Procurement Ombud Leads Discussion on the Creation of a Federal Vendor Performance Management System
Press Release
Ottawa, February 23, 2026 – The Office of the Procurement Ombud (OPO) hosted its second Procurement Solutions Forum on February 17, focused on the creation of a government-wide Vendor Performance Management (VPM) system, one of the Ombud’s 5 foundational changes to address long-standing systemic issues in federal procurement.
The session brought together senior members of the federal procurement community, underscoring the importance of cross-departmental collaboration to drive systemic improvements.
Panelists, including Joanne Graham, Chief Procurement Officer for the City of Ottawa, and a representative from Metrolinx, shared lessons learned from implementing Vendor Performance Management (VPM) frameworks in their respective jurisdictions. They emphasized how a Vendor Performance Management (VPM) system can improve accountability, reduce contracting risks and deliver better value for taxpayers. Their insights highlighted the need for strong contract management with clear deliverables. Some key success factors for a successful VPM program included consistent application, strong documentation, accurate data and training as key elements to a successful VPM system.
Federal participants highlighted the risks of continuing without a consistent, government-wide VPM system, noting that the absence of reliable performance data limits the ability to penalize poor performers, reward strong performers, and inform future contracting decisions.
By gathering insights from other Canadian jurisdictions that have already successfully implemented a VPM system , OPO is driving for a federal implementation to help address several longstanding systemic issues that remain unaddressed. A government-wide federal VPM framework will strengthen accountability, improve procurement outcomes, and ensure best value for Canadians.
OPO will continue to advance solutions to modernize federal procurement, with additional forums planned to explore the remaining foundational changes identified in its study.
Quotes
“The lack of a government-wide vendor performance management system is a glaring issue that prevents a fully functional federal procurement system. The Federal government needs to act with urgency and provide the tools necessary to properly incentivize good contract performance and make sure tax dollars are being well spent.
Today’s discussion brought us one step closer to addressing a long‑standing gap in federal procurement. By learning from jurisdictions that have successfully implemented a vendor performance management system, we can better understand what works and what doesn’t. We can certainly benefit from these lessons to build a federal vendor performance system that is fair, transparent, and delivers the best value for Canadians.”
Alexander Jeglic
Procurement Ombud
Quick facts
In July 2025, the Office of the Procurement Ombud released Time for Solutions: Top 5 Foundational Changes Needed in Federal Procurement, identifying 5 foundational changes to address systemic issues in federal procurement.
One of these foundational changes is the creation of a government‑wide Vendor Performance Management (VPM) system to improve fairness, consistency, and accountability in supplier performance.
The 4 other proposed changes include:
Establishing a federal Chief Procurement Officer
Developing one universally applicable set of federal procurement rules
Leveraging Artificial Intelligence to modernize procurement tools and processes
Creating a government‑wide framework for procurement data collection to increase transparency
The Office of the Procurement Ombud (OPO) is a neutral and independent organization within the Government of Canada, mandated to review federal contracting practices and recommend improvements.



It’s interesting that the federal government is taking lessons learned on contract management and deliverables from MetroLinx….
VPM is a great tool, but you have to convince the Vendors that just because you get score a 72 of 100 doesn't mean that you did below standard work. I find consultants are always pushing for higher scores from their assessors (usually the Project Manager).