PHIG Recipients Accelerating Procurement Processes

September 09, 2025 | Melissa Touma

Timely procurement is a cornerstone of effective public health infrastructure. Under CDC’s Public Health Infrastructure Grant (PHIG), recipients are encouraged to strengthen their procurement systems so that resources reach communities swiftly and efficiently. As jurisdictions continue to modernize their systems, several PHIG recipients are leading innovative practices that not only reduce procurement cycle times but also enhance transparency, accountability, and collaboration. By setting thoughtful targets and tracking progress, agencies can demonstrate improvements in procurement efficiency and make a strong case for continued investment in public health infrastructure.

Best Practices for Setting Targets for the PHIG Procurement Timeliness Measure

The PHIG performance measure A2.2: Procurement Timeliness tracks the median number of calendar days from when procurement documentation is received to when a contract is fully executed. It helps agencies assess and improve the efficiency of their procurement processes, particularly those funded by federal awards.

Setting realistic and meaningful targets for procurement timeliness is essential for tracking progress and driving improvement. Clear, data-informed targets help agencies identify bottlenecks, allocate resources effectively, and measure the impact of process changes over time. When targets are both ambitious and achievable, they can motivate teams, guide continuous improvement efforts, and support accountability across departments. To get on track:

1. Start with a baseline. Use historical data to establish a procurement cycle time. If data is not yet available, begin with a small sample and refine over time.
2. Segment by procurement type. Consider setting distinct targets for various types of procurement (e.g., contracts vs. purchase orders) if they follow different timelines.
3. Engage stakeholders. Collaborate with procurement, finance, and program staff to understand bottlenecks and set achievable goals.
4. Align with system improvements. Adjust targets to reflect expected gains in efficiency, especially when implementing a new contract lifecycle management system or process improvements.
5. Document assumptions and limitations. When setting targets, note any contextual factors (e.g., staffing shortages, policy changes) that may affect procurement timelines.
6. Review and adjust regularly. As systems mature and data quality improves, revisit and refine targets to reflect new capabilities and expectations.

Best Practices from PHIG Recipients

Several PHIG recipients have adopted replicable strategies to improve procurement timeliness, aligning with best practices from the National Association of State Procurement Officials and principles of collaborative procurement partnerships that emphasize cross-functional coordination and interagency engagement. Here are some best practices and examples of how PHIG recipients are moving to improve their procurement systems:

1. Establish a robust and effective data collection system that offers automated data capture, comprehensive coverage, regular audits, and validation. For example:
   • Illinois Department of Public Health currently uses Smartsheet to streamline procurement tracking and plans to implement DocuSign’s Contract Life Management (CLM) system to track procurement in 2026.
   • Seattle & King County Public Health utilizes Agiloft, a Contract Lifecycle Management platform, to manage procurement from planning to closeout.
   • Connecticut Department of Public Health built a custom Grants Management System using Dynamics 365 and Power BI, enhancing visibility and reporting.
   • Tennessee Department of Health developed a low-code Contract Tracking and Reporting Application using Caspio, improving efficiency and data accuracy.
2. Utilize a CLM System to improve efficiency, enhance transparency and accountability and ensure compliance and risk management. For example:
   • Iowa Department of Health and Human Services is rolling out Cobblestone, a full-spectrum CLM system that guides users through procurement pathways and supports contract execution and management. 
   • Connecticut Department of Public Health utilizes its new Grant Management System built into Dynamics 365 and Power Bi. 
   • Seattle & King County Public Health utilizes Agiloft, a CLM platform.
3. Establish a dedicated, centralized team that oversees and executes procurement activities for the entire agency. For example:
   • Illinois centralized its procurement function by assigning a team of five people to improve collaboration and consistency across the agency.
   • Connecticut is building a centralized team to support program staff through the procurement process.
4. Institutionalize procurement capacity building, training, and customer support. For example:
   • Louisville Metro Department of Health and Wellness placed a trainer on the procurement and contracting team to build the capacity of all grants/contract managers across the agency. Training materials and documents are available for staff to reference and build programmatic capacity.
   • Connecticut established a customer support team within its Operational Support Unit to assist staff with procurement needs.
5. Foster a working relationship with external agencies or divisions that play a role in the procurement approval process. For example:
   • Illinois includes state purchasing officers in weekly procurement meetings to enhance communication and problem-solving.
6. Foster cross-functional collaboration and learning through internal procurement meetings and engagement. For example:
   • Santa Clara Public Health Department created a Grants/Fiscal Community of Practice to foster cross-functional learning.

Procurement as a Strategic Lever for Public Health

Improving procurement timeliness is more than a technical fix — it's a strategic investment in public health readiness and resilience. By embracing data-driven tools, centralizing expertise, fostering collaboration, and exploring emerging technologies, public health agencies are reducing delays while building the infrastructure to respond swiftly to community needs, emergencies, and long-term health goals.

As these best practices continue to spread and evolve, they offer a roadmap for other jurisdictions to modernize procurement and maximize the value of every public health dollar. Next, explore how two state recipients are transforming procurement and grant management — ultimately delivering faster, more reliable services to the communities that need them most.

As more PHIG recipients work to modernize their procurement systems, sharing strategies and lessons learned becomes increasingly valuable. What strategies has your agency found most effective in improving procurement timeliness? We invite you to join the conversation and contribute your insights to help strengthen public health infrastructure nationwide. Send us an email at phig@astho.org!