The DfE’s recent pre-market engagement session highlighted several long-standing challenges within the MIS sector. While the announcement focused heavily on interoperability and data migration, there are deeper structural issues that must be tackled if the new framework is to serve schools, trusts and local authorities effectively.
Below are the critical areas that need to be addressed, many of which reflect concerns raised consistently across the sector.
1. Interoperability failures are still holding schools back
For years, schools and MATs have struggled with:
- Poor API consistency
- Fragmented integrations
- Data structures that do not align
- Manual effort to stitch together basic reporting
This lack of interoperability is one of the biggest blockers to innovation, competition and operational efficiency.
The new framework must establish clear, enforceable expectations for:
- Open APIs
- Standardised data formats
- Reliable integrations
- Technical cooperation between suppliers
Interoperability cannot be left to supplier discretion – it must be the foundation of the market.
2. Switching remains costly, risky and inconsistent
Schools repeatedly highlight:
- Expensive migration costs
- Unclear data ownership
- Inconsistent exit processes
- Varying degrees of supplier cooperation
This is not a technical problem – it is a structural one.
The framework must ensure:
- Predictable migration standards
- Mandatory data release obligations
- Consistent expectations for timelines and completeness
- Transparent exit terms
A fair market depends on the ability to switch without fear or friction.
3. Procurement complexity prevents schools from making confident choices
Procurement in the MIS market has become:
- Overly complex
- Commercially opaque
- Inconsistent across suppliers
- Difficult to compare like-for-like
The DfE now has an opportunity to simplify:
- Contract structures
- Pricing expectations
- Evaluation criteria
- Onboarding and exit standards
Consistency and transparency will give schools the confidence to choose what works best for them.
4. Economic and financial standing (EFS) checks are essential
Schools depend on their MIS for mission-critical operations.
If a supplier is financially unstable, schools bear the risk of financial instability.
The framework must include robust EFS thresholds to protect against:
- Financial fragility
- Unsustainable pricing strategies
- Reduced reinvestment
- Slower innovation
A stable MIS ecosystem depends on financially resilient suppliers.
5. Impartiality must be guaranteed
Where public-funded or government-aligned bodies are involved in procurement, impartiality is essential.
Schools need confidence that:
- No supplier is unfairly advantaged
- Decisions are made objectively
- Evaluation criteria are applied consistently
- Competition is not distorted by external influence
A truly fair framework cannot allow any perception of bias.
6. Innovation requires long-term investment – not short-term pricing
Short-term price reductions can win contracts, but they often come at the cost of:
- Underinvestment in product development
- Reduced service quality
- Stagnation in performance
- Volatility in renewal pricing
Healthy competition requires:
- Sustainable pricing
- Predictable reinvestment
- Long-term development roadmaps
- Continuous innovation
The framework must strike a balance between affordability and long-term market health.
7. The goal is simple: protect schools and strengthen the market
What schools ultimately need is:
- Confidence
- Transparency
- Predictability
- Freedom of choice
- Systems that integrate
- Contracts that protect them
- Suppliers who operate sustainably
If the DfE embeds these principles into the new framework, it will not only solve the issues highlighted in the engagement session — it will create a market that works for schools today and for years to come.
