They are often used interchangeably but they are not the same thing. In a lead provider and subcontractor arrangement — the most common structure in public procurement — one organisation holds the contract, receives all payments, and carries full legal accountability for delivery. The subcontractor has no direct relationship with the commissioner; their agreement is with the lead provider alone. The commissioner has one organisation to hold accountable, one contract, and one invoice. A consortium is a more equal arrangement, where two or more organisations come together as genuine partners with shared governance, shared decision-making, and often shared liability. This is a more complex structure and carries greater legal and operational implications for all parties involved. We explain both in detail at the top of this page — it is worth reading that section carefully before deciding which route is right for your organisation.

In most cases, organisations already have an existing relationship with their subcontractor before approaching us — and this is the ideal starting point. An established working relationship makes the coordination process significantly smoother. If you do not yet have a partner in mind, let us know early in the process. We have sector connections and, where we have someone suitable in mind, we can explore whether an introduction is appropriate. This cannot be guaranteed and depends entirely on the nature of the opportunity and our existing network at that time.

Formal subcontractor agreements are often finalised after the contract is awarded rather than before submission. However, best practice is to have the key terms agreed in principle before bidding — covering roles, responsibilities, financial arrangements, and what happens if either party cannot fulfil their obligations. Going into a bid without this clarity can create significant problems if issues arise during delivery. We recommend having these conversations with your subcontractor early, and we can advise on what commissioners typically expect to see within the submission itself.

This varies entirely depending on the scope of the subcontractor’s role within the service. There is no standard split — it is a commercial negotiation between the lead provider and the subcontractor, based on what each organisation is responsible for delivering. The lead provider receives all payments from the commissioner and pays the subcontractor in accordance with whatever is agreed between them. We cannot advise on the financial terms of that arrangement, but we can help ensure the subcontractor’s role is clearly and credibly represented within the submission.

From direct experience, the most common challenges are: communication delays between organisations, documents and information arriving later than agreed, differing availability for meetings and review calls, and occasional disagreements on how the service should be described within the submission. None of these are insurmountable — but they all take longer to resolve when multiple organisations are involved. This is why we build additional time into the timeline for consortium bids from the outset, and why getting all parties together at the kickoff call rather than communicating through the lead alone makes a significant difference.

This is a risk that commissioners take seriously, and it is something we address directly within the submission. The lead organisation must be able to demonstrate that it can maintain service continuity if a subcontractor were to withdraw — whether through enhanced performance management, temporary redistribution of work, or replacement with an alternative qualified provider. Commissioners want assurance that service users will not be affected regardless of what happens within the delivery partnership. We write this contingency into the bid explicitly so that it does not become a vulnerability in the assessment.

Commissioners do not typically express a preference for one structure over the other. What they want to see is a clearly governed delivery model with unambiguous accountability — regardless of how many organisations are involved. The most common weakness we see in consortium submissions is a lack of clarity around how subcontracting will work in practice, particularly in the event of performance or financial issues. We address this directly in every consortium bid we support, ensuring the governance structure is clearly explained and every accountability line is explicit.

Ideally, you should already have an existing working relationship with your subcontractor or consortium partner before coming to us. A partnership that is formed purely for the purpose of winning a bid — with no prior relationship between the organisations — is harder to represent credibly in a submission, and commissioners can often identify this. If you are still in the process of identifying a partner, come to us early — the sooner we know, the more options we have to assist.