Centering Community Input in Government Tech Decisions
Government adoption of technology has profound and far-reaching implications, particularly for marginalized communities. Yet historically, the public has had little say in the systems that ultimately shape their access to services, rights, and freedoms. In their June 2025 report, Gear Shift: Driving Change in Public Sector Technology through Community Input, authors Meg Young, Sarah Fox, Vinhcent Le, and Oscar J. Romero Jr. make a compelling case for embedding community voices early—before procurement begins—in the design and acquisition of government technology.
The primer opens with a sharp critique of the current system: technology procurement is often framed as an internal IT issue, rather than a civic one. Public input, when solicited at all, typically arrives too late—after decisions have been made and systems are effectively baked into bureaucratic machinery. This leads to real-world harms, such as the implementation of Electronic Visit Verification (EVV) systems that, while designed to prevent fraud in home healthcare delivery, ended up surveilling and penalizing caregivers and recipients alike. The failure? A refusal to listen to those most affected until it was too late.
The authors argue that the most effective point for community engagement is pre-procurement—before requests for proposals are drafted, before pilot programs are launched, and ideally, before assumptions become policies. This early-stage engagement allows communities to shape problem definitions, challenge flawed assumptions, and identify overlooked risks. When public agencies treat community groups as experts with firsthand knowledge—rather than outsiders lacking technical credentials—better, more equitable technology outcomes are possible.
However, the report does not shy away from tough critiques. Many community leaders and activists challenge the premise that their input can meaningfully influence government decisions. Drawing on past experiences, such as the controversial implementation of surveillance ordinances modeled after ACLU’s CCOPS framework, some fear community engagement merely offers a façade of legitimacy for predetermined outcomes. Others view participation efforts as a form of “imaginative capture”—reifying the status quo by framing community feedback as reformist while failing to disrupt deeper systemic inequalities. The authors commendably hold space for these tensions, acknowledging that participation itself is not a panacea.
Still, the report offers actionable steps. It urges public agencies to be transparent about technology planning, even in informal formats like social media posts. Agencies should foster cross-sector relationships with academic institutions and local organizations to ensure that community expertise is continually engaged. It encourages governments to adopt “design from the margins,” a principle that centers the voices of those most impacted by existing inequities. It also calls for broader public education initiatives on AI and digital technologies, so residents can participate more meaningfully in these complex discussions.
Procurement reform is central to the authors’ vision. Because purchasing decisions are often shielded behind complex, rigid, and decentralized processes, community influence can be thwarted at every turn. To counter this, the authors recommend that procurement officials recognize and plan for community engagement as a necessary part of project development—one as critical as cybersecurity assessments or legal reviews.
Ultimately, Gear Shift is not just a critique; it’s a blueprint for democratizing how public sector technology is developed and deployed. It asks government workers to “just try”—to pick up the phone, meet communities where they are, and begin building the trust that decades of exclusion have eroded. The report stresses that even imperfect outreach is better than none, and that the long-term success of government technology hinges not on technical expertise alone, but on its alignment with the needs and values of the people it serves.
Disclaimer: This blog post is a summary of the original publication Gear Shift: Driving Change in Public Sector Technology through Community Input by Meg Young, Sarah Fox, Vinhcent Le, and Oscar J. Romero Jr. It is intended for informational purposes only. Readers should refer to the original document for comprehensive details and context. This summary does not constitute legal or policy advice.