THE PROCUREMENT POLICIES, PROCEDURES, AND PRACTICES OF THESE GOVERNMENTS WERE COMPARED IN ORDER TO ESTABLISHED PURCHASING PRINCIPLES. OFFICIALS AND PURCHASING PERSONNEL WERE INTERVIEWED, AND RELEVANT RECORDS FOR 1976 EXAMINED. SINCE THE EMPHASIS WAS ON EFFICIENCY, NO DISTINCTION WAS MADE BETWEEN FEDERAL AND LOCAL FUNDS. THREE OF THE GOVERNMENTS DID NOT USE CENTRALIZED PURCHASING WHICH CAN RESULT NOT ONLY IN LOWER PRICES, BUT ALSO IN IMPROVEMENTS IN SCHEDULING, PLANNING, STANDARDIZED SPECIFICATIONS, COMPETITIVE NEGOTIATION, INSPECTION, PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT. COOPERATIVE ARRANGEMENTS ALSO ALLOW PURCHASING OFFICIALS TO EXCHANGE USEFUL INFORMATION AND DISCUSS COMMON PROBLEMS. ONLY ONE GOVERNMENT HAD MADE PROGRESS TOWARD OBTAINING BENEFITS FROM COOPERATIVE PURCHASING, WHEREAS TWO OR MORE GOVERNMENTS ARRANGED TO BUY UNDER THE SAME CONTRACT. NONE OF THE GOVERNMENTS HAD ESTABLISHED ACCOUNTABILITY FOR PROCUREMENT FUNCTIONS. ACCOUNTABILITY REQUIRES THAT GOALS BE SET, PERFORMANCE PERIODICALLY REPORTED, AND AUDITS OR SOME REVIEW BE CONDUCTED. CRITICAL ELEMENTS IN MEASURING PURCHASING PERFORMANCE ARE EFFICIENCY, ECONOMY, AND EFFECTIVENESS. A HYPOTHETICAL CASE ILLUSTRATES AN EVALUATION OF PROCUREMENT PRACTICES. A CHART LISTING 24 QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE INDICATORS FOR USE IN MEASURING PROCUREMENT PERFORMANCE IS PROVIDED. THE STUDY RECOMMENDS THAT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS USE THIS LIST AND OTHER MATERIALS IN THE REPORT TO REALIZE THE SAVINGS AND OTHER BENEFITS THAT WOULD RESULT FROM FOLLOWING RECOGNIZED PROCUREMENT PRINCIPLES. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED--MJW)