Evidence-based practices and US state government civil servants: Current use, challenges, and pathways forward

IF 6.1 1区管理学 Q1 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Public Administration Review Pub Date : 2024-09-15 DOI:10.1111/puar.13878

Yuan (Daniel) Cheng, Leslie Thompson, Shuping Wang, Jules Marzec, Chengxin Xu, Weston Merrick, Patrick Carter

{"title":"Evidence-based practices and US state government civil servants: Current use, challenges, and pathways forward","authors":"Yuan (Daniel) Cheng, Leslie Thompson, Shuping Wang, Jules Marzec, Chengxin Xu, Weston Merrick, Patrick Carter","doi":"10.1111/puar.13878","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Leveraging a three-state survey of 323 civil servants and 36 interviews, representing blue and red states, this university-government-nonprofit collaborative research project aims to better understand how civil servants access and use evidence in their decision-making process. Our findings show that 54% of respondents find evidence-based practices (EBPs) useful in making budget, policy, and contracting decisions, with 68% of civil servants anticipating future benefits from evidence use. Our hypothetical funding choice experiment indicates that civil servants prefer programs that are more recent and in their state, identify outcomes over outputs, demonstrate effectiveness for diverse demographic groups, and are evaluated by independent research entities. The main challenges in using EBPs include time constraints, resource limitations, decision-making fragmentation, and lack of evidence for certain communities. Qualitative interviews provide valuable strategies for overcoming these challenges. We conclude this article by offering practical insights for improving the integration of EBPs in state government decision-making processes.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Administration Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13878","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Leveraging a three-state survey of 323 civil servants and 36 interviews, representing blue and red states, this university-government-nonprofit collaborative research project aims to better understand how civil servants access and use evidence in their decision-making process. Our findings show that 54% of respondents find evidence-based practices (EBPs) useful in making budget, policy, and contracting decisions, with 68% of civil servants anticipating future benefits from evidence use. Our hypothetical funding choice experiment indicates that civil servants prefer programs that are more recent and in their state, identify outcomes over outputs, demonstrate effectiveness for diverse demographic groups, and are evaluated by independent research entities. The main challenges in using EBPs include time constraints, resource limitations, decision-making fragmentation, and lack of evidence for certain communities. Qualitative interviews provide valuable strategies for overcoming these challenges. We conclude this article by offering practical insights for improving the integration of EBPs in state government decision-making processes.

查看原文本刊更多论文

循证实践与美国州政府公务员：当前使用情况、挑战和前进之路

该大学-政府-非营利组织合作研究项目通过对三个州的 323 名公务员进行调查和 36 次访谈（分别代表蓝州和红州），旨在更好地了解公务员在决策过程中如何获取和使用证据。我们的研究结果表明，54% 的受访者认为循证实践（EBPs）有助于预算、政策和合同决策，68% 的公务员预计未来将从证据使用中获益。我们的假定性资金选择实验表明，公务员更青睐于最新的、在其所在州开展的、确定结果而非产出的、对不同人口群体有效的、由独立研究机构评估的项目。使用 EBPs 的主要挑战包括时间限制、资源限制、决策分散以及缺乏针对某些社区的证据。定性访谈为克服这些挑战提供了宝贵的策略。最后，我们就如何在州政府决策过程中更好地整合 EBPs 提出了切实可行的见解。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Public Administration Review PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-

CiteScore

15.10

自引率

10.80%

发文量

130

期刊介绍： Public Administration Review (PAR), a bi-monthly professional journal, has held its position as the premier outlet for public administration research, theory, and practice for 75 years. Published for the American Society for Public Administration,TM/SM, it uniquely serves both academics and practitioners in the public sector. PAR features articles that identify and analyze current trends, offer a factual basis for decision-making, stimulate discussion, and present leading literature in an easily accessible format. Covering a diverse range of topics and featuring expert book reviews, PAR is both exciting to read and an indispensable resource in the field.