Seattle — A new study by the Washington Institute Foundation identifies fundamental methodological flaws plaguing a state-sponsored study of public contracting opportunities for minorities and women. The Washington Institute concludes that the research flaws have rendered the state’s study useless.
“The state has spent $335,000 for what?” Washington Institute President Richard Derham asked. “For $335,000 we got an ill-conceived, poorly executed study of no continuing relevance to solving the problems of Washington’s citizens.”
In its current draft of the state’s “disparity study,” consultant Mason Tillman Associates (MTA) concludes that minority- and women-owned firms in Washington are not receiving their appropriate share of state contracts. MTA’s analysis compares each ethnic and gender group’s share of awarded contract dollars with that group’s estimated availability in the Washington state market.
According to Washington Institute research analyst Jeff Hanson, though, MTA’s analysis contains two major methodological flaws that invalidate its results:
MTA treats all firms as equally capable of performing even the largest of jobs. Because minority- and women-owned firms tend to be smaller, MTA overestimates their “expected” share of contract dollars.
MTA overstates the number of “available” minority and women contractors by including many who have never expressed interest in state contracts. Caucasian male contractors, on the other hand, must have expressed interest in state contracts for MTA to include them as available firms.
Because of these flaws, Hanson concludes, “MTA’s disparity study can offer no meaningful insight into whether or not minority- and women-owned firms are truly underutilized in state contracts.”
