This is the fourth blog in a six part blog series on Children’s Cabinets and integrated supports and services for children.

By Guy Johnson

“Scientific and technological information, data, and evidence are central to the development and iterative improvement of sound policies, and to the delivery of equitable programs, across every area of government.”

The above quote comes from Executive Order 13985, Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government, signed less than a week into the new administration of President Joseph R. Biden. The Executive Order was part of a broader sweep of efforts by the incoming administration to signal support for equity and to “restore trust in government through scientific integrity and evidence-based policymaking.”

At the time, one might have hoped, though not necessarily expected, the new administration’s intentions to “restore trust in government” and better serve the under-served might have tempered some of the ire of the violent mob that overran the Capitol less than a month earlier. Even though those hopes were, of course, misplaced, there is still reason to think that reasonable people might agree that policy should be advanced on the basis of evidence and not rank partisanship.

To that point, recall that President Trump and a Republican-controlled Congress liked the idea of evidence-informed policymaking enough to pass H.R.4174 - Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018 into law. One of the things the law requires is that federal agencies submit an annual plan that includes:

questions for developing evidence to support policymaking;
data the agency intends to collect, use, or acquire to facilitate the use of evidence in policymaking;
methods and analytical approaches that may be used to develop evidence to support policymaking; and
challenges to developing evidence to support policymaking, including any statutory or other restrictions to accessing relevant data.

After the bill became law, the Office of Management and Budget issued a memo spelling out “Phase 1” of implementation efforts. Of note, the memo stated in its opening paragraphs that:

[T]he Evidence Act mandates a systematic rethinking of government data management to better facilitate access for evidence-building activities and public consumption… Investing in and focusing on the management and use of data and evidence across the Federal Government will enable agencies to shift away from low-value activities toward actions that will support decision makers: linking spending to program outputs, delivering on mission, better managing enterprise risks, and promoting civic engagement and transparency.

Great! And yet, for all of this talk of evidence and policy, the bill and memo contained no mention of equity. So, President Biden’s Executive Order both reaffirmed the executive branch’s commitment to the provisions of the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018, and, through measures like the creation of an “Equitable Data Working Group,” also attempted to correct for earlier oversights regarding the prioritization of services for those least well-served.

To that end, the ongoing work at a federal level on aligning evidence and equity with policy continues to trail efforts in some states. That said, there is still much to be done outside of our nation’s capital. While state-level integrated systems of support for children must go hand-in-hand with evidence-based decision making by state agencies, the truth is that this arrangement does not yet exist in most states. For example, one of the top-line takeaways from work done by the Forum for Youth Investment in convening summits around the idea of Children’s Cabinets in states is that “Very few programs, agencies and partnerships are internally armed with the resources and staff to fully utilize the power of data.” A range of evidence types, from aligned data systems to randomized control trials or surveys, should be used to inform decision making around policy - including needed changes to programs, the development of new goals, and the improvement of data systems - with the ultimate goal of improving experiences and outcomes for disadvantaged children.

We will feature here work being done by Children’s Cabinets in two states - Maryland and Kansas - that have developed strong practices around the use of evidence. The Maryland Children’s Cabinet, which includes ten different state agencies, uses a Results-Based Accountability framework to reveal gaps in services and help drive decision-making. The framework brings together data from several agencies, allowing the Cabinet to determine areas of need and measure progress towards long term “whole child” goals. These goals have included: reducing the impact of incarceration; improving outcomes for disconnected youth; reducing childhood hunger; reducing youth homelessness; and improving trauma-informed care. The state has seen progress on several goals. For example, the percentage of youth between the ages 16-24 not in school and not working fell from 13.4% in 2013 to 10.5% in 2019. The rate of referrals for juvenile felony offenses fell from 929 students per 100,000 in 2013 to 727 students in 2019. For the goals where less progress was made, like increasing rates of childhood obesity in Maryland, data has signaled that current efforts are ineffective and new evidence-based strategies are needed.

In Kansas, the Kansas Children’s Cabinet and Trust Fund (KCCTF) entered into a partnership with the University of Kansas Center for Public Partnerships and Research. The partnership has been instrumental in helping the KCCTF evaluate its programs and base its strategies on high quality evidence. For example, in 2015, the University of Kansas conducted a longitudinal study of early learning centers, tracking their graduates’ outcomes through high school graduation. The University also led the Our Tomorrows Story Bank project, which gathered qualitative data from over 6,000 Kansans on early childhood education. The KCCTF and University co-developed the Early Education Data Trust, which aligns data on early childhood education from three different state agencies to study the impacts of services for children. All of these forms of evidence are used by the KCCTF and University of Kansas to develop the Blueprint , a strategic framework to ensure a high quality early childhood education for all children in Kansas.

Be it at the federal, state, or county level, having an agreed-upon protocol in place for using evidence in policy-related decision making will improve the integration of supports and services for children. Without this alignment we run the risk, like Lieutenant Commander Data on the starship Enterprise, of “chasing an untamed ornithoid without cause.” Yes, of course it is better for policymakers to proceed from evidence and quit going on wild goose chases.