One of the most common questions we hear from clients preparing bids for UK public sector contracts is:
“What is a good total financial value for our TOMs submission?”
It’s a fair question, but one without a simple, universal answer.
While the monetised total (£) generated through the TOMs framework is an important part of evaluation, focusing solely on “how high can we go” is often the wrong strategy. Instead, bidders should view the quantitative element as a strategic lever, balanced carefully against deliverability, scoring methodology, and overall bid competitiveness.
There Is No One-Size-Fits-All Benchmark
A strong TOMs submission in one procurement could be uncompetitive, or even excessive, in another.
This is because:
- Evaluation methodologies differ between contracting authorities
- Weightings vary (typically 10–30%)
- Local priorities influence measure selection and scoring
- The competitive landscape (i.e. what other bidders submit) is unknown.
As a result, defining a “good” figure requires a more nuanced approach.
Quantitative vs Qualitative: Two Different Strategies
A high-performing TOMs response recognises that the quantitative and qualitative elements serve different purposes, and should be treated differently.
Quantitative: A Strategic Decision
The financial value of your TOMs submission should be approached as a calibrated, strategic decision, not a race to the top.
Key considerations include:
- Alignment with local priorities
Focus on measures that directly support the authority’s stated outcomes. A lower overall value that is highly relevant can outperform a higher but less targeted submission through increased scoring in the qualitative element. - Proxy value multipliers
Some measures carry significantly higher proxy values than others. Identifying these can help maximise your total, but only where they are genuinely deliverable. - Deliverability is critical
Every commitment made may become contractual. Overpromising to inflate your total value can introduce delivery risk, reputational damage, and potential penalties. - Commercial positioning
Social value should be considered alongside pricing. In some cases, a slightly lower TOMs figure may be justified if it enables a more competitive overall bid.
Qualitative: Always Aim for Full Marks
In contrast, the qualitative element, typically assessed through method statements, should always be approached with the goal of achieving 100% of available marks.
Unlike the quantitative score, which is often relative or formula-driven, qualitative scoring is based on:
- Clarity and credibility of delivery
- Strength of methodology
- Alignment with local needs
- Evidence and track record.
This is where bidders can differentiate themselves most effectively and where expert input often has the greatest impact on final scores.
Understanding How Quantitative Scoring Works
A critical factor in determining your target TOMs value is understanding how it will be scored. Common approaches include:
1. Relative (Competitive) Scoring
- The bidder with the highest total social value receives full marks
- Other bidders are scored proportionally.
Implication:
There is an incentive to be competitive, but not at the expense of credibility. Overinflated bids may still be marked down if deemed unrealistic.
2. Ratio-Based Scoring (Value vs Contract Value)
- Scores are linked to social value as a proportion of contract value
- For example:
- £0.10 of social value per £1 of contract value = full marks (5/5)
Implication:
Once the threshold is met, there is no benefit in going higher, and doing so may unnecessarily increase delivery burden.
3. Hybrid or Capped Models
- Some authorities apply caps
- Others combine relative scoring with quality checks
Implication:
Understanding the specific model is essential, this should directly inform your strategy.
The Cost of Delivering Social Value
A frequently overlooked aspect of TOMs submissions is that social value is not free to deliver.
Commitments such as:
- Apprenticeships
- Community programmes
- Environmental initiatives
- Volunteering coordination.
all carry real operational costs.
This creates an important strategic consideration:
How does your social value commitment interact with your pricing strategy?
In practice, this can lead to different approaches:
- Higher social value, higher cost base
Positioning as a premium, high-impact bidder - Balanced approach
Delivering strong, targeted social value while maintaining competitive pricing - Lean approach
Focusing on highly relevant, efficient measures to minimise cost while still scoring well.
What Good Looks Like
Rather than chasing an arbitrary number, a strong TOMs submission typically demonstrates:
- A well-judged total value aligned to the scoring methodology and contract value
- Clear alignment with local authority priorities
- Strategic use of high-scoring, relevant measures
- Full confidence in deliverability
- A high-quality qualitative response that maximises available marks.
Final Thoughts
The total financial value of a TOMs submission is important, but it is only one part of the overall evaluation.
The most successful bidders understand that:
- The quantitative element is a strategic balancing act
- The qualitative element is where full marks should be secured
- Deliverability and credibility outweigh headline figures
- Social value must be considered in the context of overall bid competitiveness and cost.
Ultimately, a “good” TOMs value is not the highest number, it is the one that is most likely to score well, be delivered successfully, and support a winning bid.
