The GovLab Publishes Recommendations for Congress on Evidence-Based Lawmaking
In 2021, in support of the US House Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress, The GovLab organized two online advisory sessions to inform the Committee’s process of developing recommendations on evidence-based lawmaking. The goal of these “Smarter Crowdsourcing” roundtables was to discuss strategies to enable more effective use of evidence by Members and Committees in hearings and other legislative processes in the US Congress.
Fifty-three experts, including representatives from foreign parliaments, and experts in science communication, and specialists in Congressional operations and research, technology, and data science, identified recommendations for how Congress can source and use high-quality research and evidence to inform the lawmaking process.
Distilled from over 100 proposals, this blog post presents a summary of five recommendations for Congress followed by three recommendations for universities. To read the full recommendations, which explain in further detail how each solution would work, why it is a priority, and models for how it has been successfully implemented in other contexts, visit: https://modernization.smartercrowdsourcing.org/recommendations.html
Recommendations for Congress
Recommendation 1: Restore and update the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA)
Background/Problem:
While Congressional support agencies like the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and Congressional Research Services (CRS) generate high-quality evidence, an enhanced OTA would work with the broader research community to create research that is timely and useful to policymakers.
How the Solution Works:
A 21st century OTA should:
- Establish a policy lab with the ability to conduct rapid evidence reviews and data analysis
- Collaborate with existing research networks to facilitate dialogue and coordination between legislature and research community.
- Explore collaborating with committee chairs and ranking members (with the support of GAO and CRS) to publish a Congressional research agenda to align research with policymakers’ questions.
- Create a clearinghouse to showcase evidence-based evaluations of the impact of legislation
- Pilot the creation of “evidence dockets” that articulate the evidence behind major pieces of legislation
- Experiment with using new technology to source evidence rapidly in new ways
- Study how committees currently use research
Implementation/Owner:
Congress should enact legislation to restore and update the OTA
Recommendation 2: Create a Chief Data Officer (CDO) for Congress
Background/Problem:
Building data capacity in-house is necessary to ensure that Congress can develop tools to study its own lawmaking practices using empirical methods and is not exclusively reliant upon the executive branch for data analysis. Having staff trained in data science will enable Congress to use existing technology to make more effective use of the available evidence.
How the Solution Works:
The CDO would be responsible for:
- Developing tools for studying efficiency, effectiveness and equity of lawmaking process and legislative outcomes.
- Interfacing with executive branch to ensure that data produced by federal agencies is accessible to and usable by Congress.
- Tracking datasets released by legislative branch.
- Providing guidance to congressional offices regarding publication of legislative branch data.
- Establishing an open data portal to help the public access data about lawmaking practice and evidentiary bases of legislation.
- Promoting effective use of new technologies, including machine learning, to make data processing more efficient.
- Exploring use of existing tools to make data analysis and visualization more effective and accessible.
- Coordinating improvements to Congress’s data infrastructure.
Implementation/Owner:
Congress should appoint a Chief Data Officer (CDO) within the Administrative Office to promote more effective uses of government data, including data produced by executive agencies as well as Congress’s own data, in lawmaking and oversight.
Recommendation 3: Expand Professional Development Opportunities for Staff
Background/Problem:
To make the most effective use of available research, data and evidence, staff should have access to regular and comprehensive courses on data analysis skills, data analytical thinking, and rapid evidence reviews.
How the Solution Works:
The Office of the House Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) should:
- Create a free professional development program that teaches staff how to source high-quality evidence from diverse sources.
- Create a professional development program that teaches staff how to apply data analytical thinking and uses of data.
Implementation/Owner:
CAO can create — or work with outside organizations to design — professional development programs that will enhance uses of evidence and data in lawmaking while providing staff with a set of in-demand and marketable skills.
Recommendation 4: Pilot New Hearing Formats
Background/Problem:
The traditional, in-person hearing format allows only a small number of experts to participate, lacks equity and diversity, decreases opportunities for hearing from people with different disciplinary perspectives to participate, gives the majority disproportionate influence, and disincentivizes robust conversation and learning.
How the Solution Works:
Committees should continue to innovate and experiment with doing things differently, for instance by:
- Creating new and more opportunities for witnesses to participate online and/or asynchronously to test whether this improves diversity and inclusion of who participates and/or improves the quality of evidence shared.
- Establishing regular, informal and off-the-record briefing seminars involving researchers, Members, and staff to build awareness about scientific or technical policy topics.
- Experiment with publishing video recordings of Committee hearings on a delay to test whether this change encourages Members to ask more questions and engage in more dialogue.
Implementation/Owner:
Continuing a practice pioneered by the Select Committee, Congress should experiment with new technologies and formats for conducting hearings that can encourage more evidence-based dialogue among and between Members of Congress and experts and update its rules and procedures to enable broader use of what works.
Recommendation 5: Fund Research to Establish Mechanisms that Encourage Rapid, Community-Engaged Research
Background/Problem:
Research funding agencies should create incentives for researchers to write up evidence succinctly and without academic jargon, and to create research products faster. Research should not be done without a plan for engaging with, and communicating findings, to the public.
How the Solution Works:
Research funding agencies should:
- Require that grant-funded research outputs be accompanied by a short memo explaining research to policymakers.
- Implement a prize-backed challenge for researchers to produce evidence that has a real-world value to policymakers in response to a research question posed by Congress.
- Require that institutions receiving federal grants have in place policies that recognize, encourage and reward public engagement and communication of science.
Implementation/Owner:
Congress should encourage NSF, NIH, and other agencies to develop and support innovative rapid response and community engagement mechanisms
Recommendations for Universities
Recommendation 1: Make Research Intelligible: Train Researchers On How To Present their Research in Ways that are Accessible to Policymakers and the Public
Background/Problem:
Outside evidence is often delivered to policymakers in formats that are often too long, too slow, too arcane and too inaccessible to be useful to lawmakers.
How the Solution Works:
- Universities and nonprofit organizations should offer researchers free training on how to effectively communicate the findings from their research to policymakers and the public.
- Researchers should present findings in a format that makes research easy for legislators, policymakers and the public to understand why the findings are important and, where applicable, how they can be incorporated into legislation
Implementation/Owner:
Universities and philanthropy should create free, scalable and accessible training programs in communicating research to policymakers and the public and mandate their use as part of graduate education.
Recommendation 2: Encourage More University-Based Researchers to Do Stints in Congressional Offices to Enhance Expertise in Congress
Background/Problem:
Getting more hands on deck can boost capacities of Congressional offices and add expertise in data science or policy areas. Giving opportunities for academics to serve in government and return to academia helps to communicate needs of policymakers to researchers.
How the Solution Works:
While safeguarding ethics and research independence, universities should:
- Fund researchers to participate in fellowship programs, which place academics in committees’ or Members’ offices and counts public service toward research tenure requirements
- Develop new fellowship models that place researchers within Congressional support offices
- Work with donors and philanthropic sources to pay for these opportunities
- Couple fellowships with training for researchers in the workings of Congress to ensure that they can be immediately useful to Members and Committees.
Implementation/Owner:
Universities should support programs by which their researchers can work temporarily with members’ offices, committees, and Congressional support agencies.
Recommendation 3: Universities Should Use New Technology and New Methods to Connect their Researchers to Policymakers
Background/Problem:
Universities have not invested in making their research accessible to policymakers. As a result, it is difficult for policymakers to find relevant researchers and research projects.
How the Solution Works:
- Universities should make their researchers and their research more accessible and findable by policymakers. They should experiment with new uses of technology, especially machine learning that makes large quantities of information easier to search, to make research more searchable by creating expert networks of their faculty and research.
- Universities should support and encourage their faculty and students to participate in networks and organizations that connect researchers to policymakers.
Implementation/Owner:
Universities should build expert networks that make their researchers and their expertise more searchable by policymakers and support and promote participation in networks that connect researchers to policymakers.
The read these recommendation in their entirety, visit: https://modernization.smartercrowdsourcing.org/recommendations.html
For more information about the Smarter Crowdsourcing: Modernization of Congress initiative, visit: https://modernization.smartercrowdsourcing.org/
