An AI off contract spend agent matches each invoice or PO line to a contract by vendor, item and period, and marks lines with no matching agreement.
A transaction posts for a vendor with a contract
Agent looks for a matching agreement and its scope
Agent compares the price and item with the contract
Agent labels the spend and records the reason
A buyer decides whether it is justified or needs action
Confirmed items are stored with the owner
It separates the causes: a vendor with a contract billed at a different price, an approved vendor with no contract, or a vendor used instead of the preferred one.
It routes each case to the budget owner or buyer with the evidence and the contract that could have been used.
Negotiated terms only help if people buy under them. Without a check, the contract and the spending behaviour quietly part ways.
Teams buy from habit because they do not know a deal exists.
Invoices carry list prices rather than negotiated rates.
Spend continues after the contract ends, at undefined terms.
The pricing sits in a PDF that nobody opens at the point of purchase.
Buyers are not told when they went off contract, so it recurs.
Read vendor, scope, price, term and validity from each agreement.
Link invoices and PO lines to the contract that should govern them.
Mark lines as no contract, wrong price, out of scope, expired or alternative vendor.
Send the case with the contract reference and the difference to the buyer or budget owner.
Record whether the spend was justified, corrected or moved onto contract.
Bring a small sample and watch Flo work through it.
| Aspect | By hand | With the agent |
|---|---|---|
| Detection | Off-contract buying shows up in occasional audits | Transactions are compared with contracts as they post |
| Reason | The cause is guessed after the fact | Each case notes whether the vendor, price or item was off-contract |
| Owner | Nobody knows whose purchase it was | The buyer or team is named on each case |
| Prioritising | Small and large cases are mixed | Cases are ordered by repeated pattern and value |
| Prevention | The same bypass recurs | Repeat sources are listed so intake rules can change |
| If | Then | Who decides |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor has a preferred contract but the buyer used another | Tags as off-contract and names the preferred vendor | Category buyer follows up |
| Price on an invoice is above the contracted rate | Flags the price difference | AP and buyer resolve |
| Item is not in the contract scope | Marks as out of scope rather than a breach | Contract owner decides |
| Contract has expired | Labels the spend as post-expiry | Procurement lead decides to renew or exit |
| Same bypass occurs repeatedly | Groups the cases under one pattern | Procurement lead changes the process |
| Spend is a one-time emergency | Records the stated reason on the case | Budget owner confirms |
The agent reads the exception clause and notes that the purchase may be allowed. The buyer confirms the clause applies.
The agent flags that a contract may carry over under the new name. The contract owner confirms the link.
The agent lists each possible contract and the differences in terms. A buyer selects the correct one.
If no contract is found, the agent records that it could not check. The buyer provides the document.
Talk it through with the team. We will map it to your steps and show where a person stays in control.
Connect the contract list to the vendor master so matches work.
Run the agent on a single category and judge the cases with the buyer.
Send weekly lists to buyers and note which cases are justified.
Use repeated patterns to adjust catalogues, intake forms and approvals.
It shows how much of what could be covered is covered. Break it down by category to find where agreements are ignored or missing.
Quick answers to what people ask most about off contract spend.
Book a demoIt is spend that does not follow an agreed contract, either because there is no contract, the price differs, the scope does not fit or the contract has expired.
No. It identifies them and routes them to the owner. People decide how to respond.
It matches by vendor, scope, item and validity dates read from your contracts, and shows the match for a person to check.
The case is flagged as a coverage gap, and procurement decides whether a contract is worth negotiating.
Spend visibility is the ability to see what the organisation buys, from whom, on which contract and under whose budget.
→Savings identification is the search for places where the organisation could pay less for the same need.
→UNSPSC classification is the assignment of a standard United Nations Standard Products and Services Code to each item or spend line, so that purchases can be compared across systems and organisations.
→Savings validation is the check that a claimed saving is supported by evidence: a sound baseline, a signed agreement and invoices that reflect the new terms.
→Bring a small sample of real items. We will show what Flo handles on its own and where it hands over to your team.
