Ambulance Vehicle Preparation contracts show where fleet performance is really won

avro fleet team • February 3, 2026

When people talk about ambulance performance, the focus is usually on response times, staffing, and the vehicles themselves. But one of the biggest levers for fleet availability is much less visible: the facilities and workflow that keep vehicles prepared, maintained, and ready to deploy.


That is why a recent South Western Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust (SWAST) award for “Ambulance Vehicle Preparation” (AVP) is worth paying attention to. The published notice shows a total contract value of £658,792.61 (excluding VAT), a conclusion date of 20 January 2026, and the contractor listed as T Clarke Contracting Limited.


What AVP means in practice

AVP is the unglamorous part of running a modern emergency fleet. It can include the space and infrastructure needed for:

vehicle prep and turnaround

refurbishment or fit-out work

basic readiness checks

managing downtime so assets return to service quickly


If AVP capacity is tight, you often see it in the numbers: more vehicles unavailable, slower turnaround after maintenance or repairs, and higher operational pressure because the fleet has less slack.


Why this matters to private providers supporting NHS transport

Many private providers touch the ambulance ecosystem: patient transport operators, conversion and fit-out firms, fleet support services, telematics suppliers, and estates contractors. AVP investment is a signal that trusts are still putting money into the system around the vehicle, not only the vehicle.


For suppliers, it also highlights how procurement can land. The SWAST notice references a framework route. That matters because framework delivery is often faster, but it places even more weight on clear scopes, practical timelines, and minimal disruption to live operations.


The commercial takeaway: uptime is a system, not a line item

When fleet contracts are priced, uptime is sometimes treated as “maintenance plus good intentions”. In reality, uptime is a chain:

estates capacity

workflow and scheduling

parts and equipment availability

access to bays and specialist facilities

handover quality between teams


If one link is weak, you lose availability. If you invest in the weakest link, the whole chain improves. AVP projects are often exactly that: targeted work that prevents small delays turning into big operational problems.


What to watch next

If more AVP-related awards appear, it will likely reflect a wider push to protect utilisation as fleets become more complex (more onboard kit, more diagnostics, more integration with digital systems). The “vehicle” is only getting more sophisticated, so the supporting infrastructure has to keep up.


Bottom line

Ambulance performance is won in the basics: readiness, turnaround, and keeping vehicles in service. AVP contracts are not flashy, but they are often where real improvements start.

You might also like

ScotZEB3 subsidy caps are lower. Here’s what that really means for operators and funders.

By avro fleet team • February 3, 2026
ScotZEB3 (Scottish Zero Emission Bus Challenge Fund Phase 3) is open, but the tone of this round is changing. A recent industry report highlights that per-vehicle subsidy thresholds have broadly been reduced compared with the prior phase, with Transport Scotland describing this as a reflection of a more mature zero-emission bus market. Why the subsidy cap matters A lower maximum grant per bus changes the shape of a project. It pushes more cost and risk into the operator and their delivery partners. That is not necessarily bad. It can bring sharper planning and better value. But it does mean that “good intentions” will not survive contact with grid connections, depot civil's, and delivery timelines. Transport Scotland’s argument is straightforward: if the sector can deliver zero-emission buses at scale and attract private investment, then public subsidy should go further across more vehicles and more operators. What it signals for ScotZEB3 bids If you are preparing a ScotZEB3 application, treat the funding cap as a forcing function. It rewards bids that are deliverable, not just desirable. In practical terms, that usually means: Depot-first planning: confirm power availability, connection timelines, and the physical layout before you lock vehicle numbers. Phasing: a staged rollout (vehicles and chargers) is often more credible than a single “big bang”. Cashflow realism: supplier payment terms, build milestones, and drawdown timings need to match how the project will actually be paid for. Operating proof: the bid should show how duty cycles, range, and charging windows work on real routes, not on idealised assumptions. Single-operator bids: a quiet but important change One point worth noting from the coverage is that ScotZEB3 allows bids from single operators, not only consortiums. That could lower friction for smaller or more agile operators who want to move quickly. It also increases the need for strong delivery partners, because you may be carrying more of the project management and integration risk yourself. The wider context: infrastructure is now the constraint The hardest part of decarbonising bus fleets is often not the bus. It’s the depot and the grid. That’s why Transport Scotland confirming £85m for EV charging infrastructure is relevant even when it is not labelled as bus funding. It points to political and budget backing for the infrastructure side of electrification, which can strengthen the delivery case for depot projects that are ready to proceed. What to do next If you want to be competitive in ScotZEB3, focus on deliverability and value for money. A strong bid is usually the one that has already done the boring work: site surveys, power discussions, a practical timeline, and a finance structure that can cope with delays. The message in the lower subsidy caps is not “stop applying”. It’s “plan better”.

Electric scooters hit the streets with food delivery platforms

By avro fleet team • February 2, 2026
Electric scooters are emerging as a major vector for last‑mile food delivery in parts of Europe. In Spain and Portugal this year, major delivery platforms including Uber Eats, Glovo and Just Eat added thousands of electric scooters to their fleets. This deployment is more than a headline. It reflects a growing recognition that electrification isn’t just about pedal‑assisted bikes or large vans. Scooters bridge the gap when trips require more distance or speed than a bike is practical for, but still need low operating cost and emissions. The arrangement in Iberia centres on electric motorcycles supplied through a fleet management partner, with integrated battery swap possibilities via a wider charging station network. The model lets riders quickly replace a spent battery instead of waiting for long recharge cycles. That’s critical in food delivery, where downtime directly affects earnings and service quality. Electric scooters also typically have better weather protection and storage capacity than bikes. That makes them attractive for couriers handling multiple orders per shift. Free access to low‑emission zones in many cities also improves route flexibility compared with internal combustion counterparts. From the platform perspective, integrating scooters into the mix diversifies mobility. It reduces dependence on private vehicle ownership among riders and aligns with environmental targets. If demand grows and charging infrastructure improves, these scooters could become a core part of urban delivery networks. For cities, electric scooters bring their own set of considerations: parking, curb space, road safety and shared charging access. These require coordination between municipal authorities and platforms to ensure that increased scooter use doesn’t aggravate congestion or pedestrian conflicts. The trend also hints at how future fleets might evolve. Rather than one type of vehicle, a balanced mix — bikes for short dense areas, scooters for mid‑range urban runs, and small vans for large cargo — could become standard. In that mix, scooters offer a strong case for quicker electrification with real utility for riders and platforms

UK begins HGV CO₂ framework consultation and what it means for freight decarbonisation

By avro fleet team • January 30, 2026
At the start of 2026 the UK Department for Transport opened a consultation to shape a future regulatory framework for heavy goods vehicle (HGV) CO₂ emissions. The timing could hardly be more relevant. Fleets are already considering zero‑emission vehicle purchases, alternative fuels are gaining traction, and commercial operators are wrestling with how best to plan investments into vehicles and infrastructure. The consultation is part of a broader push to phase out the sale of new non‑zero emission HGVs. The intention is to have zero‑emission vehicles dominate new purchases up to 26 tonnes by 2035, and all new HGVs by 2040. The technical detail is open to industry input, with questions on trajectories, eligibility criteria and the design of compliance mechanisms. For fleet managers, finance partners and brokers this matters because regulatory clarity affects the economics of buying and owning trucks. Without a clear direction of travel, it’s hard to tell when diesel trucks turn into stranded assets or when new technology trucks become residual value anchors. What’s in the consultation The consultation is structured around several core areas: A review of the current HGV market and emissions performance. Options for regulatory frameworks that would reduce CO₂ over time. Definitions and criteria for what constitutes a zero‑emission HGV. Consideration of how to group vehicles and set compliance obligations or penalties. Because the UK’s zero‑emission heavy goods vehicle market is nascent, many manufacturers and operators see this as a chance to shape the rules rather than react. Early data shows that zero‑emission HGV penetration is growing from a low base, and that infrastructure readiness remains mixed. The consultation’s timing, closing on March 17th, gives fleet stakeholders a window to influence how the next decade unfolds. Bio‑CNG infrastructure keeps pace Parallel to regulatory discussions, infrastructure providers are building practical alternatives to electrification. ReFuels, via the CNG Fuels network, has begun construction of a Bio‑CNG refuelling station on the M4 corridor, capable of serving hundreds of trucks per day with 100 % renewable biomethane. Bio‑CNG can deliver emissions reductions of up to around 90 % relative to diesel and can be priced more predictably, reducing operating cost volatility for fleets. The expansion of public access refuelling points strengthens the case for fleets that are weighing electrification against other low‑carbon pathways. For some operators, especially those running long distances where charging infrastructure remains patchy, renewable gas can be a bridge technology. Moreover, ReFuels has signed a multi‑year fixed price supply deal with a major UK logistics operator. That kind of commercial arrangement gives fleets predictable fuel costs over time, which simplifies budgeting and helps underwriters assess fuel price risk when structuring finance. Why this matters in practice For fleet decision‑makers this is about owning and funding assets in a transition. Understanding when to replace diesel trucks with zero‑emission units is partly a question of technology readiness and total cost of ownership. But it’s also about regulatory certainty and infrastructure availability. Regulation that clearly defines timelines lets operators fine‑tune their replacement cycles, reducing the risk of buying a truck with poor resale prospects. For brokers and lenders, that kind of clarity allows better pricing of credit and residual value expectations. It also affects how you plan infrastructure investments. Electric charging deployment and Bio‑CNG or hydrogen refuelling points are capital intensive. Knowing where regulatory pressure will fall means you can advise clients on where and when to invest versus lease versus defer. Takeaways for practitioners If you’re involved in truck fleet finance or advising operators: Read the consultation: It’s not academic. It will influence when and how zero‑emission vehicles become the norm. Model multiple scenarios: With diesel phase‑out dates and infrastructure growth paths, businesses need to understand risk and return across asset lives. Look at fuel alternatives: Bio‑CNG and other renewable fuels are gaining commercial traction alongside electrification. Factor regulatory risk into deals: Timeline uncertainty directly impacts residual values and financing terms. Clearer policy helps reduce that risk.  Decarbonising road freight is not a single move from diesel to electric. It’s a sequence of policy, infrastructure and commercial shifts. The UK’s new HGV CO₂ emissions consultation is a key piece of that sequence and worth engaging with sooner rather than later.