Not Getting Our Share: The State
Disparity Study and Next Steps
Richmond WOMAN, Vol.
1, Issue 3, June 2004, pp. 12-13 |
In
“Getting Our Share” (richmondWOMAN, 1, no. 4, Dec 2003, 12-13) I wrote
that the
most recent data then available from the state indicated that out of
$10
billion in government-issued contracts for goods and services awarded
through
the state’s electronic procurement program, called eVA, only 1% was
distributed
to woman-owned businesses. I posed a number of questions about why such
a gross
disparity between women business owners’ share of contract dollars
awarded and
their representation among state businesses (then estimated at 33% of
all
private firms) might exist. I counseled, however, that we must wait to
begin to
answer these questions until after we had a “clearer picture of what a
‘fair
share’ of public business would look like for woman-owned firms.” We
now have
some data that allows us to see the picture more clearly, and the
picture is
not good.
The
recently issued study of the disparity in state contracting revealed
facts that
are not surprising to small, women- and/or minority-owned businesses
seeking to
sell goods and services to the Commonwealth of Virginia. This study,
conducted
by MGT of America (the MGT Study or the disparity study), covered state
contracting for the five years between July 1, 1997 and June 30, 2002. The entire MGT Study is available on the
Department of Minority Business Enterprise website at
www.dmbe.state.va.us.
The first
thing that the MGT Study makes clear is that the Commonwealth spent a
lot of
money buying goods and services during the five years of the study:
over $7.8
billion for goods and supplies and about $3.2 billion for professional
services
paid out in tens of thousands of payments.
The second
trend that the MGT Study documents is that very few of the payments and
fewer
of the dollars went to women or minority owned firms.
The only category in which contracting
dollars awarded to women-
and minority-owned firms (except among Native American-owned firms) was
roughly
equivalent to the availability of such firms to do the work was in the
"other services" category (nonprofessional, labor intensive services
such as janitorial services, lawn and landscaping, maintenance,
employment and printing).
Women-
(WBE) and minority-owned (MBE) firms were found to be significantly
underutilized in every other category for which the state contracts for
goods
or services: construction prime and subcontracting, architecture and
engineering services, professional services and goods and supplies.
The MGT
Study applied a measure called the "disparity index" to quantify the
difference between the availability of M/WBE's and their utilization as
vendors/contractors by the Commonwealth. The disparity index showed
that
non-minority, male-owned firms consistently were over-utilized,
receiving 97%
to 99% of all contract dollars spent. The
largest disparity documented
occurred in construction
subcontracting, where non-minority, male-owned firms represented only
82% of available
vendors but got 97% of the contract dollars.
Among
professional services vendors, the disparity between availability and
utilization over five years was found to be most significant for
non-minority,
women-owned firms – 69% lower than
expected, based on availability.
The MGT
Study recommended the following methods to address this identified
discrimination in state government as part of a comprehensive package
of
strategies: 1) issuing contracts in smaller dollar amounts, thus
reversing the
emphasis on larger dollar contracts found in the state's current "spend
management" program; 2) increased participation by M/WBE firms in
informal
purchasing (below $50,000) by making the use of M/WBE vendors a factor
in
evaluating purchasing officers; 3) setting M/WBE goals for state
contracting;
4) establishing a small business program including a small business
fund set
aside; 5) establishing a small business surety assistance program to
help
address difficulties in meeting bonding requirements; 6) improved
access to
capital; and 7) accountability and evaluation in measuring the
effectiveness of
the Virginia Department of Minority Business Enterprise and of the
strategies
implemented for improved utilization of women and minority owned
businesses.
In January,
the Governor appointed a task force made up of state officials to study
the MGT
study recommendations. On Tuesday, May 3rd, in a speech to
the
Virginia Minority Supplier Development Council, he announced that his
administration will take four important steps to address the
discrimination
identified in the MGT Study: 1) consolidate certification of WBE’s and
MBE’s in
the Department of Minority Business Enterprise; 2) establish by May 20
specific
goals for minority-owned, women-owned, and small business procurement;
3)
require prime contractors on state construction projects to include a
subcontractor plan in their bid proposals and demonstrate compliance
with the
plan to receive final contract payments; and 4) initiate performance
evaluations for top agency personnel and procurement officials that
consider
their agency’s procurement record.
While the
four initiatives announced by the Governor are all positive actions,
these
proposed actions do not address structural problems identified in the
MGT Study
that impede participation of small, women- and minority-owned
businesses in
state procurement. These structural
issues include the adverse effects on small business of the
Commonwealth’s
effort to control costs by consolidating purchases in large, statewide
contracts. This initiative, called “spend management,” is equivalent to
the
federal contract bundling program opposed by the National Association
of Women
Business Owners and every other group representing small businesses.
The
structural problems also include concerns about bonding requirements
and access
to capital – capacity issues not addressed by the Governor’s announced
actions.
In addition, the Governor’s announcement included no reference to the
MGT
Study’s recommendation in favor of a small business set aside program.
The failure
to address these structural concerns about the fairness of the state
marketplace for small businesses may render unattainable any goals set
for
including small, women- and minority-owned businesses among state
contractors.
Compare the experience of the federal government in achieving a
procurement
goal of 5% for women owned businesses – a goal set more than a decade
ago.
Although the federal government has had a competitive, small business
set aside
program in place since the 1940’s, it has not come close to meeting the
5%
contracting goal. This is true despite
the fact that, in addition to set asides, the federal government has in
place
“best practices” educational, counseling, mentoring, matchmaking,
lending and
outreach programs not included among the four initiatives just
announced by the
Governor.
In light of
this experience, it is not unreasonable for small, women, and minority
business
owners to question whether the four initiatives announced by the
Governor (standing
alone) will, in fact, put Virginia in a position to catch up quickly to
other
states like Maryland (17%), North Carolina (7.4%), Florida (11.8%) and
Texas
(13%) in spending with M/WBE's.
The MGT
Study showed a pattern of overt discrimination against women- and
minority-
owned businesses in state contracting. Other
data show that although nearly 98%
of Virginia businesses are
small businesses, those businesses receive less than half of the state
contracts. What is now required is a
complete overhaul of the contracting system and implementation of every
best
practice used by the private industry or the federal government to
level the
playing field. Nothing less can
guarantee that small, women-, and minority-owned businesses get our
fair share
of the state’s business.
|