TR04 — Reference Letter Templates
Two templates the trust can lift, amend, or replace. Designed to be defensible in a UK public-procurement context: factual, non-overclaiming, signed by a named senior individual, on letterhead, dated.
Framing language to send to the trust
Dear [Name],
Thank you for being willing to consider this. We recognise your time is constrained, so please feel free to use either of the two templates below on your letterhead, amend to your preference, or replace entirely with wording you’re more comfortable with. Even a single signed paragraph would be valuable.
The letter is for inclusion in BritiAI’s submission to the NHS SBS Healthcare AI Solutions Framework (deadline 21 July 2026). We will not publish it externally without your express permission, and we are happy to share the relevant excerpt of our submission so you can see the context in which it will appear.
If anything in the wording feels overclaimed or uncomfortable, please cut it. A shorter, more conservative letter is more useful to us than a generous one we cannot defend.
With thanks,
[BritiAI signatory]
Template A — Short version (100-150 words)
(On [Trust] letterhead)
[Date]
To whom it may concern,
Re: BritiAI Ltd — NHS SBS Healthcare AI Solutions Framework
[Trust] is aware of BritiAI Ltd and the capability the company offers in [ambient clinical documentation / agentic discharge support / longitudinal patient context / sovereign clinical AI platform infrastructure].
We have noted BritiAI’s commitment to sovereign, UK-hosted deployment, including an on-premises option, and the peer-reviewed evidence base provided by its research subsidiary Beever AI (ACL 2025).
Should BritiAI be appointed to the NHS SBS Healthcare AI Solutions Framework, [Trust] would consider BritiAI’s offering as part of our routine evaluation of suppliers operating in this capability area, subject to our standard procurement, clinical safety and information governance processes.
Yours faithfully,
[Name] [Role — e.g. Chief Clinical Information Officer] [Trust]
Template B — Richer version (250-300 words)
(On [Trust] letterhead)
[Date]
To whom it may concern,
Re: BritiAI Ltd — Reference for NHS SBS Healthcare AI Solutions Framework submission
I am writing in my capacity as [role] at [Trust] to confirm [Trust]‘s awareness of BritiAI Ltd and its associated companies (Votee AI and Beever AI), and the capabilities the group offers relevant to NHS clinical and operational settings.
[Optional — only if true: “We have had prior engagement with [BritiAI / Beever / Votee] in the form of [specific interaction — e.g. an exploratory briefing, a research discussion, a demonstration]. We found the engagement to be [factual descriptor — e.g. professional, technically credible, aligned with our governance posture].“]
We recognise the relevance of [specific capability area — ambient documentation / agentic discharge / neural-memory / AI readiness] to [Trust]‘s current digital priorities, which include [one short factual reference to a public-domain priority — e.g. workforce productivity, discharge flow, longitudinal patient context]. We are particularly mindful of BritiAI’s sovereign-by-design posture — UK-hosted with an on-premises deployment option — and the published evidence base from Beever AI (ACL 2025), which we consider material to safe deployment within an NHS clinical environment.
Should BritiAI be appointed to the NHS SBS Healthcare AI Solutions Framework, [Trust] would consider BritiAI as a recognised supplier in the relevant capability area and would expect to include the company’s offering in our routine evaluation activity under the framework, subject to our standard procurement, clinical safety (DCB0129 / DCB0160), information governance, and data protection impact assessment processes.
This letter is provided in good faith and does not constitute a procurement commitment.
Yours faithfully,
[Name] [Role] [Trust] [Email] · [Phone]
What makes a reference letter usable in a UK procurement context
A reference letter is genuinely useful to a bid evaluation only if it is independently verifiable and conservatively worded. Five attributes matter:
- Named senior individual — a real signatory with a substantive senior role (CCIO, CMO, Director of Digital, COO, Caldicott Guardian). Anonymous or junior signatures carry little weight.
- On letterhead — printed or PDF, with the trust’s official identity. Plain-text emails are weaker.
- Dated — recent, within the bid window. Undated letters look stale.
- Factual — statements should be defensible if challenged (“we are aware of”, “we would consider evaluating”, “we recognise the capability area”). Avoid effusive language, performance claims, or promises that could be construed as procurement commitments — these are unhelpful to both parties and may invalidate the letter.
- Non-overclaiming — explicitly subject to the trust’s standard procurement, clinical safety, and information-governance processes. This protects the trust and makes the letter credible to evaluators.
A short, factual, signed paragraph from a named CCIO on letterhead is materially more valuable than a long, generous, but vaguely-attributed endorsement.