Does Contracting Achieve Better Performance for Democratic-Constitutional, Procedural Tasks? Evidence From the EEO Discrimination Complaint Process

Abstract

Contracting out has been considered one of the main performance management strategies to reduce costs and bring more expertise to government agencies. However, there is a lack of research assessing the performance of contractors compared with that of in-house agency employees, when both contractors and public employees deliver complex services. This study examines whether or not contracting achieves better performance in democratic-constitutional, procedural (DCP) tasks compared with in-house delivery, by analyzing contracting use in the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) discrimination complaint process. Using agency-level panel data from the Federal EEO Statistical Report of Discrimination Complaints, combined with data from the Federal Procurement Data System and the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey, the study offers evidence resolving the competing logics for a relationship between contracting use and performance in DCP tasks. The findings show that an increase in contracting is associated with a decrease in timely completion of case investigations, which is a key measure of DCP task performance.