Attention: You are using an outdated browser, device or you do not have the latest version of JavaScript downloaded and so this website may not work as expected. Please download the latest software or switch device to avoid further issues.
The Association of Government Accountants (AGA) Performance Counts Summit convened in May 2025 with 1,500 stakeholders virtually discussing issues we champion at the Data Foundation – evidence, performance, data, and community. During the opening session, I was honored to join Savanna Rabina-Holman (Deputy Performance Improvement Officer for the U.S. Department of Defense), Mark Laisch (Professional Staff Member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee), and Ben Licht (Assistant Director at GAO) to talk about the current state of evidence and performance. Our session, moderated by Sarah Cunningham (a Partner with Data Coalition member-company Summit), examined how evidence and performance data are being used at various levels of government to drive smarter decisions.
The United States is facing a fascinating, even critical, moment for the management and use of data and evidence in government. There's likely more discourse happening right now about data than we've ever had in recent years, including productive dialogues about appropriate uses and protections for the American people and businesses. These discussions date back more than 50 years, and much has changed and advanced over the past half-century.
One critical piece -- since 2019, when the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act was signed into law, federal agencies have been building capacity to better use the vast expanse of knowledge collected and managed in government systems for decades. The Evidence Act was a bipartisan effort -- enacted during the first Trump administration -- catalyzed processes and strategies for better using public sector data across a variety of purposes.
One critical point I emphasized for the AGA community is that our country's data are a reflection of values in our society. We collectively decide what to collect, what not to collect, and how to collect information. These are choice points that matter deeply to our national identity and value systems, particularly during times of change.
At the Data Foundation, we've been monitoring these activities for years as part of our recurring survey series and, more recently, through our Evidence Capacity Pulse Reports. Importantly, many of our most frequent and important users of evidence aren't just Congress or the President, they are program managers, individuals on the front lines of delivering services and benefits to the American people, and the American people and businesses themselves.
In recent months, a frequent question posed to the Data Foundation team has been: Does the Evidence Act matter now? Is it relevant? Is evidence-informed policymaking relevant at this moment?
My answer is an unequivocal yes. Just as when Congress passed the law – the Evidence Act remains vital for our society, our government, and our private sector to manage information and knowledge productively for the years ahead. The information that the government collects and manages is relevant for a whole variety of purposes beyond just political decision-making.
In recent months, we've observed significant changes to the personnel and capacity across the federal government to undertake data collection, management, privacy protection, and analysis work. There are a number of gaps in positions like Chief Data Officers and Evaluation Officers in agencies that are admittedly concerning. These activities certainly affect the capacity to undertake implementation of the Evidence Act.
During the panel, I shared the story of "LUST" in government -- one of my favorite examples that demonstrates the value of evidence-based approaches that is also highlighted in Evidence Works, an open access book that I co-edited for the Bipartisan Policy Center.
At the Environmental Protection Agency, the Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) program, funded by gas taxes to support cleanups of leaking gasoline into groundwater and soil, discovered that their performance measures were declining without a clear explanation.
What appeared to be inefficiency was actually revealed through evaluation to be a case of unintended consequences: states had been closing the easiest cases first to hit performance targets, rather than managing by risk. This insight allowed the program to better target resources to reflect the outcome and impact we truly aspire to affect.
The story of LUST at EPA highlights several key points in our current discourse: the need to focus on the efficiency metrics that actually matter for delivering results to the public, there is a lot of context relevant for understanding performance information, and evaluations can be highly relevant and useful for managers working every day to ensure the goals of the program are effectively achieved.
As the country navigates a clear period of change, data users, evaluators, and the members of the evidence ecosystem must tell the story about how evidence can have a seat at the table to inform decisions at all levels. If we can't find the evidence or access the data, we're at a disadvantage in having productive discussions about what that evidence means.
The panel discussion highlighted several critical success factors for advancing evidence-based approaches. As my colleague from GAO emphasized during the AGA panel, agencies need to develop "cultures that value learning and continuous improvement" – and this cultural shift requires strong leadership from the top. Our DOD colleague reinforced this by noting how vital it is to "align and integrate" evidence with resourcing processes, creating the right incentives for using data meaningfully. Leadership at all levels must champion these efforts, from agency heads to program managers.
Cross-agency collaboration was another recurring theme. Breaking down silos – both vertically within organizations and horizontally across agencies – enables a more comprehensive understanding of complex problems. The most successful evidence-building initiatives occur when leaders create environments that foster this collaboration and overcome traditional boundaries.
Transparency in the availability and use of data and evaluation is also key for the success of the evidence movement, and to enable evidence-informed decision-making. As we heard repeatedly during the AGA summit, without quality data and the capacity to analyze information, decision-makers cannot make informed decisions about the efficiency and effectiveness of government programs.
The Data Foundation is committed to monitoring these developments and advocating for data accessibility, appropriate privacy protections, and ultimately, ensuring that knowledge is generated and made publicly available to the greatest extent possible.
Everyone in the government performance community should participate in processes that support targeted, meaningful transparency mechanisms. There are multiple users of government data and evidence – from program managers to elected officials to the American public – and we need to ensure this information remains accessible and useful to all. Leadership, collaboration, and a commitment to building evidence-based cultures will be essential as we work to make government data more accessible and useful for all stakeholders.
NICK HART, PH.D. is the President and CEO of the Data Foundation
