DOI: 10.5064/f6e1voto
title: Data for: Responding to Environmental Uncertainties in Critical Supply Acquisition: An Examination of Contracting for Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) in the Aftermath of COVID-19

description: &lt;h3&gt;Project Overview&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
This study aims to identify the perceived risks and perceived solutions related to the purchasing of personal protective equipment (PPE) in the aftermath of the COVID-19 public health crisis. Around the globe, medical professionals have faced shortages in critical medical supplies during this crisis, at times leading to the rationing or reuse of PPE. The aim of this research was to advance an understanding of how to improve the distribution of critical supplies, like PPE, in the face of crises like COVID-19. To do this, a qualitative study was conducted to consult professionals involved in purchasing PPE from the across the U.S. The study found that acquiring critical supplies was perceived to depend on not only determining potential opportunism of a contractor, but also potential vulnerabilities in their supply chains. Relationships with contractors were perceived to improve some aspects of supply chain analysis, and a broader understanding of the global medical supply market. Yet, respondents also indicated that contractor-provided information may also require verification with independent data sources. The results provide theoretical and practical implications for the study of critical supply acquisition.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h3&gt;Data Overview&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
The research involved research interviews with forty contract managers involved in purchasing PPE in the immediate aftermath of the COVID-19 public health crisis. The participants were consulted directly, to learn their perspectives on their perceived risks, and their perceived solutions for addressing such risks. The interviews were solicited purposefully from publicly accessible websites, including the online list of all state procurement offices posted by the National Association of State Procurement Officials (NASPO), and the online list of the largest private group purchasing organizations (GPO) in the U.S. as posted by Becker’s Hospital Review. Interview participants were also solicited from the American Society of Public Administration’s Section on Procurement and Contract Management, by consulting the leaders of the group. Lastly, some participants were also identified by interviewee recommendation, through snowballing.&lt;/p&gt;
The interview respondents all demonstrated first-hand experience purchasing PPE in the aftermath of the COVID-19 public health crisis. Their professional titles indicated their expertise in contract management, including titles such as Director of Procurement, Procurement Contracting Officer, and Senior Director of Supply Chain Management. The interview protocol addressed questions related to the perceived risks involved in purchasing PPE during the COVID-19 public health crisis, and their perceived solutions. The interview questions involved a combination of structured and unstructured questions, to allow for discovery and explanation by the interview participants.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h3&gt;Data Collection Overview&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
The interviews were conducted via telephone and through Zoom. The interviewees were asked to meet for 20-30 minutes, and many interviews extended this timeframe, with the average length of interviews recorded at 45 minutes. All interviews were solicited via email, including followup messages for request. 10 respondents were first emailed an online survey. Sixteen of the interview respondents worked for state government agencies, fifteen from local government agencies (city or county offices), seven from medical GPOs, and two from nonprofit organizations involved in purchasing.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h3&gt;Data Analysis&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
The data analysis involved identifying common themes through open coding, to explain the types of uncertainties that respondents perceived in this context, as well as their techniques for addressing them.&lt;/p&gt; 
The codes were first identified as first-level concepts, and further analysis of the interview data revealed subtopics from these themes, which were identified as second-level concepts. The interview comments were also compared across the employment of backgrounds of the respondents to further understand how their work context influenced their perceptions of these issues.&lt;/p&gt;
Finally, the interview coding analysis was compared with other reports on the COVID-19 crisis, to triangulate interview findings. The two additional documents (by Government Accountability Office and the Healthcare Group Purchasing Industry Initiative) included in this deposit are examples of such sources. The GAO document is in the public domain, while the HGPII 15th Annual Report was at the time also openly shared, but no longer available on the organization's public-facing site.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h3&gt;Shared Data Organization&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
Full transcripts cannot be shared per the conditions of the commitments made to interview participants and the terms of the IRB approval. Instead, the data deposit includes an aggregated compilation of de-identified coded themes, with illustrative sample excerpts. Reporting codes for respondents are referred to by employer type: SGR for representatives of state government agencies (then numbered from 0101 to 0116); LGR for representatives of local government agencies (numbered from 0101 to 0115) and PSR for private sector representatives (numbered from 0101 to 0109).&lt;/p&gt;
Additional documentation files include the study information sheet outlining the commitments made to the interview participants, the interview protocol, a summary of the first and second-level concepts and the coding scheme for the interview analysis.&lt;/p&gt;