No abstract

The rapid global transmission of COVID-19 has demonstrated many weaknesses in government procurement of essential supplies. In the United States, these problems have been particularly evident, as systemic fragmentation through federalism has frustrated a coordinated response. Rather than working together, states and localities are competing over limited medical resources, while the federal government has not stepped in to alleviate burdens on the lower tiers of government. In this study, we introduce how procurement is managed under normal circumstances and how it changes during emergencies. Easing procurement rules comes with necessary tradeoffs, particularly involving equity and accountability. Using case studies from recent disasters, we identify procurement and management recommendations for the COVID-19 response and future emergencies. We conclude that public procurement is integral to effective management in the 21st century and must be treated as such in the study and practice of public administration and emergency management.

While the U.S. federal government strives to advance social equity in government contracting through various policies to support small disadvantaged business enterprises (SDBEs), entry barriers persist. Drawing on federal government spending data from the initial response to the COVID‐19 pandemic, this study estimates logistic and multinomial logistic regressions using portfolio management theory to understand what factors can favor SDBE participation in government contracts during the immediate response to emergencies and whether these factors differ when governments award strategic versus non‐strategic contracts. The results show that governments do not necessarily have to reduce competition to favor SDBE participation in government contracts, as some of these suppliers can participate and win competitive procedures. Although non‐SDBE suppliers were still more likely to be awarded contracts during the initial emergency response, SDBE suppliers were more likely to win procedures for strategic and important supplies.

Innovation is often promoted as the path to overcoming the burdens of bureaucratic organizations and fostering improved service to the public. In a moment where governments face dynamic administrative and policy challenges, there is great need for leveraging innovative ideas from public sector employees. What is less clear are which factors of employee human capital correlate with feeling encouraged to innovate. We test how three types of human capital influence innovation: organization level, industry specific, and individual specific human capital. We also explore whether there are differences in feeling encouraged to innovate linked to education, training, and demographics such as gender, race, and age. Using survey responses from 2,191 public procurement officers from various levels of government in the United States, we find human capital components including experience, education, training, and age correlate with feeling encouraged to innovate, though not always in expected ways.

No abstract