This is Part 2 of our RM6378 series on how to bid CCS framework. If you haven’t read Part 1, start there—it covers framework structure, capability assessment, and why most bid failures originate in poor cost modelling, not poor writing.

Part 2 addresses what actually determines success once your submission lands on CCS evaluator desks: how CCS scores bids, what evidence they demand, and the specific areas where credible FM suppliers to government consistently outperform competitors in public sector FM bidding.

The CCS Evaluation Model: PQP

CCS uses a Price-Quality-Price (PQP) evaluation model across all RM6378 lots. Understanding the CCS evaluation criteria is essential for anyone learning how to bid CCS framework successfully.

Price-Quality-Price means this: CCS evaluators first eliminate suppliers whose prices are unreasonably high or low compared to the market. This isn’t about the lowest price winning. It’s about identifying pricing that falls within a defensible range. Suppliers priced outside that range are excluded before quality evaluation begins.

Once pricing is deemed acceptable, evaluators assess quality across a series of published criteria. Quality scoring determines ranking. Price is reviewed again only when quality scores are equal.

This structure creates a specific risk: if your pricing is unrealistic relative to market expectations, you fail at the first gate regardless of how strong your quality response is. This is why cost modelling before writing matters. Your pricing must reflect genuine delivery capability and align with what the market expects. This is critical for FM tender success.

The Award Criteria: What CCS Actually Weights

CCS has published detailed RM6378 evaluation criteria and weightings for each lot. Understanding these CCS evaluation criteria weightings should directly shape how you resource your CCS framework tender bid response and develop your FM framework bid strategy.

For Total Facilities Management lots (1a, 1b, 1c), the quality weightings are:

• Social Value: 10%
• FM Contract Management: 25%
• FM Continuous Improvement and Innovation: 3%
• Hard FM Continuous Improvement and Innovation: 11%
• Soft FM Continuous Improvement and Innovation: 11%
• Hard FM Service Delivery: 20%
• Soft FM Service Delivery: 20%

What this tells you: Your response must address both Hard and Soft FM delivery equally—there is no option to underweight one at the expense of the other. Contract management and social value together account for 35% of your quality score. These are not peripheral. Innovation accounts for only 3% in isolation, though improvement is embedded across service delivery criteria.

For Hard FM only (Lots 2a, 2b), the weighting shifts significantly:

• Social Value: 10%
• FM Contract Management: 25%
• FM Continuous Improvement and Innovation: 3%
• Hard FM Continuous Improvement and Innovation: 22%
• Hard FM Service Delivery: 40%

What this tells you: Hard FM Service Delivery is weighted at double the level in Total FM. This is not accidental. CCS recognises that Hard FM (maintenance, repairs, compliance) is where delivery failure most directly impacts the procuring body. Your evidence and commitments here must be robust.

For Soft FM only (Lots 3a, 3b), the pattern is similar but inverted—Soft FM Service Delivery receives 40% weight.

For Security lots (4a through 4d), weightings vary by the specific service:

• Lot 4a (Total Security): Security Officer Services, Physical/Electronic Systems, and Security Advisory each receive 13% weight.
• Lot 4b (Security Officers only): Security Officer Service Delivery rises to 39%.
• Lots 4c and 4d follow the same principle: the specific service type receives the highest weighting.

The strategic implication: Your evidence building should directly mirror these weightings. If you are bidding Hard FM, do not spend the same resource effort on soft services as you would on hard delivery evidence. Match your evidence portfolio to CCS’s stated priorities.

Technical Ability: What CCS Actually Demands

The participation section requires evidence of “Technical Ability.” CCS assesses this through published criteria in their Procurement Specific Questionnaire. This is a key component of facilities management tender response and government FM tender response requirements.

In practice, CCS requires:

Technical Ability Certificates demonstrating that you have delivered services of similar scope and scale within a defined period (typically three to five years). These certificates must come from clients who can speak to the quality and breadth of what you delivered—not just that you did the work, but how you managed it.

For Total FM lots, your Technical Ability evidence must show delivery across both Hard and Soft services at comparable scale. If you are bidding Lot 1c (£15m+ annual value), you need evidence of operating at or near £15m+ annually. If your evidence caps at £8m, you have a capability gap.

This is where many suppliers encounter clarification requests. They bid for a lot beyond their evidenced track record, then are asked to explain the gap. When you cannot credibly explain it, your bid loses credibility.

Honest lot selection prevents this. If your evidence is genuinely at £5-8m annual turnover, Lot 1b (£2-15m) is your realistic target, not Lot 1c. Bidding beyond your evidence does not expand your opportunity—it creates a credibility liability.

For sector-specific lots (Hard FM, Soft FM, Security), CCS similarly expects evidence of relevant service delivery. If you are bidding Hard FM for the first time, evidence of Hard FM delivery is what counts. Central government Total FM experience is valuable context but not a substitute for specific Hard FM track record.

Case Studies and Service Delivery Evidence

CCS evaluators review case studies to assess how you have managed similar complexity in the past.

Effective case studies address:

• Scale and scope: What was the contract value and duration? How many sites, how many staff?
• Complexity: What specific challenges did you encounter? How did you solve them?
• Continuity and performance: How long did the relationship last? Why did it end?
• Client satisfaction: What metrics did you achieve? What feedback did you receive?

What does not work: Generic statements about “delivering excellence” without specific evidence. Outdated examples (more than 5 years old unless you have nothing else). Case studies from sectors substantially different from what you are bidding. References who cannot be reached.

What does work: Specific examples from the last 2-3 years. Concrete delivery against measurable standards (response times, quality metrics, cost management). Examples where you solved a problem or improved performance. References who will take the call and speak directly to what you did.

CCS evaluators will contact references. If references cannot articulate what you delivered or qualify their recommendations, your case study loses credibility. This is another reason why honest evidence building matters: if your case studies are genuine, references will validate them.

The Social Value Requirement: It Is Not Marketing

The Procurement Act 2023 requires public sector organisations to consider social value. CCS has aligned this requirement to five Government Missions:

1. Clean Energy and Green Jobs
2. Spreading Opportunities and Levelling Up
3. Supporting NHS
4. Safer Streets and Neighbourhood
5. Healthy Ageing

Your FM or security services must demonstrate how they contribute to at least one of these missions.

This is where many suppliers fail. They treat social value as marketing language—”we’re committed to sustainability” without any cost or resource commitment. CCS evaluators ask a simple question: what will you actually do, what will it cost, and how will you measure it?

If you commit to “apprenticeship support,” CCS expects you to identify how many apprenticeships, the cost per apprentice, how you will recruit them, and how success will be measured. This commitment must be resourced in your cost model.

If you claim “local employment,” CCS expects you to outline how you will source local labour, what percentage you target, and how you will verify it.

If you propose “environmental improvement,” CCS expects specifics: waste reduction targets, energy efficiency measures, circular economy approaches—with costs attached.

This is not optional. Social value accounts for 10% of your quality score across all lots. If your social value response is vague or unsupported, you lose 10 points on a 100-point scale. That is material.

Financial Capacity: What CCS Requires

CCS assesses financial capacity through the Procurement Specific Questionnaire. This typically requires:

• Audited accounts for the last two to three financial years
• Evidence of relevant insurance (public liability, professional indemnity)
• Credit checks and financial health indicators
• For larger lots, sometimes evidence of bonding capacity

What CCS is assessing: Can you actually deliver this contract without financial strain? If you are awarded Lot 1c (£15m+ annually), CCS needs confidence that you have the working capital and financial stability to deliver it.

Suppliers sometimes overstate their financial capacity. If your latest accounts show £10m turnover and you are bidding a £15m+ lot, CCS will question how you will resource the step-up. If your accounts show declining profitability or cash flow stress, CCS will question your financial resilience.

Be honest here. If you are financially sound but at a modest scale, bid the lots that match your scale. Financial capacity is not something you can write your way around.

The Submission Timeline and Practical Deadlines

RM6378 opens for submissions on 5 January 2026. The deadline is 3:00 PM on that date.

This is non-negotiable. CCS does not accept submissions after the deadline, regardless of circumstance.

Working backward:

• Award decision: 11 June 2026 (estimated)
• Clarification deadline: 8 December 2025
• Submission deadline: 5 January 2026

You have until 8 December to submit questions to CCS through the portal. If CCS’s published information is unclear, this is when you seek clarification.

Practically, this means:

• Your bid must be complete, reviewed, compliant and uploaded by 2:55 PM on 5 January 2026.
• All evidence—Technical Ability Certificates, case studies, accounts, insurance documentation—must be gathered and reviewed well before submission.
• Your cost model, pricing, and compliance mapping must be finished by early December, leaving time for writing and review.
• CCS will issue clarifications after submission. These typically must be answered within 5-10 working days. You will need bandwidth to respond.

If you have not begun preparation by November 2025, you are behind. The timeline is tight for suppliers doing this for the first time.

The Lot Structure in Practice: Where Your Revenue Actually Sits

The lot structure reflects market realities in government FM contracts opportunities. Understanding this is critical for your FM framework supplier selection criteria and revenue planning. This is where suppliers learn about getting on CCS frameworks effectively.

Lot 1a (Total FM, £0-£2m annual) is designed for SMEs and specialist regional providers. The economics are different at this scale—you cannot deploy the same overhead structure as a national provider and remain competitive. But the opportunity is genuine. CCS estimates this represents billions in aggregate value across multiple smaller contracts.

Lot 1b (Total FM, £2-£15m annual) is where most large regional providers and specialist nationals compete. This band has the most suppliers bidding and the most competitive intensity.

Lot 1c (Total FM, £15m+) is reserved for only the largest multi-service operators. If you do not have £15m+ track record in Total FM, do not bid this. The evaluation will be at a different level.

The Hard/Soft split (Lots 2 and 3) allows suppliers to specialise. If you are a specialist Hard FM provider, you don’t need to commit to Soft services. This is intentional. CCS recognises that some providers excel at maintenance and compliance but are not equipped to manage catering or reception.

Security lots (4a-4d) are similarly segmented. You can bid Total Security, or specialise in officers, physical/electronic systems, or advisory services.

Strategic question: Which lots genuinely represent your revenue opportunity? Not which lots you could theoretically deliver, but which ones align with your evidence, your pricing, and your operational capacity.

How Call-Offs Actually Work Under RM6378

Once you are on the framework, CCS and other public sector bodies issue mini-competitions or direct awards against the lots you are on.

For direct awards (smaller value, less complex), a procuring body selects you directly if you are the only supplier on a relevant lot or if they choose you without competition.

For mini-competitions, multiple suppliers on the relevant lot submit bids to the specific call-off. CCS re-evaluates using similar criteria to the framework tender but applied to the specific contract requirements.

This means: Being on the framework is not the same as holding the work. You must be equipped to respond to call-off competitions repeatedly over three years. If your internal process cannot handle multiple bids in parallel, or if you lack the agility to respond to varying requirements, framework management becomes operationally challenging.

Many framework suppliers are less prepared for call-off management than they were for the initial framework bid. Plan for this.

The Risk Assessment CCS Has Flagged

CCS has noted that “other locations in addition to the 99 listed under Contract Locations may be required at Call-Off.”

This means you should not assume call-offs will be limited to UK locations. If you bid the security or FM lots and are awarded, CCS may call on you to service locations across a much broader geographic footprint than you initially planned for. Plan your operational and financial model with this in mind.

What Happens to Unsuccessful Bidders

If you do not win a place on RM6378, the framework does not reopen for new suppliers until Year 3 (estimated 2028).

This is not a failure from which you immediately recover. Missing RM6378 creates a material gap in public sector access for several years. Competitors who win will have regular pipeline access to this work across multiple public sector buyers. Your absence creates competitive disadvantage that is difficult to overcome.

This is why treating RM6378 seriously is not optional for FM and security suppliers. It is strategically critical.

The Practical Question: Can You Win?

The answer depends on whether your preparation matches the scale of the opportunity.

Suppliers who succeed on RM6378 typically share several characteristics:

1. Honest lot selection. They bid where they have genuine evidence and capability, not where they have ambition.
2. Sound cost modelling. Their pricing reflects real delivery costs and aligns with market expectations.
3. Integrated teams. Finance, operations, bid and legal work from the same understanding throughout.
4. Early preparation. They begin 3-4 months before submission, not weeks before.
5. Substantive social value. They cost and resource their social value commitments.
6. Credible evidence. Their case studies, references, and Technical Ability are genuine, recent and specific.

Suppliers who struggle typically have the opposite pattern: ambitious lot selection without matching evidence, pricing developed in isolation from operational reality, siloed team processes, rushed preparation, and generic social value responses.

What To Do Now

If you’re asking “Should we bid RM6378?” or learning how to bid CCS framework, here’s what to do:

1. Review the CCS framework documents in detail. The Procurement Specific Questionnaire and Attachment 2 contain the actual evaluation criteria and requirements. This is not optional reading for anyone serious about CCS framework tender 2026.
2. Assess your lot strategy honestly. Map which lots align with your evidence, turnover, and capability. This is your FM framework bid strategy foundation. Be willing to narrow your focus rather than stretch beyond your capability.
3. Build your cost model using current market data. Validate it against market benchmarks. Use it as the reference point for operations planning, bid writing and compliance review.
4. Consolidate your evidence. Technical Ability Certificates, case studies, references, accounts, insurance—gather these now. Identify gaps. Decide whether to fill them or adjust your lot strategy.
5. Plan your social value substantively. Work out which Government Mission your services contribute to. Cost the contribution. Commit to deliver it.
6. Align your teams. Finance, operations, bid leadership and legal should understand your cost model, delivery model and compliance requirements. Establish decision-making processes so choices are informed and consistent.
7. Set up alerts. Register interest on the CCS portal for RM6378. Follow the key dates. Ensure responsibility is clear across your organisation.

The work is substantial. The timeline is tight. The opportunity is material and enduring.

The difference between FM tender success and failure lies in the foundation you build before you write.

Baachu’s Support for RM6378 Bid Development

If you are preparing for CCS framework tender 2026 and want strategic guidance rooted in practical experience, we can help with how to write CCS proposals and develop your FM framework bid strategy.

We’ve worked inside FM businesses through multiple Crown Commercial Service frameworks. We understand what it takes to bid successfully and deliver call-offs afterwards for companies getting on CCS frameworks.

We work across:

• Lot and capability strategy: Honest assessment of where you can genuinely compete as FM suppliers to government
• Cost modelling and benchmarking: Realistic pricing aligned to market expectations and operational capacity
• Evidence consolidation: Technical Ability support, case study development, and reference preparation for facilities management tender response
• Social value planning: Substantive commitments that are resourced and measurable
• CCS bid writing guide: Clear, direct, credible responses that align with your evidence and costs
• Compliance mapping: Procurement Act 2023 requirements integrated into your delivery model

We don’t guarantee wins. We guarantee candid thinking grounded in market reality, disciplined preparation, and attention to the details that actually determine CCS evaluation criteria outcomes.

If you want to bid RM6378 effectively, get in touch at hello@baachu.com.

No hype. No templates. Just clear thinking and hard work to give you the best possible chance of FM tender success.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Should we bid RM6378?

If you are keen in public sector FM market, you have evidence at the lot value, solid cost modelling, and can commit to delivery, yes. This is your entry to government FM contracts opportunities.

How do I learn how to bid CCS framework?

Start with the official CCS documentation. Read our RM6378 Part 1 on framework structure. Build your cost model before you write. That’s your CCS framework how to bid foundation.

Can we bid multiple lots?

Yes. CCS holds you accountable to every commitment across every lot you bid. Only bid lots where you have genuine evidence for FM framework supplier selection criteria.

Should we bid multiple lots?

We suggest No. Bid one lot where your evidence is strongest.  Better to win than spread yourself across getting on CCS frameworks too broadly.

What if we bid multiple lots and lose?

You’re out until 2028 from Crown Commercial Service suppliers list. Don’t risk it. Win one lot first.

Can first-timers win?

Yes. Dozens of first-time suppliers win CCS framework tender cycles each year. Preparation is the difference, not experience with public sector FM bidding.

We’ve never bid CCS before. Where should we start?

Bid the lot that matches your current turnover for your facilities management tender response. If you’re £4m annual, bid Lot 1a or 1b. Not Lot 1c. This is your FM framework bid strategy start point.

Is first-time bidding harder?

No. CCS evaluation is identical. The risk is poor preparation when learning how to write CCS proposals, not being new to Crown Commercial Service.

How long does evaluation take?

5 months. This is the CCS framework tender 2026 timeline: Submit 5 January 2026. Award decision 11 June 2026.

Will we hear anything during evaluation?

No, unless CCS issues clarification requests. Typically 5-10 working days to respond.

What are clarification requests?

CCS asks you to explain elements of your bid. They happen when there are inconsistencies (pricing vs. scope, cost vs. operations).

Do clarification requests mean we’ll lose?

Not necessarily. They damage credibility if explanations are weak. If your bid is solid, clarifications are manageable.

When do we start getting work after award?

Immediately. Some call-offs come within weeks of framework go-live.

Is being on the framework the same as having work?

No. Framework award is access. Work comes through call-offs. You must bid for each one.

How much work can we expect per year?

Depends on lot and your visibility. Lot 1a could be £500k-£2m annually. Lot 1b could be £2m-£15m. Varies widely.

Can we withdraw our bid after submission?

Technically yes, but don’t. If you submit, commit to deliver if awarded.

What if we can’t deliver after we win?

You’re in breach of contract. Better not to bid.

Do we need Baachu to win?

No. You can mostly submit the bid yourself. Baachu can help with your lot selection, estimating, writing and compliance reviews.

How much does RM6378 bid support cost?

Contact us at hello@baachu.com. Pricing depends on your lot, service required and your current compliance for getting on CCS frameworks.

You might also find these articles useful: