The guidance explains the reporting of KPI performance and specifies serious contractual failures. This creates a practical challenge for public sector contract managers. Can the authority actually prove how its supplier has performed?

Consider a £6 million outsourced cleaning contract.

The supplier’s monthly reports indicate 97% compliance with cleaning standards.

However, complaints are increasing, inspections are inconsistent, and the authority’s operational staff believe the supplier is underperforming.

The contract manager discovers that:

Inspection records are incomplete.

Different buildings apply different standards.

Complaints are not consistently recorded.

The supplier calculates its own performance scores.

Contract review meetings have not produced reliable action records.

A weak evidence base makes it harder to challenge inaccurate supplier reporting, substantiate service failures, justify remedies or defend decisions if disputes arise. It can also undermine the reliability of information published under the statutory reporting regime.

I believe that contract managers should establish agreed measurement methodologies, audit rights, document retention requirements and robust review procedures. They must also distinguish between supplier-reported information and independently verified performance.

We are running our very popular “Designing Contract Performance Management Regimes under the Requirements of the Procurement Act” course. 15-16 December 2026. This provides practical training to enable contract managers to establish robust performance measurement systems, manage supplier records and use evidence to support commercial decisions. This course is also available as an in-house tailored event.