Social Value in Procurement: From Policy to Practice
Social value procurement is the practice of using the buying process to deliver additional social, economic, and environmental benefits alongside the core goods, works, or services being bought. In public sector procurement, buyers usually set social value outcomes in the specification and evaluate them in tender criteria, then manage delivery through contract KPIs and reporting. For suppliers, it means explaining how your delivery model will create measurable community benefits, not just offering the lowest price or meeting technical requirements.
When the public sector buys something, the government doesn't just care about what it's getting. It cares about what spending achieves beyond the immediate: local jobs, training for unemployed residents, and lower carbon emissions. That's social value, and in central government contracts, it typically accounts for at least 10% of the evaluation weight.
How to understand social value in procurement?
Think of it this way: when a council buys IT services, the contract delivers software and support.
Social value asks what else the contract could deliver. Local jobs, perhaps. Training for unemployed residents. Carbon reduction commitments. Support for small businesses in the supply chain.
This differs from Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in one important respect. CSR describes voluntary initiatives that a company chooses to pursue. Social value commitments become contractual obligations.
They get monitored and enforced throughout the contract term.
Environmental sustainability represents one component of social value, not the whole picture.
The framework also encompasses employment, skills development, supply chain diversity, innovation, and community wellbeing.
Why social value matters for public sector suppliers
Commercial impact on contract awards
Social value scores directly determine contract outcomes. Under the most economically advantageous tender principle, when two bidders offer comparable technical solutions at similar prices, the social value response becomes the deciding factor.
A weak social value response can cost enough points to cause a loss of a contract, even with strong technical and commercial scores.
Suppliers who treat social value as an afterthought often discover this the hard way.
Social value sits within a procurement market that now spends over £434 billion annually, and with the Procurement Act strengthening requirements across all contract types, the stakes for getting your social value response right have never been higher.
Buyer obligations under the current policy
Public sector buyers face legal requirements to consider social value. This is a compliance obligation for contracting authorities, not a discretionary preference they can ignore.
Contracting authorities publish how they will evaluate social value for each public sector contract in tender documentation.
The evaluation criteria section specifies the weighting applied and the themes or outcomes buyers will score.
Supplier differentiation beyond price
Price competition in public sector markets is intense. Social value offers a route to differentiation that competitors cannot easily replicate overnight.
Suppliers with established local employment programmes, apprenticeship schemes, or carbon-reduction initiatives offer genuine advantages.
Building a credible track record takes time, which creates barriers for competitors who lack similar histories.
The legislative framework for social value in procurement
The policy landscape has strengthened progressively over the past decade, with each piece of legislation building on the last.
The Public Services (Social Value) Act
The Public Services (Social Value) Act was the first legislation requiring public bodies to consider how procurement could improve economic, social, and environmental well-being.
It initially applied only to services contracts, creating a foundation that subsequent policy built upon.
PPN 06/20 and the Social Value Model
Procurement Policy Note (PPN) 06/20 transformed social value from a consideration into a mandatory scored element for central government contracts. It introduced the Social Value Model with five policy themes and defined outcomes that suppliers address in their bids.
Before PPN 06/20, buyers could consider social value. After it, central government buyers had to score it with a minimum weighting.
PPN 002, published in February 2025, replaced PPN 06/20 and introduced an updated Social Value Model aligned with the Procurement Act and the National Procurement Policy Statement.
The minimum 10% weighting remains, but PPN 002 became mandatory for all procurements commenced under the Procurement Act from October 2025.
Social value commitments must be beyond the core deliverables of the contract. I
f the contract is for employment support services, for example, the employment support itself is not a social value. How the supplier recruits, trains, and retains the workforce delivering that service could be.
Under PPN 002, social value is assessed qualitatively.
Buyers score the quality of the method statement and implementation plan, not the volume of commitments. This means larger suppliers cannot win on scale alone; all bidders must explain what they will deliver and how.
The Procurement Act
The Procurement Act expanded social value requirements beyond services contracts, strengthening the legal basis for considering wider public benefit in award decisions across all contract types.
The Act went live in February 2025 and applies to all types of public contracts, not just services.
For suppliers, this means social value scoring now touches a far wider share of the £434 billion procurement market than the original 2012 Act ever did.
The National Procurement Policy Statement
The National Procurement Policy Statement sets strategic priorities that contracting authorities must consider when making procurement decisions.
Social value is embedded as a core procurement objective alongside value for money and commercial considerations.
The Social Value Model and its five themes
The Social Value Model provides a standardised framework for evaluating supplier commitments in central government procurements.
All five themes align with government policy priorities, and suppliers map their offers to whichever themes the tender specifies.
COVID-19 recovery
This theme originated in the pandemic response but remains part of the model.
Commitments typically include supporting local employment, addressing skills gaps created by economic disruption, and rebuilding resilience in affected sectors.
Tackling economic inequality
This theme centres on regional and demographic disparities.
Relevant commitments include creating employment in deprived areas, supporting SME supply chains, and investing in workforce development for underrepresented groups. These themes map directly onto where public money actually flows.
Social protection is the UK's largest single area of government expenditure, and it has grown steadily for two decades, underscoring why tackling inequality and supporting community wellbeing carry so much weight in evaluation frameworks.
Total UK social protection expenditure has risen from £145 billion in 2002/03 to £384 billion in 2024/25, reflecting sustained growth in the government function most closely aligned with social value outcomes. (Source: PESA 2025, HM Treasury)
Fighting climate change
Environmental commitments under this theme include carbon-reduction targets, sustainable operational practices, and support for the transition to net zero.
Suppliers often commit to specific emissions reductions, sustainable sourcing policies, or the adoption of green technology.
Equal opportunity
This theme targets workforce inequality. Commitments address the disability employment gap, improve representation in the supply chain, and tackle barriers to employment for underrepresented groups.
Wellbeing
Improving health outcomes and community integration falls under this theme.
Commitments might include mental health support programmes, physical wellbeing initiatives, or activities that strengthen community cohesion.
How social value is weighted in tender evaluations
Typical weightings by contract type
The central government applies a minimum weighting to social value, with requirements expanding from October 2025, though individual procurements may apply higher weightings depending on the nature and objectives of the contract.
Local authorities and NHS bodies set their own weightings, which vary considerably.
More complex contracts and longer-term agreements typically undergo greater scrutiny for social value.
Evaluation criteria and scoring methods
Buyers score social value responses against specific outcomes defined in tender documents.
Three common approaches appear across public sector procurements:
- Pass/fail minimum thresholds: Baseline requirements that bidders meet to remain in competition
- Relative scoring: Comparing bidders against each other, with the strongest response receiving maximum points
- Quantified scoring: Points awarded for measurable commitments, often using proxy values to compare different types of social value
Evidence requirements for social value claims
Generic statements about good intentions score poorly. Buyers require substantiation: specific commitments, measurable targets, delivery timelines, and geographic scope.
Buyers want to see an impact in the local area of the contract.
A supplier bidding for a contract in the North East will not score well by referencing social value initiatives delivered in the South West, unless citing them as evidence of capability.
The commitments themselves need to be locally relevant.
Effective social value responses follow the SMART framework: commitments that are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound.
Vague promises to "support local communities" carry far less weight than a commitment to "create 10 apprenticeship positions in the West Midlands within 12 months of contract start."
How suppliers demonstrate social value in bids
Aligning commitments to model themes
Successful responses map commitments directly to the Social Value Model themes specified in the tender.
Using the buyer's language and priorities demonstrates understanding of what the contracting authority values.
If a tender emphasises tackling economic inequality, responses that focus heavily on environmental commitments miss the mark.
The evaluation criteria spell out exactly what each buyer prioritises. Don't default to your strongest theme if it's not what they've asked for.
Quantifying social value outcomes
Expressing commitments in measurable terms considerably strengthens responses.
Rather than promising to "support local employment," effective responses commit to specific numbers of jobs, apprenticeships, or training hours within defined timeframes and locations.
Evidencing track record and delivery capability
Past delivery examples demonstrate credibility. Buyers look for evidence that suppliers have the organisational capability, partnerships, and infrastructure to fulfil their commitments.
Tip 1: Reference existing initiatives rather than proposing entirely new programmes. An established track record carries more weight than ambitious but untested proposals.
Tip 2: Avoid copying social value responses from previous bids. Requirements vary significantly between buyers, and generic responses that don't reflect the specific contracting authority's priorities will score poorly.
How social value is measured and reported
The TOMs framework
The National Themes, Outcomes and Measures (TOMs) framework, developed by the Social Value Portal, provides standardised metrics and proxy values for quantifying social value. Local authorities and NHS bodies widely adopt this framework.
Under the TOMS framework, each activity carries a defined proxy monetary value.
For example, one week of an apprenticeship carries a proxy value of approximately £116, while recruiting one long-term unemployed person is valued at over £51,000. These values allow buyers to compare different types of social value commitments on a like-for-like basis.
Local authorities and NHS bodies typically structure the TOMs framework around three pillars: Social (community health and resilience), Economic (jobs, skills, and local supply chain spend), and Environmental (carbon reduction, waste, and biodiversity).
The table below shows typical priority metrics under each pillar, based on real council frameworks.
Table 1: Social
Many councils link their social value priorities to the Marmot Review ("Fair Society, Healthy Lives," 2010), which established that health outcomes are driven by social and economic conditions rather than healthcare alone.
This is why social value questions often focus on community resilience and health inequality rather than just local economic impact.
Table 2: Economic
Buyers often track recruitment of priority groups as separate line items, with individual FTE counts for categories such as NEETs, care leavers, veterans, ex-offenders, long-term unemployed, people with disabilities, mothers returning to work, survivors of modern slavery, and homeless individuals.
Table 3: Environmental
The Social Value Model measurement approach
The central government uses the Social Value Model outcomes rather than TOMs.
This approach is less prescriptive but requires clear measurement against stated commitments.
Contract monitoring and compliance
Social value commitments become contractual obligations once a contract is awarded.
Suppliers report progress during contract delivery, typically through regular performance reviews.
Non-delivery can affect future bid evaluations, contract extensions, and standing with that buyer. Contract managers track social value delivery alongside operational performance.
Are you prepared for social value requirements?
Social value now carries enough weight in tender evaluations to decide contract outcomes.
Suppliers who treat it as a box-ticking exercise, or scramble to write commitments at the bid stage, consistently lose points to competitors who prepare earlier.
Preparation means building the evidence base before opportunities go live.
That includes documenting delivered social value from previous contracts, maintaining up-to-date case studies with measurable outcomes, and understanding which themes and commitments specific buyers have historically prioritised.
Suppliers who know that a particular contracting authority has weighted tackling economic inequality at 15% in their last three procurements can tailor their approach before the ITT even lands.
Those who don't are writing generic responses and hoping for the best.
Stotles surfaces open tenders where social value carries significant evaluation weight and shows historical social value weightings used by specific contracting authorities.
That means you can identify where your existing social value track record aligns with buyer priorities, and focus your bid effort on opportunities you're genuinely positioned to win.
When you do bid, Stotles' AI bid tools can generate first-draft responses to social value questions using your previous answers, case studies, and company documents.
Rather than starting from a blank page each time, you get an 80% complete draft that your bid team refines and tailors, cutting hours from the response process while keeping your commitments specific and evidence-backed.
Want a custom report?