How FM decision-makers are addressing and managing supplier risk in their supply chain

The UK facilities management market is on a strong growth trajectory, projected to reach £52 billion by the end of this year¹ and account for nearly 8% of the nation’s GDP. That growth brings new Facilities Management opportunities but it also brings pressure. Public spending on facilities management suppliers is increasing², which means more contracts, more contractors, and a far more complex supply chain to manage. 

For directors and heads of facilities running large, multi-site estates, that complexity is where risk hides. A single non-compliant contractor, an expired certificate, or a supplier in financial distress can derail a project, trigger a safety incident, or damage your organisation’s reputation. 

We carried out external research to understand how facilities management decision-makers identify, assess and manage supplier risk and compliance across different sectors. 

In this blog, we explain: 

• Where risk hides in the FM supply chain 
• General feelings of FM decision-makers on risks and issues that matter most 
• FM managers’ current approaches to managing supplier compliance and risk 
• Where risk tends to build up in the FM supply chain 
• How Facilitiesline helps FM buyers and managers to mitigate risk and manage supplier compliance, before they arrive on-site 

 

What risks are hiding in your facilities management supply chain? 

Most Facilities Management supply chain risk comes from a lack of visibility. When supplier information is scattered across spreadsheets, inboxes, and filing systems, it becomes almost impossible to know who is compliant at any given moment. 

Common risk areas include: 

• Expired or missing compliance documents. Insurance, certifications, and safety records lapse without warning, leaving you exposed. 
• Financial instability. A supplier heading towards insolvency can stop work mid-contract, causing costly delays. 
• Health and safety history. Without insight into a contractor’s HSE event history, you may onboard a partner who carries hidden risk. 
• Modern slavery and ethical concerns. Gaps in supplier policies create both legal and reputational exposure. 
• Building Safety Act obligations. New accountability requirements demand documented proof of competence, not just good intentions. 

The challenge is real and widely felt. According to SFG20’s State of FM 2026 Report³, 72% of FM professionals identified improving compliance and safety as their top priority, yet 54% had little confidence in their organisation’s ability to actually achieve compliance. 

 

This raises the question of what FM managers are currently doing and how they intend to monitor compliance in their supply chain to create a more level playing field for managing risk in the industry. 

 

Our research: what is the current landscape of the FM industry for managers? 

We conducted research with decision-makers from various industries including hospitality, aviation, leisure, charity sector, and student accommodation providers. 

Overall, our findings show that while facilities management supplier management is generally structured, it still relies heavily on manual, fragmented processes. Most organisations have clear sourcing and oversight methods in place, yet many still depend on spreadsheets, manual document chasing, and reactive follow up, especially once suppliers are onboarded. 

Processes are usually structured at a high level, yet underneath that structure, there is still too much manual effort, fragmented visibility, and reactive management. As compliance and ESG expectations increase, the current model is likely to come under more pressure. 

Here, we break down the key findings of how FM decision-makers are managing risk and compliance. 

1. Supplier sourcing is structured, but oversight is layered

Supplier selection is fairly disciplined, but ongoing supplier management is not always consistently proactive. 

 

 

Most respondents (54%) use formal sourcing routes such as through traditional tendering, with others listing approved supplier lists and referrals. Supplier risk is usually managed through periodic audits and reviews, but there is still a meaningful level of informal or reactive management, particularly for lower-risk suppliers. 

 

 

 2. Compliance management is still too manual

Organisations want central control, but many are still operating with decentralised, admin-heavy workflows. 

A key theme is that while many teams use central compliance systems (58%), they still rely heavily on manual document collection such as emails and spreadsheets (37%). That creates a hybrid process that can be slow, inconsistent, and hard to scale. The variety of PQQs across different organisations leads to a lack of a standardised, industry-wide certification.

 

 

 

3. Visibility and complexity: some of the biggest struggles when monitoring FM supplier risk 

The challenge is not just collecting data, but maintaining visibility across dispersed operations. Some respondents vary in adopting formal and proactive approaches covering regular reporting with internal systems, whilst others opt for informal, reactive approaches when problems suddenly arise. 

The most common breakdowns happen around: 

• Compliance documentation and verification 
• Managing multiple sites and multiple suppliers 
• Inconsistencies in how compliance is managed 
• Depending on site teams, suppliers, or group structures to provide updates 

These dependencies make it harder to maintain a complete, real-time view of supplier compliance across the estate.

Once appointed, how is supplier risk managed on an ongoing basis?

46% of respondents rely on periodic audits and reviews as the primary approach to ongoing supplier risk management, typically structured around regular monitoring and performance assessment. 

This creates an area of risk, where suppliers’ insurance and qualifications could lapse in between reviews. Meaning, suppliers could be deployed without valid compliance and competence certifications – exposing the buying organisations to scrutiny if an incident were to occur. 

 

4. Regulation matters, but it is not yet transforming behaviour

Compliance pressure is present, but many teams have not yet fully adapted their processes in response. 

Although regulatory requirements are recognised by some, 75% of respondents said they are not yet driving major changes in day-to-day FM supplier oversight (respondents’ answers ranged from believing regulations had no impact and they had no awareness of them, to having awareness but not implementing change). There is some awareness of legislation such as the Building Safety Act, Martyn’s Law, Employment and Modern Slavery laws. However, awareness is varied: oversight remains shaped by existing processes and responsibilities, limiting the extent to which regulation is actively driving change. In practice, this suggests regulation is influencing awareness more than operational transformation. 

 

 

 

5. Ethical and sustainability risks are addressed mainly at the front end 

Awareness of issues is on the agenda, but monitoring is still more front-loaded than continuous. 

Risks such as modern slavery and minimum wage issues are typically assessed during pre-qualification or onboarding, rather than through ongoing active monitoring (29% of respondents). 

Sustainability and ESG are becoming more important (20%), but it is often balanced against cost and operational realities. 

 

 

6. Quality and H&S remain the biggest supplier concerns

FM leaders are most focused on operational delivery, but there is zero tolerance where safety and compliance are concerned. 

The top day-to-day concern is quality of work and supplier performance. At the same time, health and safety breaches and wider compliance failures are treated as non-negotiable reasons for supplier exclusion or termination.  Alongside delivering quality work, FM managers want reliable suppliers that meet their KPIs quickly (such as completing a job first time and to a high standard), showing signs of a reactive approach (see point 3). 

 

 

7. Confidence is relatively high but may mask inefficiency 

Teams feel reasonably confident, but some inefficiencies may have become normalised. 

Respondents gave themselves an average score of 8.5/10 for confidence in supplier compliance visibility across sites. However, that sits alongside evidence of manual processes and accepted inefficiencies, with many reporting ‘no major issues’ despite clear process friction. Perceived control does not always equate to complete oversight across suppliers and sites. 

22% of respondents report no major issues with current processes, even with the introduction of the Building Safety Act. There could be a potential lack of education within the sector on dutyholder responsibilities and how the Building Safety Act applies to FM organisations that needs to be understood sooner rather than later. 

 

8. What’s next for the FM industry? Compliance expectations are likely to tighten

The direction of travel is clear: FM supply chains will need stronger, more scalable facilities management compliance oversight. 

Looking ahead, respondents expect supplier compliance requirements to increase over the next two years, mainly due to: 

• Regulatory and legislative change 
• Growing ESG requirements  

Unfortunately, it may be a case of not feeling as inclined to change processes that are currently working until a serious incident occurs, for industry-wide change to occur and for behaviours to follow the same suit. 

 

How can facilities managers reduce supply chain risk effectively? 

Whilst some FM managers may not see a need to change existing processes, there is still time to drive risk out of your supply chain with a clear, repeatable approach: 

1. Centralise supplier information. Bring every contractor’s compliance data into one place, so you never have to chase scattered certificates again. 
2. Set risk-based compliance levels. Match the depth of checks to the risk of the service. High-risk work should carry stricter requirements than low-risk tasks. 
3. Verify before you onboard. Confirm credentials, insurance, and competence at the start of a relationship, not after a problem appears. 
4. Monitor continuously. Compliance is not a one-off check. Track expiry dates and verification status across your whole supply chain. 
5. Act early on warning signs. Flag financial distress, lapsed documents, or safety concerns before they become disruption on site. 

Each step reduces uncertainty. Together, they turn a reactive process into a proactive one. 

 

Control FM supply chain risk with Facilitiesline 

Facilitiesline provides facilities managers and property owners total control across every site, region, and contractor, with oversight of their supply chain’s compliance. Customers working in soft fm and hard fm are already benefiting from:  

• Outsourced supplier verification: Outsource your PQQs to Facilitiesline, or set your own bespoke requirements. Our in-house team verifies credentials so you do not have to, cutting duplicate documentation and manual checks. 
• Real-time compliance monitoring: When a supplier becomes unverified, Facilitiesline flags it and reminds the supplier to update their information, helping you avoid disruption before it occurs. 
• Risk insights that protect your reputation: Access supply chain insights on HSE event history, risk of financial distress, and modern slavery policies, so you can spot exposure early. 
• Building Safety Act support: Gold Membership includes a dedicated building safety requirement, helping you demonstrate Building Safety Act competence. Competency-based PQQs ensure suppliers are capable, not just compliant. 
• Automated alerts. Set instant or daily notifications for changes in compliance status, expiring documentation, building safety, insurances, and more. 

Streamlined visual dashboards bring it all together, showing your supply chain risk by financial score and compliance level. The result is faster decisions, a robust audit trail, and confidence that you are working with certified suppliers. 

Book a demo and see Facilitiesline in action, so you can mitigate risk on your buildings and sites with reliable, pre-qualified fm suppliers. 

 

FAQs 

How does Facilitiesline reduce supply chain risk? 

Facilitiesline centralises supplier verification, helps FM buyers, property and estates managers monitor compliance continuously, and flags issues such as expired documents, financial distress, or HSE concerns before they cause disruption. It also supports Building Safety Act competence through dedicated requirements and competency-based PQQs (in its Gold supplier memberships). 

Who is Facilitiesline for? 

Facilitiesline is designed for facilities managers, heads of facilities, and property owners managing large or multi-site estates. It supports sectors including hospitality, retail, education, healthcare, FM providers, and property owners. 

How many work categories does Facilitiesline cover? 

Facilitiesline supports more than 4,000 work categories, spanning both hard and soft facilities management services such as building maintenance, HVAC, fire safety, cleaning, security, and grounds maintenance. 

How do I get started with Facilitiesline? 

You can book a free Facilities Management demo to see the platform in action and learn more about buyer packages. The Facilitiesline team can guide you through onboarding your existing suppliers or sourcing new pre-qualified partners.