The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic created a new and unique public healthcare crisis that political leaders across the globe had to rapidly respond to. Although every country needed to handle this emergency, governments’ responses varied greatly, with some reacting with quicker and more efficient policies than others. Which heads of government reacted the fastest and oversaw policies that were more successful in minimizing casualties and illness? I argue that both the gender of the leader as well as the institutional structure impacted a government’s COVID-19 policy. First, studies have shown that women more than men pay close attention to “care issues” such as welfare, child and family issues, and elder care. As a public health crisis impacting the elderly at higher rates than other age groups, the pandemic naturally aligns with a feminine policy agenda. Thus, I hypothesize that female heads of government had both faster and more efficient responses to the crisis than their male counterparts. Second, I hypothesize that prime ministers had quicker and more effective reactions than presidents due to their need to face fewer veto points in government. However, after interacting gender with government type, I believe that gender should have a larger impact on policy responses to COVID-19 than structure, given the potential expansion of presidential powers in states of emergency. Overall, I hypothesize the order of leaders from fastest and most efficient responses to the pandemic to slowest and least efficient as: female prime ministers, female presidents, male prime ministers, male presidents.