Understanding Social Value and It’s Purpose
Social value has become a central element in public sector procurement, with dedicated questions now standard in most tender exercises. Getting these questions right often makes the difference between winning and losing, particularly as evaluation weightings increase. For many SMEs, social value represents both an opportunity to showcase their positive impact and a challenge in articulating this effectively within formal tender responses.
At Bid Writer Consultancy, we help SMEs across the UK develop compelling social value responses that connect with buyer priorities and demonstrate genuine commitment. This guide explains common question formats, measurement frameworks, and practical approaches to maximising your scores through evidence-based, locally-relevant commitments that resonate with evaluation teams.
Common Social Value Tender Questions
Social value questions vary in format and focus across different buyers, but several themes recur consistently. Understanding these core question types helps prepare effective responses before the tender even arrives, allowing you to gather relevant evidence and develop appropriate commitments in advance rather than scrambling during the response period.
Specific commitments
Questions ask what measurable social value you will deliver if awarded the contract. These typically request quantified outputs (e.g., “How many apprenticeships will you create?”) with implementation timescales and monitoring approaches. Buyers expect firm commitments rather than aspirational statements, with increasingly sophisticated evaluation approaches that distinguish between vague promises and credible, resourced delivery plans. These questions often include requirements for additionality – benefits beyond what would happen through normal business operations – and relevance to the contract scope and local context.
Methodology questions
Explore your approach to delivering social value rather than specific outputs. These assess your understanding of social value principles, how you identify appropriate initiatives, and how you integrate social value into service delivery. Sample question: “Describe your methodology for identifying and implementing social value initiatives relevant to this contract.” Strong responses demonstrate systematic approaches rather than ad-hoc activities, showing how you analyse local needs, engage with stakeholders, develop appropriate interventions, and measure outcomes. These questions often reward evidence of organisational commitment through governance structures, resource allocation, and senior accountability.
Evidence-based questions
Require examples of social value delivered in previous contracts. Buyers use these to assess your track record and capacity to deliver on new commitments. Sample question: “Provide evidence of social value outcomes you have achieved in similar contracts within the last three years.” Effective responses include quantified achievements, challenges overcome, lessons learned, and beneficiary impacts rather than simply listing activities. Case studies that demonstrate relevance to the current opportunity score particularly well, especially when supported by client or beneficiary testimonials that provide external validation of your impact and approach.
Supply chain questions
Focus on how you’ll generate social value through your purchasing decisions and supplier relationships. Sample question: “Outline how you will ensure your supply chain contributes to social value objectives in this contract.” These questions recognise that significant value can be created through procurement choices and contractual requirements for suppliers. Good responses detail specific mechanisms like supplier selection criteria, contractual social value clauses, performance measurement for tier 2 suppliers, and capacity building initiatives that strengthen local supply networks rather than simply promising to “buy local” without defined approaches.
Community engagement questions
Examine how you’ll involve local stakeholders in shaping and delivering social value. Sample question: “Describe your approach to engaging with community organisations to identify and address local priorities.” These questions reflect the principle that effective social value responds to genuine community needs rather than imposing pre-determined programmes. Strong answers demonstrate understanding of existing community assets, engagement methodologies that reach diverse stakeholders, and collaborative approaches that build sustainable relationships rather than transactional interactions.
Measurement and reporting questions
Assess how you’ll track, verify and communicate social value outcomes. Sample question: “Detail your systems for measuring and reporting social value outcomes, including frequency, metrics and verification methods.” These questions address growing concerns about accountability for social value promises. Comprehensive responses cover data collection methodologies, verification approaches, reporting formats and frequencies, use of recognised frameworks like TOMs, and governance mechanisms that ensure delivery against commitments.
Across all question types, buyers increasingly expect responses that are specific to their local area, aligned with their strategic priorities, and backed by concrete evidence. Generic statements about corporate social responsibility rarely score well in modern evaluations, as procurement teams become more sophisticated in distinguishing between genuine commitment and bid-stage promises without implementation substance.
TOMs Framework: Local Government Approach
The Social Value Portal’s TOMs (Themes, Outcomes and Measures) framework has become the standard measurement approach for many local authorities. Understanding how TOMs works is essential for bidding to councils and other local government bodies, as this structured approach allows buyers to consistently evaluate and compare social value offers across different suppliers using standardised metrics and financial proxies.
The TOMs framework consists of a hierarchical structure comprising themes, outcomes, and specific measurable actions:
-
5 core themes (Jobs, Growth, Social, Environment, Innovation) setting broad categories of impact
-
35+ outcomes that articulate what success looks like within each theme area
-
100+ specific measures with standardised financial proxy values that enable monetary quantification of social benefits
When responding to TOMs-based questions, you’ll typically select specific measures from a predetermined list and commit to delivering quantified outputs. Each measure has an assigned proxy financial value, allowing buyers to calculate the total social value offered as a percentage of contract value. This approach enables direct comparison between bidders on a pound-for-pound basis, creating transparency in social value evaluation that previously proved challenging.
For example, if bidding for a £100,000 contract, you might commit to a package of measures that include:
-
NT1: Creating 2 new local jobs (valued at £31,492 each) to provide employment opportunities within the contract delivery area
-
NT10: Providing 100 hours of volunteer time (valued at £16.07 per hour) for employees to support local community initiatives
-
NT18: Supporting 3 local community projects (valued at £1,000 each) through funding, expertise or in-kind contributions
This combination would deliver total social value of £66,373, or 66.37% of contract value, giving evaluators a clear metric to assess alongside your qualitative descriptions of implementation approaches and beneficiary impacts.
Key tips for developing effective TOMs-based responses reflect both the technical aspects of the framework and evaluation practices we’ve observed across numerous successful bids:
Focus on measures relevant to the contract scope
Rather than spreading commitments across numerous measures. Evaluators prefer depth over breadth, with connected measures that create meaningful impact in specific areas rather than token commitments across many categories. A focused approach demonstrates thoughtful consideration of where your organisation can create genuine value rather than simply maximising proxy values through disparate commitments.
Align selections with local priorities
Identified in council plans, local economic strategies, or social value policies. Research these documents before responding to ensure your selected measures address specific local challenges rather than generic social benefits. Many councils adapt the standard TOMs framework with additional local measures or modified weightings that reflect their particular priorities, making research essential before selecting your commitments.
Provide detailed delivery methods
For each measure, not just the numerical commitment. Explain how you’ll recruit locally, what community projects you’ll support, or which charities you’ll partner with. The proxy value calculation represents only part of the evaluation; narrative explanations of implementation approaches significantly influence qualitative scoring and credibility assessment. Without clear delivery mechanisms, even high-value commitments may score poorly.
Be realistic with commitments
TOMs measures each carry an evidence requirement, and buyers increasingly include social value KPIs in contract management. Unrealistic promises may win the contract but lead to performance issues later as contract managers monitor delivery against specific targets. Consider your organisation’s capacity, previous experience delivering similar initiatives, and the contract’s scope and duration when setting commitment levels.
Include qualitative descriptions
Alongside quantitative commitments. Numbers alone don’t tell the full story of impact – explain who will benefit and how, connecting outputs to meaningful outcomes for communities or individuals. The most compelling responses combine the required numerical commitments with powerful narratives about the resulting changes for beneficiaries, particularly those facing barriers or disadvantages that align with council priorities.
The Social Value Portal offers a public version of the TOMs framework which you can review to familiarise yourself with common measures. Many councils publish their specific TOMs list in tender documentation, sometimes with customised local measures. Studying these resources before tenders arrive enables thoughtful preparation rather than rushed selection during the bid period.
Social Value Model: Central Government Approach
Central government departments, executive agencies and non-departmental public bodies typically use the Social Value Model rather than TOMs. This model, introduced in 2021 following the government’s Procurement Policy Note (PPN 06/20), takes a different approach by focusing on policy outcomes rather than financial proxies. Understanding this distinction is crucial for organisations bidding for central government contracts, as the evaluation methodology differs significantly from local authority approaches.
The Social Value Model is structured around:
-
5 key themes (COVID-19 recovery, economic inequality, climate change, equal opportunity, wellbeing) that align with central government policy priorities
-
Specific policy outcomes under each theme that articulate what departments aim to achieve
-
Model award criteria for each outcome that provide a consistent evaluation framework across departments
Unlike TOMs, the Social Value Model doesn’t assign financial proxy values to commitments. Instead, responses are evaluated qualitatively against defined criteria focusing on the strength of proposals, implementation approaches, and evidence of delivery capability. This creates a different dynamic in bid development, emphasising narrative quality and delivery credibility rather than maximising financial proxy values.
Central government tenders typically select specific policy outcomes relevant to the contract rather than covering all themes. For example, a digital services contract might focus on outcomes related to skills development and reducing economic inequality, while a construction project might emphasise environmental outcomes. This targeted approach recognises that different contract types offer varying opportunities for specific types of social value, rather than imposing a one-size-fits-all requirement across all procurement.
Key tips for developing effective Social Value Model responses draw on our experience supporting successful central government bids:
Use the three-part response structure recommended in the model guidance to ensure comprehensive coverage of all evaluation aspects:
-
How you’ll deliver the specific policy outcome (your offer) – detailing the precise actions, commitments and initiatives you’ll implement
-
How you’ll ensure delivery (management, governance, reporting) – explaining oversight, resource allocation and performance monitoring
-
Where you’ve delivered similar outcomes before (evidence) – providing specific examples that demonstrate capability and track record
This structure directly addresses the evaluation criteria used by central government assessors, making their job easier while ensuring you don’t miss crucial elements of a complete response. Following this recommended approach signals familiarity with government expectations and demonstrates professional bid development.
Align commitments with departmental priorities
Published in annual reports, procurement policies, or social value statements. Different departments emphasise different aspects of the model based on their specific remits and ministerial priorities. For example, the Department for Work and Pensions naturally places greater emphasis on employment and skills outcomes, while the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs prioritises environmental measures. Researching department-specific guidance beyond the core model documentation helps target your proposals to what matters most to that particular buyer.
Address the specific evaluation criteria
Published in the tender documentation. These criteria often include aspects like proportionality, additional value, and relevance to the contract. Government evaluators typically use structured marking schemes that award specific scores for different aspects of your response. Reviewing these criteria carefully and structuring your response to explicitly address each element significantly improves evaluation outcomes compared to more general approaches that miss key scoring opportunities.
Specify key performance indicators
That you’ll use to measure and report outcomes. Government buyers expect robust measurement approaches with regular reporting. While financial proxies aren’t used in evaluation, clear metrics demonstrating the scale and impact of your commitments remain essential. Effective responses include baseline measurements, target improvements, measurement methodologies, and reporting frequencies tailored to each commitment. This level of detail demonstrates implementation readiness rather than conceptual thinking.
Reference relevant standards and certifications
That support your commitments, such as Fair Tax Mark, Living Wage accreditation, or environmental management systems. Central government particularly values independently verified credentials that provide assurance about your organisation’s practices and capabilities. Current certifications demonstrate existing commitment rather than future intention, scoring higher in evaluation because they represent lower delivery risk.
The full Social Value Model guidance is available on the government website and provides valuable insights into what central government evaluators expect to see in responses. Reviewing this official documentation alongside department-specific guidance helps inform targeted approaches for different central government buyers.
Developing a Social Value Policy
A comprehensive social value policy serves two essential purposes: guiding your internal approach to creating social impact and providing evidence of commitment in tender responses. For organisations regularly bidding for public contracts, having a well-developed policy demonstrates strategic intent rather than reactive bid-by-bid approaches, significantly enhancing credibility with evaluators who increasingly look for embedded commitment beyond tender-specific promises.
Effective policies include several key components that collectively show a structured, thoughtful approach to social value creation:
Definition and scope – Your organisation’s understanding of social value and how it applies to your operations and supply chain. This establishes the conceptual foundation for your approach and demonstrates thoughtful engagement with social value principles rather than simply responding to procurement requirements. Effective definitions connect to recognised frameworks like the Social Value Act while expressing your organisation’s particular perspective and priorities.
Strategic priorities – Key social value themes and outcomes your organisation commits to pursuing across all operations and contracts. These should align with your organisational values and capabilities while reflecting broader societal challenges relevant to your sector. Limiting priorities to 3-5 key areas creates focus and prevents the dilution of effort across too many initiatives. The most credible priorities connect directly to your core business activities rather than peripheral charitable efforts.
Governance structure – How social value is managed, measured and reported within your organisation. This should include board-level oversight, designated responsibilities at operational levels, integration with business planning processes, and regular review mechanisms. Strong governance signals that social value is embedded in organisational management rather than relegated to CSR teams or bid writers. Documentation of meeting frequencies, reporting lines, and accountability mechanisms strengthens this section significantly.
Implementation approach – Practical methods for delivering social value commitments across different business activities. This section bridges high-level principles and ground-level actions, explaining how priorities translate into specific initiatives. Effective approaches include resource allocation models, decision-making frameworks for selecting initiatives, staff engagement mechanisms, and integration with operational delivery. The strongest policies differentiate between business-as-usual practices and additional social value creation.
Measurement framework – Tools and metrics used to quantify and report social outcomes across your organisation. This demonstrates commitment to accountability and continuous improvement rather than unverified claims. Effective frameworks include both quantitative metrics (jobs created, carbon reduced) and qualitative measures (case studies, beneficiary feedback) with defined collection methodologies and reporting frequencies. Reference to recognised external frameworks like TOMs or the Social Value Model strengthens credibility.
The best policies avoid vague statements about “giving back” or “being responsible” in favour of specific commitments, defined responsibilities, and measurable targets. Reference to recognised frameworks like the UN Sustainable Development Goals or Social Value UK principles adds credibility by connecting your approach to established standards and demonstrating awareness of best practice beyond the immediate requirements of UK procurement.
When developing your policy, involve staff across the organisation rather than treating it as a bid team exercise. Social value delivered through contracts must be implemented by operational teams, so their input ensures commitments are practical and achievable rather than disconnected from delivery reality. Cross-functional workshops exploring how different departments can contribute to social value objectives often yield innovative approaches while building internal commitment.
Review and update your policy regularly to reflect changing practices and priorities. A dated policy from several years ago suggests social value isn’t a current priority, while a recently updated document demonstrates ongoing commitment. Annual refreshes allow incorporation of lessons from implementation experience and adaptation to evolving market expectations. Include the review date prominently in the document to signal currency to evaluators.
Building Your Evidence Bank
Evidence of past performance frequently determines social value scores. Building a comprehensive evidence bank significantly strengthens your tender responses by providing ready-to-use examples that demonstrate capability and credibility. This proactive approach eliminates the scramble to gather evidence during tight tender timeframes, allowing more thoughtful selection and presentation of the most relevant examples for each opportunity.
Effective evidence collection encompasses a range of documentation types that collectively demonstrate both specific initiatives and systematic commitment to social value principles:
Case studies
Detailing specific social value initiatives, including challenges, solutions, quantified outcomes, and beneficiary feedback. Structure these consistently for easy adaptation to different tender questions, covering context, actions, results, and lessons learned. Develop at least one robust case study for each major social value theme (employment, environment, community), ideally from different geographical areas to support locality-specific bids. The strongest case studies include quotes from beneficiaries or delivery partners that provide external validation of your impact claims.
Impact reports
Documenting cumulative social value across your organisation. These demonstrate systematic commitment rather than isolated examples and show how individual initiatives contribute to broader outcomes. Annual or contract-specific impact reports provide evaluators with comprehensive evidence of your approach and achievements. Including professional design elements like infographics and photography significantly enhances the credibility and accessibility of these documents compared to simple text reports, making them valuable attachments to bid submissions.
Testimonials
From beneficiaries, community partners, and clients confirming your social impact. External validation carries more weight than self-reporting, addressing the natural scepticism evaluators bring to supplier claims. Collect testimonials systematically at project milestones rather than retrospectively seeking them during bid development. The most valuable testimonials speak specifically to outcomes achieved rather than general satisfaction, ideally quantifying benefits where possible and explaining how your approach differed from other providers.
Performance data
Showing trends in key metrics like local employment percentages, apprenticeship completions, carbon reduction, or supply chain spend with SMEs and social enterprises. Longitudinal data demonstrating improvement over time particularly impresses evaluators, suggesting genuine commitment rather than static performance. Present this information in accessible formats like charts or dashboards that clearly illustrate progress against targets. Where possible, benchmark your performance against industry standards or competitor data to provide context for your achievements.
Certifications and accreditations
Providing independent verification of practices, such as Living Wage Employer status, disability confident certification, or environmental standards. These official credentials offer shorthand evidence of commitment to specific social value aspects, reducing the need for detailed explanations of basic practices. Maintain a current register of all relevant certifications with renewal dates and responsible owners to ensure continuous coverage and timely updates. Evaluators increasingly check certification status directly with awarding bodies, so accuracy is essential.
Contract reports
Showing delivery against social value KPIs in previous public contracts. These directly evidence your reliability in fulfilling commitments made during tender processes – addressing a common concern about bid-stage promises versus delivery reality. Collect performance reports, client feedback, and formal reviews from previous contracts to demonstrate accountability and achievement. Where possible, include evidence of solving implementation challenges or exceeding original commitments to demonstrate adaptability and genuine commitment.
When collecting evidence, focus on outcomes rather than activities. Buyers care less about what you did (e.g., “we ran workshops”) than what resulted (e.g., “15 previously unemployed people gained sustainable employment, with 80% retention after 12 months”). This outcomes-focused approach aligns with evolving procurement practice that increasingly values demonstrable impact over good intentions or resource inputs.
Organise evidence by theme (employment, environment, community) and by locality to quickly locate relevant examples for specific tenders. Create a searchable digital repository with consistent metadata tagging to enable rapid filtering during bid development. Update your bank regularly, ideally after each contract milestone or major initiative, assigning specific responsibility for evidence collection to relevant delivery managers supported by templates and guidance to ensure quality and consistency.
Writing Winning Social Value Responses
The quality of your response writing significantly impacts scores, even with strong commitments and evidence. These writing approaches consistently yield higher marks:
Directly address evaluation criteria in your structure. If the marking scheme awards points for “relevance to contract,” “deliverability,” and “benefits to local area,” explicitly address each criterion in separate subsections.
Quantify commitments precisely. Instead of “we will create apprenticeships,” specify “we will create 3 Level 3 apprenticeships in building services within the first 6 months of the contract, recruiting exclusively from the [specific area].”
Explain the ‘so what’ behind initiatives. Don’t just describe what you’ll do; articulate why it matters in addressing specific local challenges or priorities.
Connect commitments to contract delivery. Show how social value initiatives integrate with core service provision rather than appearing as bolt-on extras. For example, link training programmes to specific contract roles or connect environmental initiatives to service delivery methods.
Provide delivery timelines showing when key activities will occur and when outcomes will be achieved. This demonstrates practical planning rather than aspirational thinking.
Detail verification methods for each commitment, explaining how you’ll measure, record and report outcomes. This addresses a common concern about accountability for promised benefits.
Emphasise additionality by clearly distinguishing contract-specific commitments from business-as-usual activities. Evaluators look for value beyond what would happen anyway.
Include implementation responsibilities, naming specific roles responsible for delivery, monitoring and reporting. This shows you’ve considered resource requirements rather than making empty promises.
High-scoring responses typically include tables summarising commitments, with columns for specific initiatives, quantified outputs, delivery timescales, and measurement approaches. This clear format makes evaluation straightforward and demonstrates structured thinking.
Research-Driven Approach to Local Priorities
Tailoring social value proposals to local priorities dramatically improves scores compared to generic approaches. Effective research includes:
Local authority plans – Council strategic plans, economic development strategies, and community priorities documents often explicitly state social value objectives.
Demographic data – ONS statistics highlighting specific challenges in the contract area, such as youth unemployment, skills gaps, or health inequalities.
Previous procurement documentation – Prior contracts often reveal which social value elements the buyer particularly values.
Annual reports – Buyer organisations typically highlight social priorities in their annual reporting.
Local voluntary sector analysis – Research into active community organisations reveals partnership opportunities and locally supported causes.
Social value case studies – Many public bodies publish examples of good practice from their suppliers, providing insights into preferred approaches.
Sources like council websites, Office for National Statistics, local economic partnerships, and community foundation reports provide valuable context for tailoring your response.
In central government tenders, research department-specific priorities through annual reports, departmental improvement plans, and ministerial statements. These often reveal social value priorities that go beyond the core Social Value Model guidance.
Reference your research directly in responses to demonstrate local understanding. For example: “According to the Council’s Economic Strategy 2023-2026, youth unemployment in [area] remains 3.2% higher than the national average. Our targeted apprenticeship programme addresses this specific challenge by…”
SMART Targets and Specific Commitments
Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time-bound (SMART) targets form the backbone of credible social value responses. Vague promises score poorly compared to precise commitments.
Examples of SMART vs non-SMART commitments:
Non-SMART: “We will support local employment.” SMART: “We will create 4 new FTE positions within the first contract year, recruiting exclusively from residents living within 10 miles of the delivery location, with at least 2 positions reserved for people from groups facing barriers to employment.”
Non-SMART: “We will reduce carbon emissions.” SMART: “We will reduce carbon emissions from contract delivery by 15% compared to current service provision, achieving 5% reduction in year 1, 10% by end of year 2, and 15% by contract completion, independently verified through ISO 14064 certification.”
Non-SMART: “We will support the local community.” SMART: “We will provide 120 hours of staff volunteer time annually to support [specific local charity], delivering weekly coding workshops for disadvantaged young people, with a target of engaging 60 participants per year and supporting at least 15 to achieve Level 2 certification.”
When setting targets, consider both:
-
-
Output measures – immediate quantifiable deliverables (jobs created, volunteer hours, workshops delivered)
-
-
-
Outcome measures – longer-term benefits resulting from outputs (sustainable employment, improved wellbeing, skills development)
-
The most compelling responses link these together, showing how specific outputs connect to meaningful outcomes for communities or individuals.
Reviewers increasingly scrutinise the achievability of commitments. Unrealistic promises may score well initially but create contract management problems later. Base commitments on:
-
-
Your organisation’s capacity and resources
-
-
-
Realistic assessment of contract requirements and opportunities
-
-
-
Previous experience delivering similar initiatives
-
-
-
Understanding of local context and challenges
-
Supply Chain and Partnership Approaches
Leveraging your supply chain and local partnerships significantly enhances social value offerings, particularly for SMEs with limited internal resources.
Effective supply chain approaches include:
Local purchasing commitments with specific percentage targets for contract-related procurement from businesses within defined geographical boundaries.
Tier 2 supplier requirements that cascade social value obligations to subcontractors through formal agreements and performance monitoring.
Supply chain diversity initiatives targeting increased spending with social enterprises, minority-owned businesses, or SMEs, with specific percentage targets and support programmes.
Supplier development activities like prompt payment commitments, capacity building workshops, or mentoring programmes that strengthen local business ecosystems.
Productive partnership approaches include:
Named collaboration agreements with specific local charities or community organisations, supported by confirmation letters in bid appendices.
Skills partnerships with local colleges, universities or training providers, creating pathways into employment related to the contract.
Specialist organisation involvement bringing expertise in supporting specific beneficiary groups like ex-offenders, disabled people, or young people not in education, employment or training.
When presenting supply chain and partnership elements, include:
-
-
Partner profiles demonstrating their local relevance and capability
-
-
-
Defined roles and responsibilities for each organisation
-
-
-
Governance structures for managing collaborative delivery
-
-
-
Resource commitments from each party
-
-
-
Measurement approaches for collaborative outcomes
-