Yuan (Daniel) Cheng, Leslie Thompson, Shuping Wang, Jules Marzec, Chengxin Xu, Weston Merrick, Patrick Carter
{"title":"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","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":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"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\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"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}","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}
Evidence-based practices and US state government civil servants: Current use, challenges, and pathways forward
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.
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.