Tying funding for social programs to their effectiveness seems like a no-brainer. Sadly, however, genuine evidence-based decision making in policy and budget priority-setting in federal social spending is all too rare. Evaluations are often required in federally-funded social programs; however, the standards of evidence have often been unclear or lacking altogether (Sorry, but using client satisfaction scales as your sole measure of success is a poor way to measure effectiveness!). On top of that, since performance is rarely considered in funding decisions, little incentive exists for programs to change and improve in response to evaluative feedback.

An effort to rectify this situation began in the Bush II years— but even then, less than .2 percent of all nonmilitary discretionary programs were held to rigorous evaluation standards. Kind of takes your breath away, doesn’t it?

That’s a particularly disturbing figure when you consider that, according to Ron Haskins in the NYT, “75 percent of programs or practices that are intended to help people do better at school or at work have little or no effect.” One way of interpreting this shocking figure is that in the absence of evidence-based decision making, a massive amount of funds are tied up in supporting ineffective programs that could be invested in promising alternatives.

The use of evidence in policy and decision making should not only be a no-brainer, but a bipartisan no-brainer as well— and in important ways it is. Picking up on the initial efforts of the Bush administration, the Obama administration has been engaged in a quiet yet sustained effort to use evidence to improve social programs. This effort includes key contributions in recent years from federal agencies as diverse as the Centers for Disease Control, the National Institute of Justice, and community-based organizations such as the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America (CADCA). Follow the links to get a taste of the creativity and growing rigor of these efforts.

Amazingly, there is resistance to these efforts in some quarters, as the Haskins article goes on to describe. Attempts to cut funding for EBDM-grade evaluation of federally-funded social programs are afoot in Congress as I write these words. Maybe the American taxpayer should take a cue from Canada and take to the streets to protest the death of evidence.

The battle for evidence-based policy has been explored in depth in a new book, MoneyBall for Government. It’s a great introduction to the topic!