There’s only one Social Value Model, but there are several social value frameworks. Each one measures and monetises the impact of social interventions in different ways.
So, how do you choose the right social value framework for your organisation? That’s what we’ll explore in this blog, which poses ten key questions you’ll need to consider.
1. Is it Fully Aligned with Systems the Commissioning Authorities You Work with Use?
This is a big one, because different types of buyers have different demands:
- Central government departments and their agencies must use the definitions, metrics, award criteria, etc set out in the UK Social Value Model (either the PPN06/20 or PPN02 version between February and September 2025; exclusively PPN02 from October)
- Other kinds of authority are not subject to binding rules, meaning they can vary far more in interpreting “social value”.
If you work primarily with central government or its partners, you should look for the social value framework that is most-closely aligned with the Social Value Model.
2. How Robust and Transparent Are the Methodologies for Developing Metrics and Proxy Values?
One of the trickiest elements for social value professionals is assigning meaningful monetary values to the impact of their work – but this is essential to enable buyers to evaluate competing bids.
- HM Treasury’s Green Book gives definitive guidance on how policies, programmes and projects should be appraised by officials. If a framework cannot show that it is based on the latest version of this guidance, then its reliability is immediately questionable
- Given the wide scope of activities that “social value” can cover, reliance on other sources alongside the Green Book is inevitable. Where this is the case, ask:
- Are the secondary and tertiary sources used publicly accessible?
- Are the sources credible (eg Office for National Statistics, universities, think tanks, etc)?
- Are there any conflicts of interest evident? For example, was research cited produced by someone who stands to benefit from the framework?
- Are the metrics and proxies presented subject to independent, expert scrutiny and validation – with disagreements being conducted in the open?
3. How Regularly Is it Updated?
As we’ve already noted, official guidance is subject to regular change. At the same time, new standards of best practice are always being developed by practitioners in the field.
A trustworthy standard will be:
- Updated according to a regular schedule – for example, annually
- Updated in the open – so that users know what has changed and when
4. Is it Focused on the Right Geography?
If you are working within UK public procurement rules, you should make sure that the framework you choose has been designed with UK guidance, UK social conditions, and UK policy priorities in mind.
This leads to a second geographical consideration: is the framework flexible enough to allow you to account for specific local needs and issues facing the communities in which your work will be delivered?
For example, both versions of the Social Value Model say that there is separate social value attached to developing robust local supply chains, including Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs); Voluntary, Charitable and Social Enterprises (VCSEs); and Startups. The framework you choose should include extra weighting for these factors in such cases.
5. Does it Focus on Outcomes? Or Inputs?
A framework that looks primarily at inputs should immediately ring alarm bells – because a focus on inputs implies that monetisation is more important than impact.
For the same reason, you should be suspicious of approaches that prioritise quantity of outputs (eg number of volunteer hours, number of careers events organised, etc) over the quality of the outcomes generated.
Social value is about more than simply money spent or activity undertaken, and if a framework doesn’t set out to measure outcomes – admittedly, a much harder task – then you be wary that it may leave your organisation open to accusations of soc- or greenwashing.
6. Does it Overstate Social Value through Unrealistic Assumptions?
There are two types of error to watch out for here.
The first is a failure to discount “deadweight”. Here, “deadweight” means benefit that would have accrued anyway without the specific social intervention.
For example, if a local authority asks for tenders to build a new leisure centre, the benefits to the community of the leisure centre itself cannot be claimed as social value arising from the project. This ties in to a key social value notion: that of “additionality”. Social value gains must be additional to the core benefits expected from a project – for instance, the boost for the local economy deriving from working with local businesses on the project.
Deadweight is relatively easy to spot. The second problem area is much trickier as it is concealed in the working that underpin metrics and proxy values.
Some frameworks significantly overstate the real value of outcomes – bringing ex-offenders back into work, for example:
- By considering the total cost of all crime in calculating proxy values, without regard to the types of offender and offence that are likely to be rehabilitated in this way
- By ignoring pre-intervention reoffending and re-employment rates – thereby failing to discount the many ex-offenders who obtain work without assistance
Social value frameworks that exaggerate results in these ways don’t stand up to scrutiny. And that’s another reason why transparency is a key factor to look out for.
7. Is it Manageable? Or Over-Complex?
Some frameworks include hundreds of metrics, many of which overlap in part or completely! This is usually because they’ve been edited and added to over time, with new elements brought in as practice evolves – but without looking at how the whole knits together.
This is another reason to opt for a framework that has been designed from the ground up to map onto the rules that commissioning authorities use.
The 2021 Social Value Model presents 52 separate metrics; the 2025 version has 33 “standard reporting metrics”. But many of these cover multiple different scenarios, interventions, and outcomes – eg “Number of people-hours spent protecting and improving the environment under the contract, by UK region”.
A careful balance needs to be struck between:
- Too few metrics – Risking some social value created going unmeasured, or compromising the rigour of proxy values assigned
- Too many metrics – Risking over-complication, overlap and double-counting, inconsistency in calculating proxy values, etc
8. Does it Promote Improved Corporate Practices and Habits?
Another reason to choose a framework that prioritises outcomes above inputs or outputs is the question of sustainability.
One-off interventions are less valuable than those which help create communities and individuals capable of maintaining and improving their circumstances over time.
There’s also a cultural angle. The choice of framework can help to promote a corporate culture where social value is “built-in, not bolt-on” – which is more efficient, leads to improved impact, and delivers more good over the years.
9. What Support is Available for Users?
If the framework you are considering offers training, guidance, and support for users then:
- It will demand less of your time to learn how to use
- You will be less at risk of making a mistake and potentially losing contracts as a result
10. Are Organisations Like Yours Also Using It?
And finally, always take the time to check who else uses the frameworks you’re looking at.
But don’t only look for similar businesses: also keep an eye out for what commissioning authorities say about the frameworks they use (like this, for example).
Alan Boyce
Senior Researcher More articles by Alan >
