What Commissioners Want to See in Domiciliary Care Bids

November 10, 2025

👀 Blog 4 of 7 in our Domiciliary Care Bid Writing Series

Links to all 7 blogs in this series are at the bottom of this post.

In this series, we explore what makes domiciliary care tenders score highly — and what causes otherwise strong providers to miss the mark. Each post takes a focused look at one of the biggest scoring levers: structure, local knowledge, evidence, outcomes, and presentation. Whether you’re bidding for a local authority, NHS, or integrated framework, the same principles apply: clarity, alignment, and proof.

If you’re preparing a live bid, our domiciliary care bid writer and home care bid writer services can help you strengthen structure, language, and evidence — turning what you do every day into a scoring narrative that resonates with commissioners.

🧐 What Do Commissioners Actually Want?

Commissioners aren’t just looking for compliance — they’re looking for confidence. They want to see that your service is not only safe and well-led, but that it consistently improves lives, collaborates with local partners, and contributes to wider system goals like hospital avoidance, prevention, and inclusion.

When assessors read through a stack of tenders, the ones that stand out show a clear connection between care delivery and commissioner outcomes. That connection usually shows up in five key ways:

Local insight — showing you understand population needs and local system priorities
Personalisation — evidence of people shaping their support, not just being recipients of it
Measurable outcomes — tracking improvement, not just activity
Workforce stability — retaining staff and embedding values-led culture
Co-production, equity, and inclusion — clear, structured engagement with diverse voices

Each of these factors links directly to the Care Quality Commission’s (CQC) Quality Statements and to local authority goals under the Care Act 2014. The strongest bids explicitly reference those links, showing not only that you meet the standard, but that you understand the wider system context.

An experienced domiciliary care bid writer will help you draw those lines clearly — turning your operational detail into narrative evidence that commissioners can score with confidence.

🚫 Common Pitfalls

Most unsuccessful domiciliary care tenders don’t fail because of bad services — they fail because of unclear writing. Common pitfalls include:

Overusing generic terms such as “high-quality” or “client-centred” without proving what that means in practice
Copying and pasting responses from previous bids without adapting them to the current specification
Listing policies and training without explaining how they translate into frontline action
Not showing how outcomes are reviewed, measured, and improved over time
Failing to connect examples to measurable results

Commissioners are looking for tangible impact — not just reassurance. The winning bids show why it matters, how it works, and what difference it makes.

For instance, a line like “We use real-time digital monitoring to ensure continuity of care” can be expanded to say: “Our real-time monitoring identifies rota gaps within 15 minutes, enabling redeployment before visits are missed — maintaining 99.3% on-time performance across 10,000 visits per month.” That’s the difference between a compliant answer and a high-scoring one.

✅ What to Include Instead

Commissioners want assurance through evidence. Replace generic claims with specifics that show results, collaboration, and improvement.

Case studies: Real examples showing someone’s independence or wellbeing improving over time. Keep them short — 4–5 lines — but outcome-focused.
KPIs and metrics: Use internal performance data (on-time visits, continuity, reablement goals met). Even if it’s internal, it’s still powerful.
Co-production mechanisms: Describe how you gather and act on lived experience — service user forums, family feedback groups, peer advocates.
Links to local priorities: Quote from the Health and Wellbeing Strategy, Integrated Care Strategy, or Equality Objectives to show alignment.

When you bring these elements together, you’re not just a compliant provider — you’re a strategic partner delivering against shared system goals.

🧠 Case Example: Turning Practice into Points

Let’s say you introduced a new evening check-in service for people recently discharged from hospital. A weak answer might simply describe the process. A strong answer would show:

Why it was introduced (e.g. 15% of hospital readmissions linked to medication non-adherence)
What you did (daily evening calls with eMAR verification for 14 days post-discharge)
Result: “Reduced readmissions to 3% over 6 months, saving an estimated 42 hospital bed days.”

This narrative moves you from describing *tasks* to proving *impact* — which is exactly what commissioners want to see in tender responses.

🔁 Language Tip: Turn Inputs Into Outcomes

Commissioners don’t just want to know what systems you use — they want to know what difference they make.

Instead of writing:
“We use digital care planning and eMAR systems.”
Say:
“Our use of digital care planning and eMAR ensures care is accurate, responsive, and auditable — contributing to a 17% reduction in medication errors and faster escalation of concerns.”

Every piece of technology, training, or process should have a “so what?” statement attached. This turns your operational descriptions into evidence of effectiveness.

📉 When to Bring in a Specialist Review

Even well-written tenders can lose marks for small errors in alignment, repetition, or missing evidence. A structured review from a tender proofreading and review service can catch these issues early and elevate your submission from compliant to competitive.

Reviewers focus on three key areas: structure, flow, and coverage. Does your answer mirror the commissioner’s scoring framework? Does each sub-point have a verifiable example? Is the tone consistent with your brand voice? These refinements are often what push scores from the 70s into the 90s.

📍 Making It Real: Aligning to Local Systems

Strong bidders reflect the local care system in how they write. Reference named PCNs, hospitals, or community partners — but only if it’s genuine. Commissioners can tell when these references are filler.

Good example: “We are part of the East Lancashire Provider Forum and contribute to the Integrated Discharge Pathway through weekly MDT updates.”

That’s short, real, and connected to outcomes — and it shows that you understand how your service fits into the local ecosystem.

🧩 The Difference Between Compliance and Credibility

Compliance proves you meet the minimum standard. Credibility proves you deliver excellence. The difference lies in the *evidence density* of your answer — how many tangible, verifiable details support your claims.

Here’s a useful rule of thumb:

1 example per 200 words — ideally a micro-case, metric, or partnership mention
1 measurable KPI per question, even if it’s internal
1 connection to local priorities per answer

This formula ensures every section of your bid demonstrates value, context, and reliability — exactly what commissioners are scoring for.

✅ Final Self-Check

Before you submit your tender, ask yourself these five questions:

Does each answer show how your service improves outcomes — not just how it operates?
Have you referenced local priorities, data, or system partners?
Did you include at least one real-world example or KPI per section?
Does your language reflect outcomes and improvement, not just process?
Would a commissioner reading it feel confident you can deliver from day one?

If the answer to all five is “yes,” your tender is likely to score well. If not, our domiciliary care bid writer service can help you close the gap — quickly and strategically.

Item added to your cart