to governors, trustees, and finance leaders who need confidence that the chosen route is compliant and defensible. If you are a school with one site and a small number of devices, you can still use the same approach, just at a smaller scale. If you are a trust with many schools, you will need to place even more emphasis on standardisation, contract governance, and data security controls.
I have to be honest, some schools assume a managed print tender is only worthwhile if you are large. I do not agree. Smaller schools often feel the pain of downtime more acutely because there is less slack in staffing and admin capacity. A well scoped tender can deliver stability without overcomplicating things.
Pros And Cons You Should Acknowledge Before You Start
A managed print services contract can bring real benefits, but it also introduces dependencies. I suggest you make both sides explicit early, because it helps set realistic expectations for stakeholders and helps you write a tender that tests what matters.
On the benefits side, MPS can reduce unpredictable spending by putting maintenance, consumables, and support into a defined commercial model. It can reduce staff time spent chasing faults and ordering supplies. It can also improve information security if secure release and audit trails are implemented properly. Schools can gain better visibility of printing habits, which supports cost control and sustainability goals.
On the potential downsides, MPS can lock you into a service model that does not suit your real usage if your volumes are wrong or the contract is not flexible. If device placement is poorly designed, you can unintentionally increase walking time for staff and create queues at peak moments. If service levels are weak, you can end up with downtime that feels worse than before because you no longer have quick informal workarounds. There is also a data and safeguarding dimension. Printers store information and create opportunities for documents to be left on trays or misdirected, so security and processes matter.
In my view, the tender should be written to maximise the benefits and reduce the downsides. That means being clear about volumes, performance expectations, security requirements, and governance.
Understanding The UK Procurement Context For Schools
Procurement rules for schools depend on the type of school and the value of the contract. Maintained schools typically operate within local authority arrangements and financial regulations. Academy trusts are generally treated as contracting authorities for public procurement purposes in many scenarios and are expected to follow public procurement rules where applicable.
The regulatory landscape has been changing. The Procurement Act 2023 came into force for new procurements from late February 2025, with ongoing updates including threshold revisions from January 2026. In practical terms, this affects which procedures and notice requirements apply when your contract value crosses certain thresholds. Thresholds have been updated for the period starting January 2026 and schools should make sure they are using the current figures at the time they begin the procurement.
I have to be honest, many school tenders go off track because people fear procurement rules and try to avoid clarity. The safer approach is the opposite. Know your obligations, document your rationale, and use a structured process that can be evidenced. If you are uncertain about whether a route to market is compliant, it is sensible to take advice early rather than patching it later.
Another practical point is publication. In England, Find a Tender is the central service for publishing relevant procurement notices, and its role has expanded under the newer regime. The exact notice requirements depend on whether you are above or below threshold and on which rules apply to your procurement. Some sector specific nuances exist, and you should not assume that what a neighbouring trust does is automatically the correct approach for your school.
Checkpoint One, Define The Purpose Of The Tender In Plain Language
Before you draft specifications or pricing schedules, define what success looks like. In my opinion, a simple purpose statement prevents scope creep and keeps evaluation grounded.
For example, your purpose might be to provide reliable printing and scanning across all teaching and admin areas with predictable costs and strong data security. Or it might be to standardise devices across a trust and reduce support tickets while improving sustainability. If you write this purpose clearly, you can test every tender requirement against it. If a requirement does not support the purpose, it may be unnecessary complexity.
It also helps you decide what you are not procuring. Many schools accidentally bundle unrelated services into an MPS tender, such as large scale document management, specialist reprographics, or wider IT support. Sometimes bundling is sensible. Sometimes it reduces competition and makes evaluation harder. A clear purpose helps you draw the boundary.
Checkpoint Two, Build A Baseline Of Your Current Print Environment
A good tender starts with an honest picture of what you have now. That includes your device fleet, where devices are located, what they are used for, and what problems you experience. It also includes information security practices, whether consistent or not.
In my view, the most important baseline items are device age, fault frequency, and real usage volumes. Schools often estimate volumes from invoices or guesses, but the better approach is to collect meter reads and usage reports over a meaningful period. If you already have a mix of suppliers, you may need to collate data from different sources. If you have no reporting, you may need a short audit period to gather usage data before finalising the tender.
Baseline work also needs to include the human reality. Where do queues form, when do devices run out of toner, which departments rely on colour, and what happens when a device is down. If you are a trust, you will likely see variation between sites. Some variation is unavoidable, but the tender can still aim for standardisation where it helps.
Another baseline consideration is connectivity and infrastructure. Print reliability depends on network stability, correct drivers, and sensible device placement relative to staff movement. If you have buildings with poor Wi Fi coverage or unreliable network points, your MPS tender should recognise this and specify how the supplier must support installation and testing. I suggest you avoid assuming the supplier will fix upstream network problems unless that is explicitly included.
Checkpoint Three, Decide Your Desired Service Model
Schools generally choose between two broad service models.
One model is device supply and maintenance with a cost per page. You typically pay a fixed amount for devices and a variable amount for printing volume, with maintenance and toner included. This can be straightforward and predictable if your usage pattern is stable.
Another model is a more managed approach where the supplier provides ongoing optimisation, reporting, and proactive support. This may include automated supply replenishment, remote monitoring, and periodic reviews to adjust device placement or settings.
In my view, the right model depends on how stretched your internal team is and how complex your estate is. A small primary school may benefit from simplicity, while a large secondary or a trust may benefit from formal governance and reporting.
Within that, you also need to decide whether you want the supplier to take over existing devices, replace them, or deliver a mix. Sometimes there is a good case to keep newer devices and introduce a managed service layer. Sometimes it is more cost effective and less risky to refresh the fleet and standardise.
I believe it is also worth deciding your appetite for a single supplier across all sites versus a more flexible approach. A single supplier can simplify support and pricing. It can also increase dependence, so you need strong service levels and clear exit provisions.
Checkpoint Four, Define Scope Clearly Without Overpromising
Scope is the heart of the tender. It needs to be detailed enough that suppliers can price and plan accurately, but not so rigid that it blocks innovation or future adjustments.
Your scope should state which sites are included, which buildings and departments are in scope, and whether staff or student printing is included. It should define whether scanning workflows are required, whether secure print is required, and whether devices must support accessibility needs such as screen readers, adjustable contrast, or simple user interfaces. If you have specialist needs, such as high volume exam printing or graphics work, you should state them clearly.
In my opinion, it is also crucial to specify what is out of scope. For example, is paper supply included, or will the school continue to procure paper separately. Are major network upgrades included, or is the supplier expected to work within existing constraints. Is desktop support included, or is the supplier only responsible for device level faults.
This is also where you should state expectations around installation. A supplier should typically be responsible for delivery, positioning, configuration, driver deployment where agreed, testing, and staff orientation. Schools often forget the transition effort, then discover the rollout disrupts teaching. I suggest you require an implementation plan that minimises disruption, including work outside teaching hours where appropriate and a clear plan for removing old devices safely.
Checkpoint Five, Include Information Security And Safeguarding Requirements Early
Printers are often overlooked in security discussions, but they are part of your information environment. They handle personal data, safeguarding documentation, staff records, and sensitive correspondence. UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018 set expectations for lawful processing and security of personal data, and your MPS tender should show that you are thinking about these obligations. In my view, secure printing is often one of the strongest justifications for an MPS approach because it reduces the risk of papers being left unattended.
You should specify whether you require secure release, such as card based or PIN based release, and whether guest printing is permitted. You should define expectations for audit logs, retention, and who can access logs. You should also define what happens to data stored on devices, including hard drives on multifunction devices. Device drives and memory can hold images of scanned and printed documents. Your tender should specify secure configuration, encryption where available, and secure decommissioning processes when devices are removed or returned.
Safeguarding intersects with security in practical ways. If printers are accessible to the public in reception areas or shared corridors, you may need placement rules or secure release policies to protect sensitive printing. If students have access to certain devices, you may need controls to prevent misuse, such as printing inappropriate material or accessing stored scans.
I suggest you also address incident management. If there is a suspected data incident involving print devices, you need a clear process for reporting, investigation, and cooperation. A well written tender includes expectations for supplier support in incident response.
Checkpoint Six, Describe The User Experience You Expect
Managed print services should make life easier for staff. If the user experience becomes harder, you will see workarounds, complaints, and sometimes risky behaviour such as using personal devices or uncontrolled printing methods.
Your tender should set out what staff should be able to do easily. That includes reliable printing from staff laptops and desktops, straightforward scanning to the correct destinations, and minimal confusion around colour versus mono or duplex settings. If you require follow me printing, where staff can release jobs at any device, state this clearly and define how users authenticate.
If your school uses cloud systems, you may want scanning to integrate smoothly into those workflows. The tender should describe the desired outcomes rather than over specifying technology, unless you have a strict requirement. For example, you might require scan to email for staff accounts, scan to network folders with appropriate permissions, and scan to a secure archive for certain admin processes.
I have to be honest, schools sometimes assume staff will adapt to anything. In reality, staff time is precious and frustration builds quickly when printing becomes unpredictable. I believe it is worth requiring a short user guidance approach from the supplier and clear support pathways for common issues.
Checkpoint Seven, Get Real About Volumes And Peaks
Suppliers price based on assumptions. If your assumptions are wrong, you may pay more than expected or the supplier may struggle to meet service levels.
Your tender should provide realistic volume data if you can. If you cannot, be transparent about uncertainty. For schools, printing is often seasonal. Peaks occur around assessments, reports, transitions, and certain events. If you have a reprographics heavy model where central admin prints for departments, your pattern may differ from a decentralised model. Trust wide procurements may also include different patterns across schools.
It is also wise to define what counts as a page for charging purposes, especially for colour coverage and duplex printing. Some contracts charge per side. Some include different rates for mono and colour. Some include click charges. Clarity reduces disputes later.
If you want cost predictability, you might request pricing that includes volume bands, or a blended cost model. The tender can ask suppliers to explain how they manage over and under usage, and whether true ups apply.
Checkpoint Eight, Specify Support Standards That Match The Reality Of School Life
Support expectations are where many MPS contracts succeed or fail. Schools are busy environments. A device down in the middle of a school day creates immediate stress, especially if it affects safeguarding paperwork, registers, exam preparation, or SEN documentation.
Your tender should set out response time expectations in practical terms. You may want different expectations for critical devices, such as those serving admin, exams, or safeguarding functions. You may also want clear expectations for remote support, phone support, and on site attendance.
It is important to define what a response means. A response might be acknowledgment and triage, not a fix. You should define fix time expectations or workaround expectations where appropriate. If a device cannot be fixed quickly, you may require a loan device or replacement process.
You should also define how consumables are handled. A common MPS promise is automatic toner replenishment based on monitoring. If you require this, state it and define expectations for lead times and emergency support. You should also define how waste toner and cartridges are handled in line with environmental and safety expectations.
I suggest you also specify expectations for planned maintenance and firmware updates. Updates should be managed to avoid disruption and maintain security. Your tender can ask suppliers to explain how they schedule updates and how they communicate changes.
Checkpoint Nine, Include Sustainability And Waste Management In A Realistic Way
Schools increasingly want procurement to reflect environmental responsibility. Print is an obvious area because paper and consumables have visible waste.
Your tender can include requirements around energy efficiency, default duplex settings, secure release to reduce uncollected print, and reporting that supports reduction initiatives. You can also ask about device refurbishment, reuse, and end of life recycling. In my view, suppliers should be able to explain their approach in practical terms rather than broad marketing claims.
There are government procurement policy notes and guidance on carbon reduction plans and sustainability in procurement, though the applicability can vary by organisation type and contract scope. It is still useful to treat sustainability as part of quality evaluation rather than an afterthought.
I believe the most credible sustainability requirements are those that connect to measurable behaviours, such as reducing unnecessary printing through secure release, providing clear usage reporting, and ensuring consumables are recycled responsibly.
Checkpoint Ten, Decide How You Will Evaluate Value For Money
Value for money is not only the cheapest bid. For schools, poor reliability or weak support can cost more in staff time and disruption than any saving on cost per page.
Your tender should define evaluation criteria that reflect your purpose. That typically includes price, service, technical capability, security, implementation approach, and governance. You should also consider how you will test supplier claims. For example, if a supplier claims rapid support, ask how it is resourced in your geography and what service coverage looks like for rural or multi site estates.
In my view, a common mistake is weighting price too heavily because it feels objective. Price is important, but an MPS tender is a service procurement. Service quality and delivery plan often determine whether the contract works day to day.
It is also sensible to define what evidence you will accept for claims. That might include case studies, service model descriptions, sample reports, and proposed account management structures. You can also ask suppliers to describe escalation routes and how issues are resolved.
Checkpoint Eleven, Write Requirements For Contract Governance
A managed print contract should not be signed and forgotten. Schools need ongoing oversight to make sure performance stays on track.
Your tender should describe how you expect governance to work. That can include regular performance reviews, reporting frequency, service level reporting, user issue trends, and proactive recommendations. If you are a trust, you may want governance at both site level and central level, with consistent reporting across schools.
I suggest you define key performance indicators that matter in school terms, such as device uptime, call out response times, fix times, first time fix rates, and user satisfaction feedback. You may also want reporting on print volumes, colour usage, and secure release statistics to support reduction efforts.
Under the newer procurement regime, there is also a growing emphasis on transparency and contract management obligations for contracting authorities, which makes structured contract governance even more relevant.
Checkpoint Twelve, Get The Contract Terms Right Before You Go To Market
Contract terms often cause problems late in the process, especially if a supplier proposes terms that conflict with school requirements. I believe it is better to set your key positions in the tender so suppliers price and plan with the right assumptions.
Important terms include contract length, extension options, break provisions, exit support, data handling, and change control. Schools often prefer contracts long enough to secure stable pricing, but not so long that they are stuck with ageing devices and outdated service models. Device lifecycle expectations should be clear, including whether devices will be refreshed during the term.
Exit support is crucial. If you change supplier, you need safe removal of devices, secure wiping of data, and smooth transition of users. Your tender should require a clear exit plan and define any exit charges. In my view, hidden exit costs are one of the biggest risks in managed service contracts.
You also need clarity on what happens if volumes change significantly. Schools can expand, merge, change curriculum delivery, or shift to digital approaches. A contract that cannot flex creates either financial pain or service gaps.
Checkpoint Thirteen, Plan The Implementation And Transition Like A Mini Project
Even a good contract can start badly if the rollout is chaotic. Implementation should be treated as a structured project with clear roles and timelines.
Your tender should require a mobilisation plan, including site surveys, device placement proposals, installation schedule, driver and software deployment, testing, and staff orientation. You may also need a plan for managing printing during the transition, especially if old devices are removed before new ones are stable.
If you have safeguarding sensitive processes, you may want certain devices installed and tested first, such as those supporting admin and pupil services. If you have exam periods, you may want to avoid major change in those windows.
What I would say is that a supplier that understands schools will be able to propose a rollout that respects timetables and site constraints.
Checkpoint Fourteen, Think About The Wider Digital And IT Environment
Printing does not exist in isolation. Your tender should align with your broader IT approach.
If you have device management for staff laptops, you may want print drivers deployed centrally. If you use single sign on, you may want print authentication integrated. If you have cloud first policies, you may want scan workflows that support them. If you have strict network policies, you may need clear guidance on ports, security settings, and device hardening.
A common misconception is that printers are simple network devices. In reality, modern multifunction devices are effectively computers on your network. They need patching, configuration, and monitoring. Your tender should ask suppliers how they secure devices and keep them updated, and how they work with your IT team to maintain security posture.
Checkpoint Fifteen, Handle Data Processing Roles Properly
If the supplier processes personal data on your behalf, they may be acting as a processor under UK data protection law, and you will need appropriate contractual terms covering processing instructions, security measures, sub processors, and breach reporting. The tender should ask suppliers to confirm how they handle data and whether they use sub contractors for support, logistics, or monitoring.
In my view, schools should also ask about where monitoring data is stored and how long it is retained. Usage monitoring can include user identifiers if secure print is used. That can be legitimate and useful, but it must be handled lawfully and securely.
It is also worth asking about access controls. Who at the supplier can access device logs, what training they have, and what audit controls exist.
Checkpoint Sixteen, Decide How You Will Test Supplier Fit And Capability
Schools sometimes choose a supplier that looks strong on paper but is weak in delivery for their geography or scale. I suggest you build evaluation steps that test operational reality.
That can include scenario based questions in the tender. For example, how does the supplier respond when a key device fails on a busy day, or when a site runs out of toner unexpectedly, or when a device is printing poor quality output and staff are under time pressure. The point is not to catch suppliers out. It is to reveal whether they have a mature service model.
You can also ask for sample reporting outputs, example service dashboards, and descriptions of account management routines. If site coverage matters, ask for details of local engineering capacity and how call outs are dispatched.
If you have multiple sites, ask how the supplier ensures consistent standards across them, including installation quality and ongoing support.
Checkpoint Seventeen, Consider Frameworks Versus Running Your Own Tender
Some schools use framework agreements to procure services more quickly and with pre competed terms. Others run a full open tender process. The Department for Education provides guidance for schools on routes to buy and suggests using frameworks where appropriate, as long as they meet your needs.
In my view, frameworks can be helpful, but you still need good specification and good evaluation. A framework does not guarantee a good fit. It simply provides a compliant route to market with certain conditions already set.
If you run your own process, you have more control over the exact structure, but you also take on more administrative work. The right choice depends on your capacity, the complexity of your requirement, and the value and risk of the contract.
Checkpoint Eighteen, Prepare For Approval And Audit Scrutiny
School procurement should stand up to internal scrutiny from governors or trustees, and potentially external scrutiny depending on funding and audit context. Academy trusts are expected to have competitive tendering policies and to demonstrate good governance in purchasing decisions.
That means you should document your rationale, your evaluation process, and how conflicts of interest are managed. It also means keeping records of clarifications, scoring, moderation, and decision approvals.
I have to be honest, this documentation can feel like bureaucracy when you are busy. But it protects the school. If someone later questions why you chose a supplier, you can show a clear evidence trail.
Common Misconceptions That Often Derail School Print Procurements
One misconception is that managed print is only about reducing cost per page. Cost matters, but schools often see the biggest gains in reduced downtime and reduced admin burden. If you focus only on per page pricing, you can choose a supplier who is cheap but cannot deliver service.
Another misconception is that you can safely procure devices first and sort service later. In reality, device choice, placement, and service model are interconnected. A well designed MPS tender considers the whole system.
A third misconception is that secure print is optional in schools. In my view, secure print should be treated as the default expectation in many settings because it reduces the risk of sensitive documents being left unattended. There may be exceptions, but you should decide them deliberately.
A fourth misconception is that a supplier will automatically understand school constraints. Some do, some do not. Your tender should define school specific needs, such as holiday periods, limited access windows, safeguarding processes, and site security requirements.
FAQs Schools Commonly Ask Before Issuing A Tender
Is it better to lease devices or buy them outright?
It depends on your financial approach, your appetite for lifecycle refresh, and how you want to manage risk. Leasing or rental within an MPS model can provide predictable costs and planned refresh. Buying can feel cheaper upfront, but it can leave you with ageing devices and unpredictable maintenance. I suggest you focus on whole life cost, service quality, and flexibility rather than the emotional comfort of ownership.
Do we need secure release printing for staff only, or also for students?
For staff, I believe secure release is strongly advisable in most schools because staff print sensitive material. For students, it depends on your environment and whether student printing is supported. Some schools allow student printing with controls, others prefer central admin printing for students. Your tender should reflect your policy and safeguarding considerations.
How do we avoid being locked into a bad contract?
Clarity and exit planning are the best protections. Define service levels, define change control, define refresh expectations, and insist on transparent exit provisions and data wiping. Also make sure your evaluation tests service capability rather than relying on promises.
Do we need to publish a notice for our tender?
Notice requirements depend on contract value and the rules that apply to your organisation at the time of procurement. The UK procurement regime has changed in recent years, including the move to expanded use of Find a Tender for notices and lifecycle transparency. If you are unsure, it is sensible to seek advice early, because a mistaken route to market can create legal and governance risk.
What about sustainability, do we need a carbon reduction plan requirement?
Some government policy notes focus on central government contracts above certain values, and the strict scope may not apply to every school contract. That said, schools can still build meaningful sustainability requirements into evaluation, focusing on measurable practices such as recycling, energy efficiency, reporting, and reducing wasted printing.
A Practical Procurement Mindset For Schools That Want A Smooth Outcome
If I could leave you with one mindset, it is this. Treat your managed print tender as a service design exercise, not just a buying exercise. The paperwork matters, but the daily lived experience matters more. Your staff need printing and scanning to be boringly reliable. Your leadership needs costs and risks to be controlled. Your safeguarding and data obligations require careful handling. A good tender brings all of that together in a way suppliers can respond to clearly.
The most effective school tenders I have seen have a few things in common. They start with an honest baseline. They define scope in plain language. They prioritise security and reliability. They evaluate service realism, not marketing confidence. And they plan implementation like a real project that respects the rhythm of the school year.
A Calm Way To Sanity Check Your Tender Before It Goes Live
In my view, the final sanity check is simple. Read your tender as if you were a supplier seeing it for the first time. Can you understand exactly what sites are included, what devices and workflows are expected, what service levels you must meet, and how you will be judged. If the answer is yes, you will attract better bids and you will get fewer clarifications. If the answer is no, you will either price in uncertainty or you will be disappointed by what you receive.
I suggest you also read it as if you were a teacher. Would this new arrangement make your day easier or harder. That question, more than anything, tends to reveal whether the tender is truly aligned with school reality.
Where Confidence Comes From When You Award The Contract
Awarding a contract can feel like a leap, especially when budgets are tight and scrutiny is high. Confidence comes from preparation and evidence. When your baseline is sound, your requirements are clear, and your evaluation is documented, you are not relying on gut feel. You are making a defensible decision that supports teaching, learning, safeguarding, and operational stability.
If you approach your managed print services tender with that steady mindset, you will not only secure a better contract. You will also reduce the chances of unpleasant surprises later, which is usually the best outcome a school can ask for.