Demonstrating Best Value in Social Care Tenders — A Complete Guide
How to prove to commissioners that your service delivers better outcomes, greater independence, and measurable savings — without cutting corners on quality.
Every new procurement round asks providers to evidence best value. In social care, that isn’t code for cheap: it means achieving the greatest positive impact for people within the resources available. Winning bids show how quality creates efficiency — not the other way round.
If you’re preparing bids in learning disability tenders, domiciliary care submissions or home care contracts, your responses must describe how you reduce avoidable support, why it remains safe, and what outcomes improve as a result. Our Tender Review & Proofreading Service helps you turn good practice into scorable, evidence-led answers.
🔎 What Commissioners Mean by “Best Value”
Local authorities balance public money with statutory duties. In tenders, “best value” is the sweet spot where:
- ✅ Independence increases — people need fewer paid hours because they can do more for themselves.
- ✅ Risks are reduced proactively — fewer incidents, admissions, complaints, and safeguarding alerts.
- ✅ Resources stretch further — shared staffing, smart scheduling, and technology replace unnecessary intensity.
- ✅ Outcomes are measured — changes are tracked and reported, not assumed.
Put simply: better outcomes per £1 spent, evidenced and sustainable.
🏗️ Building a Best Value Narrative
High-scoring bids explain three things clearly:
- Approach — the methods you use (PBS, tech, shared staffing, skill-building, digital care).
- Assurance — the governance that keeps people safe as support reduces.
- Evidence — before/after data, case examples, and commissioner benefits.
🧠 Example 1: Reducing 2:1 to 1:1 Through Positive Behaviour Support (PBS)
Context (LD): A man with learning disabilities and autism was supported 2:1 due to frequent incidents of distress in public and at home. Incidents were often triggered by unpredictable routines and sensory overload.
Interventions:
- Co-produced PBS plan (with the person, family, and clinicians) focusing on predictable routines, preferred activities, and de-escalation cues.
- Weekly reflective supervision; monthly multi-disciplinary reviews.
- Skills teaching: communication aids, visual timetables, and graded exposure to community settings.
Outcomes:
- Reactive incidents down 65% in 9 months; no physical interventions for 6 months.
- Support safely adjusted from 2:1 to 1:1 across daytime sessions.
- Increased participation (three regular community activities per week) and improved well-being scores.
Tender line: “By embedding PBS and reflective supervision, we reduced incidents by 65% in 9 months and safely reprofiled support from 2:1 to 1:1; delivering annual savings while improving community participation and quality of life.”
💤 Example 2: Epilepsy & Risk Sensors Enabling Sleeping Nights
Context (Home Care): Several people had waking-night support due to epilepsy and falls risk. Staff were present but rarely required to intervene.
Interventions:
- Installed epilepsy sensors, bed occupancy and door sensors, linked to a secure alert platform.
- Defined response protocols (on-call responder within target minutes) and rehearsed drills.
- Documented risk reviews and family/clinician consent.
Outcomes:
- Transition from waking to sleeping nights for three people; response times averaged under three minutes.
- Night-time privacy and sleep improved; staff redeployed to daytime reablement tasks.
- Annual cost reduction while maintaining safety, evidenced through alert logs and post-incident reviews.
Tender line: “Technology-enabled monitoring replaced unnecessary waking nights for three people. Safety was maintained (sub-3-minute responses), sleep improved, and capacity was redeployed to daytime goals.”
👥 Example 3: Shared Staffing for Inclusion (1:1 ⟶ Small-Group)
Context (LD): Three people received separate 1:1 hours for day activities, yet were isolated and disengaged.
Interventions:
- Co-produced a weekly shared timetable (gardening club, walking group, cooking class).
- Risk assessments, travel training, and buddying to enable 1:2–1:3 staffing safely.
- Outcomes tracking: engagement, friendships, and confidence measures.
Outcomes:
- Reduction of individual 1:1 hours by 32% with improved social participation.
- Two new peer friendships formed; reported loneliness fell significantly.
- Commissioner praised the model for combining outcomes and efficiency.
Tender line: “Shared staffing increased participation and reduced isolation; hours fell 32% while confidence and friendships grew, evidencing best value.”
📉 Example 4: Preventing Hospital Admissions With Digital Care
Context (Home Care): A client had repeated A&E attendances (medication errors, dehydration).
Interventions:
- Introduced eMAR with alerts, hydration prompts, and family GP liaison.
- Weekly audit of medication and hydration adherence via dashboards.
Outcomes:
- Unplanned admissions dropped from six per year to zero over 10 months.
- Improved well-being and fewer crisis calls; measurable savings to the system.
Tender line: “eMAR plus hydration prompts reduced unplanned admissions to zero; the protocol is now embedded across all similar packages.”
🧩 Example 5: Skill-Building That Replaces Paid Hours
Context (LD): A person relied on staff for shopping, meal prep, and laundry (10 hours/week).
Interventions:
- 12-week graded independence programme with visual guides and checklists.
- Assistive tech: step-by-step cooking app, induction hob safety, and timed appliances.
Outcomes:
- Paid hours reduced from 10 to 6/week with no increase in incidents.
- Self-reported independence rose; family satisfaction improved.
Tender line: “Graded skills programme cut paid hours by 40% while increasing confidence and safety, verified via review data.”
🧭 How to Structure Best Value Responses
Use a repeatable, scorable structure:
- Need/Context — baseline risks, hours, incidents, admissions.
- Approach — PBS, tech, shared staffing, skill-building, digital care.
- Safety — risk assessments, consent/MCA, escalation, supervision, audits.
- Evidence — before/after data, case examples, KPIs, costed impact.
- Commissioner benefit — outcomes per £1, system savings, sustainability.
🛡️ Safety & Governance When Reducing Support
Support reductions must be earned through outcomes and risk control, not imposed. Describe:
- Risk reviews — frequency, who attends, and decision logs.
- Consent & MCA — capacity assessments, best-interest decisions, and family advocacy.
- Supervision — reflective practice, incident learning, and escalation.
- Audit — quality checks, tech testing, and data protection.
Reassure scorers that efficiencies happen within a robust framework, not by increasing risk.
📐 Metrics That Prove Best Value
Pick a small set of indicators and report them consistently:
- Independence measures (tasks completed without support).
- Incidents (frequency, severity, and restraints — aiming downwards).
- Unplanned admissions/999 calls (prevented events).
- Hours reprofiled (waking→sleeping nights; 2:1→1:2).
- Satisfaction and community participation scores.
Present data visually in attachment appendices; summarise the headline numbers in your response.
🚩 Pitfalls That Kill Best Value Scores
- ❌ “We deliver high quality” with no evidence or numbers.
- ❌ Cutting hours without risk planning or consent — unsafe and unscorable.
- ❌ Listing technology but not embedding it into practice and governance.
- ❌ Overclaiming savings without tracking or commissioner sign-off.
- ❌ Generic copy that could belong to any provider.
A second pair of eyes helps. Our tender review service weeds out vague claims and reshapes answers around the commissioner’s rubric.
🧰 Practical Mini-Examples
1) Technology-Enabled Sleeping Nights
“Following MDT review and consent, we implemented epilepsy and movement sensors linked to secure alerts. With rehearsed response protocols (<3 minutes median), we transitioned from waking to sleeping nights for three people. Safety was maintained and sleep quality improved. Hours were reallocated to daytime goals, delivering verified savings and better outcomes.”
2) PBS-Driven Ratio Reduction
“We embedded PBS with weekly reflective supervision and a structured activity schedule. Incidents fell by 65% over 9 months; staffing safely reprofiled from 2:1 to 1:1; Reviews document the decision-making process, with the person’s voice central. Outcomes improved across independence, participation, and family satisfaction.”
3) Shared Staffing for Community Inclusion
“Co-produced timetables enabled 1:2–1:3 staffing for community sessions. People reported more friendships and reduced loneliness; total hours reduced by 32% with no increase in incidents. Commissioners recognised this as both efficient and person-centred.”
🎯 Final Thought
Best value is not a race to the bottom. It’s a disciplined way to prove that quality, prevention, and independence produce sustainable savings — and better lives. Show commissioners how you reduce avoidable support safely, measure impact, and reinvest capacity where it matters. Do that consistently, and you won’t just be compliant — you’ll be compelling; and you’ll win and retain more tender contracts.
💼 Rapid Support Products (fast turnaround options)
- ⚡ 48-Hour Tender Triage
- 🆘 Bid Rescue Session – 60 minutes
- ✍️ Score Booster – Tender Answer Rewrite
- 🧩 Tender Answer Blueprint
- 📝 Tender Proofreading & Light Editing
- 🔍 Pre-Tender Readiness Audit
- 📁 Tender Document Review
🚀 Need a Bid Writing Quote?
If you’re exploring support for an upcoming tender or framework, request a quick, no-obligation quote. I’ll review your documents and respond with:
- A clear scope of work
- Estimated days required
- A fixed fee quote
- Any risks, considerations or quick wins
🔁 Prefer Flexible Monthly Support?
If you regularly handle tenders, frameworks or call-offs, a Monthly Bid Support Retainer may be a better fit.
- Guaranteed hours each month (1, 2, 4 or 8 days)
- Discounted day rates vs ad-hoc consultancy
- Use time flexibly across bids, triage, library updates, renewals
- One-month rollover (fair-use rules applied)
- Cancel anytime before next billing date
🚀 Ready to Win Your Next Bid?
Chat on WhatsApp or email Mike.Harrison@impact-guru.co.uk
Updated for Procurement Act 2023 • CQC-aligned • BASE-aligned (where relevant)