If you’ve noticed NHS tenders starting to ask for “more than delivery”, you’re not imagining it. Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) are being nudged towards a more strategic commissioning approach, which affects what they fund, how they shape services and what they need to see from providers and bidders.
This guide breaks the shift into a simple, evaluator-friendly scorecard. It’s written for providers, delivery partners and suppliers who want to submit bids that are easier to mark, harder to pick apart, and more clearly aligned to what commissioners are trying to achieve.
Why ICB bid expectations are changing
NHS England’s Strategic Commissioning Framework sets out what NHS England expects from ICBs in the strategic commissioner role, and includes an updated commissioning cycle. For a full view of what this means for you, read our guide to NHS commissioning and ICB changes.
You do not need to quote the framework in every bid, but you do need to recognise the direction of travel it implies:
- stronger use of population insight and evidence in shaping services
- a bigger emphasis on prevention and reducing avoidable escalation
- digital enablement as part of the operating model, not an add-on
- clearer outcomes, evaluation, value and learning over time
In 2026, many evaluations will still score on the basics, such as mobilisation, governance, workforce and risk control. The difference is that “basics” alone will be less distinctive. The highest scoring bids will make it obvious how the service moves the dial for the population and how you will prove it.
The ICB evaluator scorecard for 2026 bids
Think of an evaluator reading your response with four questions in mind. Your job is to answer them quickly, with proof.
Do you understand our population and priorities, or are you guessing?
This is where data and insight stops being a buzzword and becomes a scoring lever.
What tends to score well
- a clear needs story that links demand, variation and outcomes to your model
- segmentation that fits the service, not a generic “all residents” statement
- an explicit inequalities lens, including barriers to access and engagement
- local context references, used sparingly and with a clear implication for design
What usually loses marks
- data listed without interpretation
- segmentation that is not used anywhere else in the response
- vague inequalities commitments with no delivery mechanism
- “national policy only” answers with no local relevance
Make it scorable
Use a short “needs to design” bridge, for example:
- “The population insight tells us X. That changes our model in these three ways: A, B, C.”
- “The highest-risk groups for access are Y and Z. We will mitigate through these specific adjustments.”
If you want Bidding Limited to sense-check whether your insight story reads as evidence or assumption, our NHS & ICB bid strategy consultancy support is designed for exactly that.
Can your model deliver prevention, not just respond to demand?
ICB bid expectations around prevention can be hard to meet. Prevention is often easy to claim and harder to evidence. Evaluators often look for whether you can make prevention operational without destabilising delivery.
What tends to score well
- prevention defined in practical terms, such as earlier intervention points, outreach, navigation, behaviour change support, or pathway redesign
- clear referral and step-up, step-down logic
- measurable indicators that show early impact, not only end outcomes
- an approach that integrates with existing services, not parallel provision
What usually loses marks
- “we focus on prevention” with no pathway detail
- prevention activities that are not resourced, scheduled or governed
- outcomes that cannot be measured inside the contract term
- no explanation of how you will reach underserved groups
Make it scorable
Add a short “prevention mechanics” box:
- Trigger points
- Who does what
- How people enter the prevention offer
- What data proves it is working
Is digital embedded in delivery, or bolted on?
From 2026, digital will often be assessed as part of access, productivity, quality and reporting. In other words, ICB bid expectations will include whether it makes the service safer, easier to use and easier to manage.
What tends to score well
- a simple description of your digital touchpoints across the pathway
- information governance and data quality handled in plain English
- reporting that links activity, outcomes and learning
- realistic adoption planning, including staff and user support
What usually loses marks
- a long list of systems with no explanation of how they change delivery
- “interoperability” claims without boundaries and assumptions
- vague promises on dashboards with no definitions
- no plan for uptake, training and support
Make it scorable
Use a one-page style summary in words:
- “This is what the user experiences”
- “This is what staff do differently”
- “This is what the commissioner sees in reporting”
Can we see outcomes, value and control, and can you prove it over time?
ICBs have to make resource decisions and justify them. The bids that score are usually the ones that make value and outcomes easy to trace.
What tends to score well
- a clear outcomes chain: needs → activities → outputs → outcomes
- a small set of meaningful measures, defined well
- evaluation that includes learning and iteration, not just reporting
- value for money expressed with clarity, not jargon
- operational control: workforce, clinical governance, escalation, risk ownership
What usually loses marks
- lots of KPIs with no rationale
- outcomes that do not connect to delivery activities
- evaluation described as “we will review” with no rhythm or method
- cost narratives that do not relate to demand or productivity
Make it scorable
Include a short “how we will manage and improve” rhythm:
- what happens weekly, monthly, quarterly
- who attends
- what triggers change
- how changes are documented and agreed
Bidding Limited often sees marks lost here not because the model is weak, but because the evidence is hard to find. A mock evaluation approach can help you spot that quickly.
The evidence pack ICBs will expect you to have ready
Even when a tender does not ask for all of this explicitly, having it prepared makes writing faster and responses stronger.
Data and insight
- needs narrative, with a small number of credible sources
- segmentation logic and what it changes in your model
- inequalities barriers and your targeted mitigations
Prevention and pathways
- pathway map and interface points
- referral routes and eligibility logic
- prevention activities with resourcing and governance
Digital and reporting
- digital touchpoints and adoption plan
- information governance and data quality approach
- reporting definitions for activity, outcomes and learning
Outcomes and value
- outcomes chain and evaluation method
- performance and improvement rhythm
- value for money story linked to demand, productivity and outcomes
Quick self-audit: 10 questions before you submit
Use this as a last pass.
- Could an evaluator summarise our needs story in one sentence?
- Have we shown how population insight changes design decisions?
- Is our inequalities approach specific, resourced and measurable?
- Is prevention described as delivery mechanics, not a slogan?
- Can the evaluator see how people flow through the pathway?
- Is digital described through user, staff and commissioner lenses?
- Are our outcomes defined, measurable and linked to activities?
- Do we show how we will learn and improve during the contract?
- Have we made value for money easy to follow and credible?
- Have we made our service easy to score, with clear proof points?
Next steps
If you are preparing for ICB opportunities and want to turn your model into clearer, more scorable answers, Bidding Limited can support on strategy, bid management, writing and evaluator-style review. Our healthcare tenders team supports NHS, ICB and local authority healthcare bids across services and delivery models. Together, we can help you to meet ICB bid expectations and give you a stronger chance of securing your next win.
