Preliminary analysis prepared independently by House Strategies Group LLC from public data, ahead of the City of Frederick's forthcoming supplier diversity assessment and disparity study RFP (draft under review). Not affiliated with or endorsed by the City of Frederick. Every figure carries its source and its limits. Not a procurement-disparity finding.

Module · Disparity index

Utilization measured against availability

The disparity index divides a group's share of spending by its share of the available firm base. A value of 1.0 is parity. Below 0.80, the convention used across disparity studies, flags substantial underutilization. For Frederick the official numbers are the City's 2021 study's, shown here in full. What a current index would look like is a set of bounded questions, not a number, and this page keeps that distinction explicit.

These are the City's own official figures, not HSG estimates
Every index in the grids below comes from the City's 2021 study: its dollar-weighted custom-census availability, its reconstructed FY2014-FY2018 utilization, its significance tests at 95 percent confidence, per Appendix F. The study found statistically significant MWBE underutilization in all five categories, surviving regression controls for capacity and other race- and gender-neutral factors. A gap is a question, not a verdict: significant disparity is what triggered the City's race-neutral-first program response, and it is the baseline this update measures movement against.
Construction index
0.70
util 29.01% ÷ avail 41.37%
A&E index
0.39
util 15.59% ÷ avail 39.89%
Professional Services index
0.00
util 0.00% ÷ avail 31.59%
Other Services index
0.24
util 7.01% ÷ avail 29.13%
Goods & Supplies index
0.00
util 0.00% ÷ avail 15.93%
Threshold
0.80
below this flags substantial underutilization

The 2021 study's index by category (prime dollars, MWBE combined)

FY2014-FY2018 prime utilization ÷ dollar-weighted availability, with the 0.80 threshold and parity marked. All five categories statistically significant.

Source: The City's 2021 disparity study (Griffin & Strong, P.C.). Prime MWBE utilization divided by the study's dollar-weighted custom-census availability, per category, FY2014-FY2018. All five categories were statistically significant at 95 percent confidence and survived the study's regression controls for capacity and other race- and gender-neutral factors.

The official matrix: index by group and category, prime dollars

Each cell is the 2021 study's utilization divided by its availability for one group in one category. Color runs from deep red (severe underutilization) to green (parity or above). The two green cells are the study's two overutilization findings: the single dominant construction firm behind the Asian American cell, and women-owned firms in A&E. Every other measurable cell sits at or near zero.

< 0.40 severe0.40-0.600.60-0.800.80-1.00≥ 1.00 parity
Group \ Industry clusterConstructionA&EProfessional ServicesOther ServicesGoods & Supplies
Total MWBE
0.70
0.39
0.00
0.24
0.00
Total MBE
0.86
0.00
0.00
0.31
0.00
African American
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.31
0.00
Asian American
8.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hispanic American
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.78
0.00
Native American
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Women
0.00
1.76
0.00
0.00
0.00

Source: The City's 2021 disparity study, Appendix F Tables F-1 to F-5, Study Period rows. Appendix F Study Period rows, prime lens. Total MWBE availability shown at the chapter values (41.37, 39.89, 31.59, 29.13, 15.93); Appendix F prints 41.48, 40.00, and 29.14 for three of them; the published indices are unchanged either way. Bolded significance in the report (p < .05) applies to every cell except Asian American Construction and Women A&E (overutilized) and Hispanic American Other Services (occurrences too small to test).

The same matrix with subcontracts included

Prime plus tracked subcontractor dollars. Goods & Supplies has no column here: FY18 had zero tracked subcontractors, so the study could not build a total-utilization analysis for that category. That absence is a finding in its own right, and it is the same record gap that stopped Frederick County's 2026 study from meeting its legal threshold.

< 0.40 severe0.40-0.600.60-0.800.80-1.00≥ 1.00 parity
Group \ Industry clusterConstructionA&EProfessional ServicesOther Services
Total MWBE
0.74
0.70
0.09
0.24
Total MBE
0.88
0.19
0.12
0.31
African American
0.02
0.00
0.01
0.31
Asian American
8.23
0.49
0.84
0.00
Hispanic American
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.78
Native American
0.18
0.00
0.00
0.00
Women
0.14
2.48
0.00
0.00

Source: The City's 2021 disparity study, Appendix F Tables F-6 to F-9, Study Period rows. Prime plus subcontractor dollars, Appendix F Tables F-6 to F-9. No Goods & Supplies column exists because FY18 had no tracked subcontractors, so the study could not build a total-utilization analysis for that category.

What would it look like now?

No current disparity index can be computed from public data alone

An index needs a numerator and a denominator measured on the same basis. The denominator has moved: minority-owned employer firms in Frederick County grew from 10.67 percent of all firms in 2017 to 15.35 percent in 2022, and the 2021 study's dollar-weighted availability ran 15.93 to 41.37 percent by category. The numerator does not exist in public form: the City publishes no line-level payment or award data, and the only public program figure since the study, roughly 20 percent of $44M in 2022, combines small-, women-, and minority-owned firms and so cannot serve as an MWBE utilization rate. That absence is itself a finding about reporting, and closing it is a deliverable of the update.

2021 study availability, by category
15.93% to 41.37%
Dollar-weighted custom census, FY2014-FY2018
County minority employer-firm share, ABS 2022
15.35%
Up from 10.67% in 2017; a growing denominator
Two-county metro proxy minority share, ABS 2022
31.70%
The wider market the study's CSA geography reaches toward
Only public utilization figure since the study
~20% of $44M
2022 program review; small-, women-, and minority-owned combined, not an MWBE rate

The questions a current index turns on

  • Did the zero rows move? Professional Services and Goods had zero prime MWBE dollars across all five study years. A single award in either category since 2021 changes the story; the public record cannot say whether one happened.
  • Is prime concentration still the pattern? One firm carried 96.58 percent of MWBE prime dollars in the study period. The update tests whether the SBR and goal-setting programs broadened the base or the concentration simply moved.
  • Does utilization track the goals? The City set category goals at the study's measured availability (41, 40, 32, 29, 16). No public report states performance against any of them.
  • Can a subcontractor record be built? FY18 had zero tracked subcontractors, and Frederick County's March 2026 study failed its legal threshold on exactly that gap. Whether the City's post-2021 records can support sub-tier analysis determines what any new index can defend.

Frederick in context: City, County, and State indices

Disparity index (utilization ÷ availability) across the region's official studies. Every measured value sits below the 0.80 threshold.

< 0.40 severe0.40-0.600.60-0.800.80-1.00≥ 1.00 parity

Source: The City's 2021 disparity study (Griffin & Strong, P.C.), chapter tables and Appendix F; U.S. Census ABS Company Summary 2022 and 2017 and NES-D 2022, Frederick County MD, two-county metro proxy, CBSA 47900, and Maryland; City of Frederick 2022 program review; Frederick County disparity study (MGT Impact Solutions, 2026); Maryland statewide disparity study (MGT, 2025).

Reading the comparison honestly
Every measured index in Frederick's own market context sits below the 0.80 substantial-disparity threshold: all five categories of the City's 2021 study, the County's 2026 combined index, and the State's 2025 statewide result. A gap is a question, not a verdict: each of these studies then had to ask whether race-neutral factors explain the gap, and what remedy the record can support. These indices come from different studies with different market areas, periods, and availability methods, so they are context, not a comparable series. Croson requires the City's own record: the County and State results frame the region's pattern but cannot substitute for Frederick's evidence.
The cautionary tale next door
The County's first-ever study, released March 2026, found MWBEs at 17.47 percent of available firms but 4.23 percent of competitive spend, a combined index of 24.22: substantial disparity. Yet the County did not meet the legal threshold for race- or gender-conscious programs, because only 27 percent of prime contractors kept subcontractor records and the Croson evidence could not be built. MGT recommended race-neutral steps: an SBE program, data collection, simplification, and outreach.
Why it matters for the City
The City's 2021 study flagged the same gap five years earlier: FY2018 had zero tracked subcontractors, and the study's data-reform recommendation (award identifiers, sub-$50K tracking, real NIGP codes, a relational subcontractor database) remains the unfinished predicate. The cautionary tale next door: findings without records cannot support remedies. The update's value depends on fixing the City's data architecture, not just recomputing ratios, so that whatever the numbers show, the record can carry it.