Module 6 · Benchmarks

A preliminary evaluation of the disparity-study landscape

Fairfax is not the first jurisdiction in this market to measure disparity. This is a preliminary read of the publicly available studies: who conducts them, what their methods do well, and where a more rigorous, more reproducible approach strengthens both the analysis and its legal defensibility.

Who does this work

A handful of firms produce most disparity studies nationally. The most active in this region, and on several of the studies below, is MGT, alongside BBC Research, Keen Independent, Colette Holt & Associates, Griffin & Strong, and Mason Tillman. House Strategies Group is pursuing the Fairfax study directly, as prime, meeting that bar with a Washington, D.C. area data and analytics core and an academic bench whose members have led and defended disparity studies nationally. The point of the evaluation below is not that these studies are wrong. It is that the methodological frontier has moved, and Fairfax can get a more controlled, more transparent, and more defensible study than the regional norm.

Loudoun County, VA

2025

MGT (MGT Impact Solutions)County Government procurement

The directly adjacent Northern Virginia county selected MGT for its procurement disparity study after a competitive field that included BBC Research, Griffin & Strong, Keen Independent, and Mason Tillman.

A single-entity study (County Government, not the school division) of availability, utilization, and barriers across the County's contracting marketplace.

Relevance to Fairfax: The closest neighbor and the most direct comparator for Fairfax in market, timing, and method. Fairfax is a larger, two-entity scope, covering both the County and FCPS.

Preliminary evaluation: Confirms both the regional method and the dominant provider. A Fairfax study covering the County and FCPS is broader, and a method that controls for firm capability and ships a reproducible platform adds defensibility a single-entity county study typically does not.

View study

City of Houston, TX

2024

MGT (MGT of America Consulting)FY2018-FY2022 (5 years)

Overall M/WBE disparity index of 84.2, with substantial, significant gaps in several categories and explicit no-disparity findings for certain Hispanic-, Asian-, and women-owned cells.

Custom-census availability, a dual test (index at or below 80 plus a t-test for significance), private-sector regressions, and a structured anecdotal record. The private-market econometric analysis was performed by a subcontractor.

Relevance to Fairfax: The most recent large MGT study, and a clear model of group-by-category findings that migrate no-disparity groups to a race-neutral small-business track.

Preliminary evaluation: A strong contemporary template with group-specific, significance-tested findings. The two dimensions a more controlled, reproducible method strengthens most are the availability measure and the verification of the anecdotal record.

View study

WSSC Water (Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission), MD

2022

MGT (MGT Consulting Group)FY2015-FY2019

M/WBE firms received 33.2% of procurement against non-M/WBE firms at 66.8%; commissioners adopted MBE program revisions on the findings.

Analyzed utilization and availability, calculated disparities, and gathered anecdotal evidence from owners, associations, and staff.

Relevance to Fairfax: A large suburban-Maryland utility inside the RGMA. A useful comparator for goods, construction, and engineering procurement.

Preliminary evaluation: Genre-standard scope from the region's most active firm. Controls for firm size, age, and capacity, plus a reproducible data layer, are where a stronger study advances both rigor and defensibility.

View study

Howard County, MD

2023

MGT (MGT Consulting)County marketplace, public and private (18-24 month study)

Howard County's first disparity study, examining race, ethnicity, and gender effects on availability, capital access, and contract and subcontract utilization.

Quantitative availability and utilization analysis paired with qualitative evidence of barriers from owners, organizations, and stakeholders.

Relevance to Fairfax: A nearby Maryland county on the same regional method, useful across goods, services, and construction.

Preliminary evaluation: Standard genre scope. The availability estimation and the depth of causal controls are the dimensions where a more rigorous, transparent method adds the most legal defensibility.

View study

Commonwealth of Virginia

2020

BBC Research & ConsultingFY2014-FY2019

Minority- and women-owned firms were 32.8% of SWaM-certified businesses yet received 13.4% of contract dollars over five years.

Disparity indices of 40 (subcontract-plan contracts) and 46 (no-plan contracts). Substantial disparities for every racial, ethnic, and gender group on prime contracts; subcontract plans did not measurably improve outcomes.

Relevance to Fairfax: Defines the statewide baseline and the SWaM certification framework Fairfax tracks against, and the legal and statistical template for a Virginia study.

Preliminary evaluation: A credible statewide baseline. Its indices are survey-based; our method extends them with controls for legitimate competitive factors and group-by-category significance, so a gap is reported as a barrier only where it survives those tests.

View study

Prince William County, VA

2024

County-commissioned (procurement disparity study)County contracting marketplace

The adjacent Northern Virginia county commissioned a comprehensive disparity study across its contracting marketplace.

Examines availability, utilization, capital access, and barriers for small, women-, minority-, and veteran-owned firms.

Relevance to Fairfax: Another immediate Northern Virginia peer, a comparator for Fairfax's market, supplier base, and timing.

Preliminary evaluation: An active, directly comparable regional study. The shared questions, RGMA, and timing make it the most useful live peer to learn from and improve upon.

View study

Government of the District of Columbia

2023

BBC-Pantera-Tiber (joint venture)Initiated 2021, released April 2023

Substantial disparities for minority- and women-owned firms across DC Government, Events DC, and UDC contracting.

Found disparities persisting despite the District's Certified Business Enterprise (CBE) program and other race- and gender-neutral measures.

Relevance to Fairfax: Anchor jurisdiction of the WAA metro and a core RGMA component. Shows disparities persist even with active local-business programs.

Preliminary evaluation: A large multi-entity regional study, the closest structural analogue to Fairfax's two-entity scope. Its persistence-despite-programs finding is exactly the question a controlled, causal method is built to answer.

View study

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA)

2021

Keen Independent ResearchMarketplace and DBE/SBE contracting

M/WBE utilization near 23% against an availability of roughly 48% for firms qualified and interested in WMATA contracts.

A custom availability survey plus in-depth firm and trade-association interviews. Disparities were larger on contracts carrying no DBE goal.

Relevance to Fairfax: The same regional marketplace as the proposed Fairfax RGMA. The survey-based availability denominator is the method public data cannot reproduce.

Preliminary evaluation: A solid survey-based availability model. Our approach pairs that survey rigor with controls for capability and a published, reproducible data and code layer.

View study

King County, WA

2024

Colette Holt & AssociatesCounty M/W/DBE marketplace

A court-tested firm's recent study found King County had nearly eliminated contracting disparities for several groups.

Colette Holt & Associates, co-author of the federal NCHRP 644 methodology standard, paired the legal framework with a separate PhD-economist-led statistical analysis.

Relevance to Fairfax: The legal-defensibility benchmark. Demonstrates an honest study that reports low or no disparity where the data support it, the posture a defensible study must be willing to take.

Preliminary evaluation: A defensibility model: an experienced legal lead plus a separate PhD economist on the statistics, willing to report a null finding. Our team is built on that same two-role architecture, with a live reproducible platform added.

View study

Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT)

Triennial

Civil Rights Division (49 CFR Part 26)Ongoing DBE goal cycles

Federal DBE availability analysis and triennial overall goal-setting for federally assisted transportation contracts.

VDOT sets a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise goal based on the relative availability of ready, willing, and able DBE firms in its market, the same availability logic at the center of a disparity study.

Relevance to Fairfax: Shows the federal DBE methodology that complements a Croson-based local study and informs construction-sector availability in Virginia.

Preliminary evaluation: The federal availability standard. Its ready-willing-and-able logic is the model we carry into the local study, in place of an equal-weight firm count.

View study

Why the method matters in Virginia

The Fourth Circuit already drew the line

The court that governs Virginia decided H.B. Rowe Co. v. Tippett, 615 F.3d 233 (4th Cir. 2010). It upheld race-conscious contracting measures only for the groups the evidence actually supported, and struck them down where the record lacked statistically significant, properly controlled findings. A disparity study that wins in this market is the one built, from the first design choice, to clear that bar. Every improvement below is made for exactly that reason.

The methodological frontier

Where our method goes further, and is more legally defensible

Each row pairs a common limitation of the published studies with what House Strategies Group would do instead, why it produces a more defensible result, and a documented example from the case law and the research where that limitation has surfaced. These are not hypothetical concerns.

Common limitation

Availability is often an equal-weight count of firms in a geography, which inflates the denominator with firms that never bid or cannot perform.

Our method

A ready, willing, and able custom availability survey, anchored to actual public-work registration and bid behavior, not a raw headcount.

Why it is more defensible

Defeats the inflated-availability attack, the most contested step under Croson, by measuring the pool a court actually recognizes.

In the record: research by George R. La Noue (University of Maryland, Baltimore County) finds studies routinely count firms that never bid or lack the capacity to perform, inflating the pool the comparison rests on.

Common limitation

A raw availability-to-utilization ratio is treated as a finding, with no control for the legitimate factors that also drive who wins work.

Our method

Controls for firm size, age, experience, and capital, plus a private-sector but-for regression, so a gap is reported as a barrier only when it survives those controls.

Why it is more defensible

Separates a barrier from a capability difference, which is the core of a strong-basis-in-evidence showing and the gap critics most often exploit.

In the record: in H.B. Rowe Co. v. Tippett, 615 F.3d 233 (4th Cir. 2010), the precedent that governs Virginia, the court struck the contracting measures for the groups whose findings were not backed by controlled, statistically significant evidence.

Common limitation

A single headline index can mask which specific groups and categories the evidence actually supports.

Our method

Group-by-category findings with significance testing on every cell, remediated only where the evidence holds.

Why it is more defensible

Matches H.B. Rowe, which upheld measures only for the groups the record supported and struck them where it did not.

In the record: H.B. Rowe upheld remedies for African American and Native American firms but struck them for Asian, Hispanic, and women-owned firms, and Croson warned against treating unlike groups as one.

Common limitation

Anecdotal evidence is sometimes anonymous, unverified, and self-selected.

Our method

A verified, attributed, and retained anecdotal record, with structured instruments and a documented protocol.

Why it is more defensible

Meets the corroboration courts require and survives the discovery that has undone studies whose underlying records could not be produced.

In the record: La Noue's congressional testimony warns that anonymous or unverified anecdotes cannot, on their own, sustain a race- or gender-based preference.

Common limitation

The deliverable is frequently a static PDF, and the underlying data and code are not published.

Our method

Published data, documented model specifications, and a live, interactive, Section 508-compliant platform delivered to the County.

Why it is more defensible

Makes the strong-basis-in-evidence showing auditable and reproducible, the failure mode that sank disparity evidence in other jurisdictions.

In the record: La Noue documents disparity-study litigation in which a regression analysis could not be reviewed (Montana) and a consultant could not produce its underlying data (Shelby County, Tennessee).

Common limitation

Recommendations can be boilerplate, leading with race-conscious goals.

Our method

Race-neutral, opportunity-focused remedies first, with race-conscious measures reserved for the narrow, significant, group-specific gaps neutral tools cannot close.

Why it is more defensible

The narrow-tailoring discipline the Fourth Circuit and 49 C.F.R. 26.51 require, and the posture most durable after Students for Fair Admissions.

In the record: Croson and 49 C.F.R. 26.51 require race-neutral measures be considered first, and La Noue documents the institutional pressure on for-profit firms to find disparity rather than test for it.

The common thread, read honestly

Across every peer study, minority- and women-owned firms are a substantial share of the available market and a smaller share of the dollars. The preliminary Fairfax index points the same way. That is the case for a full study, not a substitute for one, and the value is in measuring the gap correctly and explaining what causes it.

See the approach behind these claims

The methodology page draws the line between what public data can show and what the full study adds. The approach module sets out how we move from a measured gap to its cause.

Our approach Methodology & legal framework The preliminary index