Why ECM Isn’t an Outcomes Strategy Under the Procurement Act 2023 (And What Providers Need Instead)

Many providers say, “We’re fine on outcomes — we’ve got ECM.” Under the Procurement Act 2023 and Most Advantageous Tender (MAT) scoring, that assumption becomes risky. Commissioners will expect joined-up KPI evidence, governance assurance and social value proof — not just visit logs and care records.

This blog explores why Electronic Care Management (ECM) systems are necessary but not sufficient for future tenders and renewals, and what providers should put in place now to avoid losing points (and contracts) in 2026.

1. ECM has grown up – but commissioning has moved on faster

Most social care and community providers have invested heavily in ECM or digital care records. At their best, these systems:

• Capture visit times, tasks and outcomes in real time.
• Hold up-to-date support plans and risk assessments.
• Record staff activity, missed calls and alerts.
• Support safer rostering and line management.

From an operational perspective, that’s a significant step forward from paper-based systems. However, Procurement Act 2023 and MAT introduce a different set of expectations:

• Outcomes must be defined, measured and evidenced against clear KPIs.
• Commissioners must be able to show why they retained or awarded contracts.
• Performance information and transparency duties will increasingly sit in the public domain.
• Value is judged on a balanced scorecard of quality, outcomes, risk and social value – not just unit price.

That means commissioners, ICBs and local authorities will ask a deeper question:

“Can you show us, using your data and governance, that people’s outcomes are improving – and that risks, quality and social value are being managed?”

ECM alone doesn’t fully answer that question. It provides raw material – not the finished evidence story.

2. What ECM is good at – and where it stops

It’s important to be fair to ECM platforms. They can be very powerful, particularly when:

• Staff are trained and motivated to record accurately.
• Supervisors regularly review flags, alerts and trends.
• Reports are used in supervisions and MDT meetings.

Where ECM adds real value:

• Safety & compliance: missed visits, late calls, incomplete tasks and incident notes are visible.
• Care plan adherence: you can evidence whether planned tasks were delivered.
• Audit trails: for CQC, safeguarding and complaints responses.

Where ECM typically stops:

• It rarely turns data into commissioner-ready KPI dashboards without extra work.
• It doesn’t automatically create a coherent outcomes framework across services or contracts.
• It doesn’t explain what you’ve learned or how you’ve improved practice over time.
• It doesn’t tell a social value story (employment, skills, community impact) without additional data.

In other words: ECM answers “what happened?” quite well, but not “what difference did it make and how do we know?”

3. What MAT and the Procurement Act will actually look for

Under Most Advantageous Tender, buyers balance multiple elements:

• Quality and outcomes – are you achieving measurable improvements in people’s lives?
• Risk and governance – are you safe, well-led and learning from incidents?
• Value – are you delivering good outcomes for the resources invested?
• Social value – are you supporting local priorities on jobs, skills, inclusion and sustainability?

In tenders and contract reviews, that becomes very concrete. You’ll be asked to provide:

• Trended KPI data (e.g. outcomes achieved, response times, reablement gains).
• Governance evidence (supervision cycles, audits, escalation routes, lessons learned).
• Case studies backed by data, not just narrative.
• Proof of social value commitments delivered – and how they’re measured.

ECM may contribute inputs to each of these. But without a structured approach, providers risk turning up with:

• Lots of screenshots, but no clear story or trends.
• Raw data, but little analysis or interpretation.
• Good practice on the ground, but weak board- and commissioner-facing evidence.

That’s where points – and contracts – will quietly be lost from 2026 onwards.

4. Why “we’ve got ECM, so we’re fine” is a dangerous phrase

In workshops and reviews, I often hear:

“We’ve invested a lot in ECM. Once we switch on more reports, we’ll be fine on outcomes.”

But when we dig deeper, we usually discover:

• KPIs are not clearly defined at contract or organisational level.
• Different services use different outcome definitions for the same measures.
• Frontline recording is inconsistent (e.g. “goal met” is ticked differently across teams).
• Managers don’t receive a standard dashboard that they use in supervisions or governance.
• Performance data doesn’t flow into tender responses, renewal packs or board reports in a systematic way.

ECM, in other words, becomes a huge, under-used data lake – impressive to look at, but not translating into MAT-ready evidence.

From a commissioner’s perspective, this is where risk creeps in:

• They can’t easily see impact at contract level.
• They struggle to explain why you should be retained or extended.
• They may feel more confident sticking with, or switching to, a provider with a clearer performance story.

Under a more transparent regime, “we have ECM” won’t be a convincing answer. “Here is our outcomes evidence strategy – and ECM is part of it” will.

5. What a real outcomes & evidence strategy looks like

A Procurement Act-ready outcomes strategy joins up four building blocks:

1. Clear KPIs and outcomes – defined, owned and understood.
2. Consistent data capture – ECM and other systems configured to capture what matters.
3. Governance and learning – dashboards, reviews, actions and follow-up.
4. Commissioner-ready reporting – performance packs, case studies and renewal narratives.

ECM sits mainly in block 2. The other three require deliberate design.

You don’t need to create something enormous. For many providers, a practical starting point looks like:

• A small set of core KPIs used across similar services (e.g. outcomes progress, missed visits, staff continuity).
• Simple KPI definitions agreed with managers and configured in ECM where possible.
• A standard dashboard and narrative template for quarterly reviews.
• A light-touch governance cycle – who reviews what, when and what happens next.
• A process for turning evidence into contract retention packs and tender content.

If you want structured support here, have a look at:

• Contract Retention & Outcomes Evidence Support – KPI dashboards, governance reporting and renewal packs.
• Contract Retention & Outcomes Evidence Packages – fixed-price, multi-day packages with online-only discounts.

6. What you can do in the next 90 days

You don’t need to rebuild everything at once. A focused 90-day plan can make a visible difference before the next tender or review cycle.

Step 1: Pick one contract or pathway as a pilot

Choose a service where:

• You have a reasonably engaged manager and team.
• The contract is important for your future strategy.
• There is some ECM data that can be improved and used.

Step 2: Define 5–7 core KPIs and outcomes

With the manager (and ideally a commissioner, if possible), agree a small set of measures, for example:

• Proportion of people with improved independence or reduced support.
• Unplanned hospital admissions or avoidable attendances.
• Missed or late calls as a percentage of total visits.
• Staff continuity (e.g. top 5 workers per person).
• Service user/family-reported satisfaction scores.

Check where ECM can support these, and where you need additional data sources or manual logs.

Step 3: Build a simple dashboard and narrative

Create a one- or two-page dashboard (Word, Excel or Google Sheets) plus a short narrative. Then, commit to reviewing it every quarter.

If you’d like help designing these templates, see:

• Bid Library & Process Design – which can also cover performance report templates.
• Tender Library Refresh Packages – to align method statements with your new evidence.

Step 4: Capture one “lived experience” case study with data

Choose one person’s journey (with consent) and combine:

• A short narrative (before → support → outcomes).
• ECM data (visit records, goals achieved).
• Any relevant feedback (compliments, surveys, MDT notes).

Turn this into a commissioner-ready case study you can reuse in reviews and tenders.

Step 5: Feed learning back into your bid strategy

Once the pilot has run for a quarter, ask:

• What can we now evidence that we couldn’t before?
• How does this change the way we answer quality and outcomes questions?
• What should we stop promising in tenders – or start promising, now that we can evidence it?

For more structured support with this step, you might find Bid Triage & Opportunity Assessment helpful – particularly if you want to align bids and contracts more tightly.

7. Where ECM fits in a mature MAT strategy

ECM absolutely has a place in a modern, MAT-ready provider. The aim isn’t to replace it – it’s to give it a job description inside a wider evidence system.

In a mature set-up, ECM is used to:

• Capture day-to-day delivery accurately and reliably.
• Feed key metrics into contract-level dashboards.
• Support supervisions and clinical oversight.
• Provide audit trails for governance, incidents and CQC.

Alongside ECM, you’ll also have:

• Defined KPI frameworks per contract or pathway.
• Quarterly or biannual performance and governance reports.
• Structured contract retention and renewal packs.
• A tender library that reuses this evidence for future MAT-based bids.

If you want help stitching those pieces together, you can combine:

• Contract Retention & Outcomes Evidence Support – to design the evidence system.
• Contract Retention & Outcomes Evidence Packages – to implement it over 5, 10 or 20 days.
• Monthly Bid Support Retainers – if you’d prefer ongoing, flexible support instead of a one-off project.

8. The bottom line: ECM is necessary – but not sufficient

From 2026, providers are unlikely to lose tenders simply because their ECM isn’t perfect. They’ll lose – quietly but consistently – because they can’t turn data into a coherent outcomes and governance story that stands up under MAT scoring and Procurement Act transparency.

If you already have ECM, you’re part-way there. The next step is to:

• Clarify your KPIs and outcomes.
• Design simple, repeatable dashboards and narratives.
• Build a contract retention and evidence strategy that ECM can feed into.

That’s the difference between “we’ve got ECM” and “we can prove our impact”.

Next steps

If you’d like to sense-check where you are, or map a pragmatic 90-day plan, you can:

• Explore Contract Retention & Outcomes Evidence Support.
• Review the fixed-price Contract Retention & Outcomes Evidence Packages.
• Or get in touch to talk through your current position and options.

No obligation, no hard sell – just a realistic view of what you already have, and what you might need to put in place before MAT and Procurement Act expectations fully bite.

🚀 Need a Bid Writing Quote?

If you’re exploring support for an upcoming learning disability tender, request a quick, no-obligation quote. I’ll review your documents and respond with:

• A clear scope of work
• Estimated days required
• A fixed fee quote
• Any risks, considerations or quick wins

🔁 Prefer Flexible Monthly Support?

If you regularly handle tenders, frameworks or call-offs, a Monthly Bid Support Retainer may be a better fit.

• Guaranteed hours each month (1, 2, 4 or 8 days)
• Discounted day rates vs ad-hoc consultancy
• Use time flexibly across bids, triage, library updates, renewals
• One-month rollover (fair-use rules applied)
• Cancel anytime before next billing date