Practice Area 08
Disparity Studies & Procurement Equity
A disparity study asks whether a government buys from the firms available to it in the proportions you would expect, and if not, why. Most studies answer the first half. They measure availability, measure utilization, divide one by the other, and report the ratio. That number is the beginning of the analysis, not the end of it.
A gap is a question, not a verdict. A ratio below the threshold is consistent with discrimination, and it is equally consistent with differences in firm size, capacity, bonding access, or which firms even learn a contract exists. Our method separates those causes rather than assuming them. We control for capability, model the procurement funnel stage by stage, and test each finding group by group and category by category, so that a jurisdiction learns which of its own practices produce the gap and which do not. We do not assume a jurisdiction is at fault, and we are prepared to report no disparity where the data shows none.
That discipline is what makes a study survive contact with a court. City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co. requires evidence specific to the jurisdiction, not societal statistics, and in the Fourth Circuit H.B. Rowe v. Tippett governs how that evidence must be built. We design to that standard from the first data request, and we sequence remedies race-neutral first, because a narrowly tailored program has to show that neutral measures were tried.
- Availability analysis (custom survey-primary, willing and able)
- Utilization analysis across prime and subcontract spend
- Disparity index construction & statistical significance testing
- Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition of bid-success and award dollars
- Capacity-controlled regression & selection modeling
- Procurement-funnel drop-off & method-of-purchase analysis
- Marketplace & private-sector but-for regression
- Structured anecdotal evidence collection with verification
- Croson / H.B. Rowe legal-defensibility review
- Race-neutral-first remedy design & program sunset planning
✦ HSG Firm ExperienceSubmitted · awaiting decision
↗ portal
Fairfax County, Virginia · Department of Procurement and Material Management
Procurement Disparity Study · RFP 2000004217 Submitted · Award Pending
HSG is bidding this study as prime. Before submitting, we built and published a working analysis of Fairfax County and Fairfax County Public Schools procurement using only public data, so the County could evaluate our reasoning rather than our adjectives. The environment carries ten analytical modules, a full methodology, and every data request, survey item, and interview prompt we would use, published openly. Scope covers County and FCPS spend exceeding $1B annually.
Role: PrimeModules: 10 LiveTerm: 1 Yr + 2 Renewals
↗ analysis
Independent Preliminary Read · Public Data Only
What the Public Record Already Shows
Against a Washington metropolitan market of 113,780 employer firms, Census Annual Business Survey data puts minority-owned availability at 37.2% and women-owned at 25.5%. Fairfax County's own FY23 SWaM report puts minority-owned utilization at 9.0% and women-owned at 4.9% of County and FCPS purchase-order spend. The resulting disparity indices, 0.24 and 0.19, fall well below the 0.80 threshold. We present this as an independent read finding a substantial disparity that warrants rigorous causal study. It is not, and we do not call it, a finding of discrimination.
Source: Census ABS 2022Source: Fairfax FY23 SWaMStatus: Preliminary
House Strategies Group · Proprietary Method
The Barrier-versus-Capability Framework
Our analytical core separates a gap caused by barriers from a gap caused by differences in firm capability. It pairs decomposition of bid-success rates and award dollars with capacity-controlled regressions and selection modeling, then reports results on a significance grid broken out by group, category, and outcome rather than as a single headline ratio. The cleanest signal we look for is whether a gap widens in high-discretion purchasing lanes, which is where informal networks, rather than capability, decide who gets asked to bid.
Legal Frame: Croson · H.B. RoweRemedy Design: Race-Neutral First
Methodological Position · Field Context
Reproducible by Design
A study that recommends a program will eventually be challenged, and the challenge will target the method. We build the analytical pipeline so a third party can rerun it: pre-registered reference groups, disclosed model specifications, correction for multiple comparisons across the significance grid, and results reported both with and without contested controls so a reader can see the range rather than a single convenient number. Where analysis is AI-accelerated, the analytical steps themselves remain deterministic and inspectable.
Approach: Glass-BoxReporting: Bounded Ranges