Evidence-Based Policymaking Resource Center

Budget Development

States and counties can use data to inform their budgets, what Results First calls evidence-based budget development. Included on this page are links to briefs, fact sheets, and other resources. Along with explanatory documents, this section also includes stories about how select states and counties approach this type of budget development.

Implementation Oversight

Jurisdictions can achieve the benefits of evidence-based programs by building capacity to support effective implementation, what Results First calls evidence-based implementation oversight. Included below are links to briefs, fact sheets, and other resources. Along with explanatory documents, this section highlights how select states and counties approach this type of oversight.

Outcome Monitoring

In 2014, the Pew-MacArthur Results First Initiative identified five key components of evidence-based policymaking: program assessment, budget development, implementation oversight, outcome monitoring, and targeted evaluation.

Targeted Evaluation

In 2014, the Pew-MacArthur Results First Initiative identified five key components of evidence-based policymaking: program assessment, budget development, implementation oversight, outcome monitoring, and targeted evaluation. Taking into consideration and implementing one or more of these components can help states and counties use the Results First evidence-based policymaking framework in ways that yield meaningful changes for their communities.

Program Assessment

In 2014, the Pew-MacArthur Results First Initiative identified five key components to evidence-based policymaking: program assessment, budget development, implementation oversight, outcome monitoring, and targeted evaluation

Evidence-based policymaking is the systematic use of findings from program evaluations and outcome analyses (“evidence”) to guide government policy and funding decisions. By focusing limited resources on public services and programs that have been shown to produce positive results, governments can expand their investments in more cost-effective options, consider reducing funding for ineffective programs, and improve the outcomes of services funded by taxpayer dollars.