Date: Friday, July 4, 2025
I’m Jessica R. Norton, Founder and Principal Consultant of Evidenced Research & Evaluation Consulting. I named my consultancy “Evidenced,” given my deep curiosity for what it means to build and use evidence for social programs and policies.
Through years of experience advancing evidence in the government context, I am both encouraged by and uncertain of how we will build on the Foundations for Evidence-Building Policymaking Act of 2018 (Evidence Act). Here, I ponder the future of the Evidence Act and questions that remain for its advancement.
Does the Evidence Act hold promise as a foundation for sound government evaluation policy that will elevate evidence-based policymaking?
The Evidence Act was a groundbreaking bipartisan mandate to advance evidence-building in government operations. Touting three core pillars, the Act outlined the need for federal agencies to engage in evidence-building activities, open government data, and ensure data protection and statistical efficiency. Agencies have been diligent in implementing these mandates with varying levels of ease—and the institutionalization of the Evidence Act is viewed as a successful and positive step in evaluating federal initiatives and advancing government accountability.
The Evidence Act has provided a significant foundation for advancing evidence in government by increasing accountability and transparency, defining evidence, building evaluation capacity, and enhancing access to data, among other benefits. It has also increased evidence generation at the state and local levels through evaluation requirements for government-funded initiatives. All of which have the potential to improve the implementation of government programs, policies, and regulations through the use of evidence.
Nevertheless, evidence-building is only the tip of the iceberg. Without a process to ensure the use or application of new evidence in policymaking, much of the evidence remains in a resting state of inertia, leaving much to be desired in how evidence informs legislative decision-making.
Although the answer should be as simple as disseminating results to decision-makers, when placing evidence at the intersection of policy and politics, we can only hope that it proves convincing enough to inform decisions—and in addition to hope, what we can offer is education and advocacy, which are essential for developing informed evaluation policies.
Fortunately, there are efforts within the federal government to create frameworks for evidence-based policymaking. For example, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) outlines an evidence-building cycle for decision-makers to identify and address key policy questions, including assessing the sufficiency of existing evidence, prioritizing what new evidence is needed, generating new evidence through data analysis, and utilizing evidence to support learning and informed decision-making. However, it is unclear how guidance such as this can inform legislative decision-making. To advocate for more comprehensive evaluation policies, we must explore possible barriers to incorporating evidence frameworks in future evidence legislation.
How do we advocate for an evaluation policy that bridges the gap between evidence generation and its use in policymaking?
As we look toward the future of the Evidence Act, we must acknowledge its limitations and advocate for a more comprehensive approach to achieving evidence-based policymaking. Future amendments to the Act should outline how evidence-building activities will inform policymaking and establish clear standards for evidence-informed decision-making.
While it is uncertain whether the Evidence Act will undergo revisions, we, as evaluators, can continue to propose practical questions and provide insight that will enhance evaluation policies to improve the legislative process. With proper guidance from evidence experts, we build upon the foundation of the Evidence Act to ensure that government regulations, policy development, and programs are driven by sound evidence.
The American Evaluation Association is hosting Gov’t Eval TIG Week with our colleagues in the Government Evaluation Topical Interest Group. The contributions all this week to AEA365 come from our Gov’t Eval TIG members. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this AEA365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the AEA365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an AEA365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to AEA365@eval.org. AEA365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators. The views and opinions expressed on the AEA365 blog are solely those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of the American Evaluation Association, and/or any/all contributors to this site.