States & Localities Should Embrace Data & Evidence to Maximize the Impact of Pandemic Relief Funds
Even in normal times, governing is hard. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, state, local, and Tribal governments had a tough but important job: protect residents, provide essential services, and help Americans reach their potential. Of course, these are not normal times. Beyond the immediate need to manage the pandemic and its economic fallout, governments face an urgent need to identify and implement effective solutions to persisting racial and economic disparities; increased rates of mental health distress and drug overdoses; homelessness and housing shortages; gun violence; climate change, and natural disasters.
Last year, state, local, and Tribal governments got a lifeline in the form of the American Rescue Plan Act (ARP), an economic stimulus bill signed into law by President Biden in 2021. The law provides state, local, and Tribal governments with a rare opportunity to address the current public health crisis while investing in solutions that would have long-lasting and transformational impacts on their communities. In this moment, it’s critical that these state and local jurisdictions use data and evidence as a guide to maximize the long-term impacts of their investment of federal pandemic fiscal relief funds.
Out of $1.9 trillion in approved spending through ARP, about $350 billion will go directly to states, local and Tribal governments. Half was made available last May. Another half is expected to be made available this spring. State, local, and Tribal governments must allocate the funds by 2024 and use the funds by 2026. According to the U.S. Department of the Treasury, this money can go to a wide range of uses, such as increasing the pay of essential workers and offering financial incentives to increase local COVID-19 vaccination rates. One important eligible use is investing in data- and evidence-based tools to help ensure federal resources are used effectively.
In fact, in official guidance from the Treasury Department, the agency urges governments to invest in evidence-based programs, build performance management systems and data capacity, and conduct rigorous evaluation. Routinely monitored evidenced-based programs maximize learning about what works and enables administrations to answer questions such as: Are programs yielding the intended outcomes (or doing harm)? Do the benefits justify the costs? Are outcomes equitable across recipients? Tracking outcomes helps implementers understand problems, make program improvements, and provides the best chance of favorable results. Clear evidence makes decision making and governing easier, while successful programs and well-run services can restore trust in government. We know “what is treasured is measured” and “what is measured is improved.” Businesses prioritize learning about what works daily to maximize profit. Likewise, governments should prioritize learning to maximize investments and make progress on residents’ health and well-being.
An initial analysis of publicly available reports from state, Tribal, county, and city governments suggest that many are taking the guidance about data and evidence to heart. With the second half of the federal fiscal relief funds to be released in the spring, there is still an opportunity for a stronger emphasis on data and evidence in these spending plans. Specifically, Mathematica and Results for America analyzed 201 state, Tribal, county, and city ARP performance reports to assess how governments are allocating resources and the extent to which they are investing in data and evidence capacity, performance management systems, and evaluation – investments that would yield benefits far beyond the current public health crisis.
We were encouraged by what we found. For example, 101 of the plans we reviewed showed either clear or promising evidence of planning to invest in evidence-based interventions; 61 showed a clear or promising commitment to building and strengthening data and evidence capacity; and 89 showed a clear or promising commitment to investing in evaluation. Given that we did not review all state, local, and Tribal government plans, and many of the plans are being updated now that the Treasury Department has released further guidance on allowable uses in a January 2022 final rule, we believe the true numbers may be higher.
In our ARP Data and Evidence Dashboard, we also highlight examples of governments whose public ARP reports articulated plans to build data and evidence capacity and invest in evaluation. At the state level, for example, Colorado uses an evidence-based policy framework to target funds for evidence-informed programs, compare costs and benefits, support effective implementation, and guide decision making; California is expanding existing evidenced-based programs and will continue measuring outcomes and identifying potential improvements to maximize program results; and Virginia and Tennessee are investing in Electronic Health Records Systems to give state leaders better information to support effective decisions and maximize their ability to invest in impactful programs, reevaluate those with negative results, and make smart investments.
At the county level, Boulder and Pima are developing learning agendas with an evidence-building strategy that enables effective, efficient, and equitable funding stewardship; Prince George’s requires that all agencies requesting ARP funds submit a logic model to illustrate the proposed project’s intended goals, objectives, outcomes, and impacts; and Maricopa is conducting evidence-informed project selection, using data to build evidence on effectiveness, and data sharing through a public dashboard.
At the local level, Milwaukee is implementing an evidence-based program that provides legal representation (for evictions) in high poverty neighborhoods and will closely track metrics and child-level outcomes; Stockton is building open data dashboards to present complex public health, housing, and homelessness data visually; and New York City created the NYC Recovery Data Partnership to facilitate data sharing city-wide to inform programmatic and policy decisions for an equitable recovery.
Although we are buoyed by these exemplary strategies – using evidence-based programs, building data capacity, and conducting evaluations – we are concerned that among the reports we reviewed, most lacked plans to invest in data and evidence capacity or evaluation; only about half planned to invest in evidence-based interventions. As leaders collect community input, newly elected officials take office, and governments receive the second tranche of ARP funds, there is still both time and resources to build evidence and data capacity by investing in learning agendas, performance management systems, and rigorous evaluation. Strategic partnerships within and across cities, counties, state, and tribal governments can be formed to share resources and methods.
Governing during the pandemic will still be hard. But high-quality data and evidence can make the job easier, and the need for smart investments and positive results right now could not be greater.
Candace Miller, a principal researcher at Mathematica, led the Mathematica team that worked with Results for America to create the American Rescue Plan Data & Evidence Dashboard. J.B. Wogan is host of Mathematica’s bimonthly podcast, On the Evidence, and previously covered state and local governments as a staff writer for GOVERNING magazine.
