The study was purposeful on the effect of risk management on procurement performance of PDEs in Uganda, taking the case study of MoFPED. Particularly, the study established the effect of risk identification, risk assessment, risk analysis, risk control and risk management as a whole on procurement performance, measured on efficiency and effectiveness of public procurement in the ministry. A cross-sectional survey design, with a mixed approach to data collection and analysis was utilized. The research sample size was 103 MoFPED staff of which questionnaires for 95 staff were returned, thus getting a response rate of 92.2%.Results from quantitative analysis were complemented with qualitative responses from 4 PPDA participants for triangulation. Responses from ministry staff which were anchored on a 5-point likert scale were summarized with the help of descriptive statistics first, followed by the use of Pearson’s correlation to find out whether procurement risk management and its components; identification, assessment, analysis and control had a significant relationship with procurement performance. This was then followed by the use of regression analysis to the effect and predictive power of procurement risk identification, risk assessment, risk analysis, risk control and risk management as a whole on procurement performance. The study found out that; the extent of risk identification was moderately satisfactory (mean = 3.1053) and this had a significant influence on procurement performance (r =.403**; sig. 000; p<.01; beta = 0.403; sig.000; R square change = .163); The extent of risk assessment was low (mean = 2.8105) and this had a significant influence on procurement performance (r =.617**; sig. 000; p<.01; beta = 0.617; sig.000; R square change = .38); The extent of risk analysis was low (mean = 2.3316) and this had a significant influence on procurement performance (r =.833**; sig. 000; p<.01; beta = 0.833; sig.000; R square change = .694); The extent of risk control was low (mean = 2.1316) and this had a significant influence on procurement performance (r =.768**; sig. 000; p<.01; beta = 0.768; sig.000; R square change = .590). Overall, findings revealed that, risk management was inadequate and this significantly influenced procurement performance (r = .810**; sig.000; p<.01; beta =.810; sig.000; R square change = 0.656) The study concluded that, the unsatisfactory procurement performance of the ministry was mainly attributed to weaknesses in procurement risk management. The study thus recommended that, MoFPED and other PDEs should highly ensure effective risk management in their procurement activities to improve procurement performance.

show more