Interest in evidence-based policymaking and harnessing data to help solve problems continues to grow across all levels of government. At the federal level, Congress last year passed and President Obama signed a law (P.L. 114-140) creating the “Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking.” Sponsored by House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), the legislation was enacted with strong bipartisan support. As outlined in the law, the Commission was set up to study and make recommendations on the following:
- how administrative data on federal programs and tax expenditures, as well as other related data series, may be made more available to researchers and institutions to support policy-relevant research and further build evidence, while at the same time protecting privacy and confidentiality;
- how outcome measures, randomized controlled trials and rigorous impact evaluations can be incorporated into program design; and
- whether and how to establish a clearinghouse for program and survey data, how this clearinghouse could be self-funded, who should have access to this clearinghouse, how to protect the data, and other implementation questions.
Similar efforts to better harness administrative data to build and promote the use of evidence have already occurred or are underway at the state and local level. Recently, Commission members heard from experts from several states and academic institutions about their experiences with integrating data and some key lessons learned:
- David Mancuso, Senior Director of Research and Data Analysis for Washington State’s Department of Social & Health Services (DSHS), talked about the department’s integrated administrative data system, and how it’s used for policy analysis, program evaluation, predictive analytics, and performance measurement. For example, the system enabled DSHS to perform rigorous data analysis to evaluate a care coordination program for complex Medicaid beneficiaries, finding that the intervention reduced inpatient hospital costs and showed a promising reduction in overall Medicaid costs as well. Mancuso’s presentation identified the keys to Washington State’s success with the system, such as the involvement of senior agency leadership and an emphasis on how integrated data analytics can support service delivery systems, as well as some challenges, including obtaining funding, addressing privacy concerns, and recruiting staff with the necessary skills.
- Kenneth Dodge, Founding Director of the North Carolina Education Research Data Center (NCERDC), housed at Duke University’s Center for Child and Family Policy, talked about the role of his center in conducting state education policy research. Set up as a partnership between the university and the state’s Department of Public Instruction (DPI), NCERDC receives electronic data files from DPI, and then cleans, stores, merges, and de-identifies the files. Dodge provided an example of how NCERDC’s data was used to evaluate the impact of pre-kindergarten program funding levels by county on elementary school test scores. His presentation pointed to strategies that can overcome legal, data security, and political barriers to making government data more accessible.
- Domenico “Mimmo” Parisi, a professor at the National Strategic Planning and Analysis Research Center at Mississippi State University, discussed the process of setting up and running a statewide longitudinal data system intended to align education and workforce data to enable better analysis, and ultimately improve outcomes and lower program costs. His presentation highlighted LifeTracks, Mississippi’s statewide longitudinal data system designed to comply with reporting requirements as well as facilitate research and policy analysis. On lessons learned, Parisi explained the importance of showing the value of the system, and the need for legislative and executive support.
- Robert George, a Senior Research Fellow with Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago, shared insights about increasing the use of state and local administrative data to support large scale evidence-building. Chapin Hall is currently collaborating with the U.S. Census Bureau, with support from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, on how to efficiently link state and local data to Census-held data in order to provide policy-relevant research that can serve all levels of government. George emphasized the importance of showing federal, state and local agencies the benefits of giving researchers access to their data, and involving them in the research projects.
As these experts shared, obtaining, integrating, and making government administrative data available to researchers and evaluators is no small task, and can come with numerous technical, political, and privacy challenges. But such systems, when designed and run carefully and effectively, also offer a host of benefits by enabling policy-relevant research that can inform government decision-making. The Commission, charged with determining how this might be done at the federal level, can learn a lot from what states have done and are doing to increase the use of data to build evidence and inform policymaking. This NASBO Issue Brief highlights additional examples of states doing great work in this area.
The recommendations of the Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking are due in a report to Congress and the President later this year. NASBO will continue to monitor the work of the Commission and other groups in this space, as well as states’ ongoing efforts to use data to inform funding and management decisions.