Skip to main content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.


The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

❮   Back to News

August 24, 2021

An Insider’s View on Implementing the Evidence Act

By Matt Soldner, Evaluation Officer, ED

Four hands linked to signify the work of the Evaluation Officers As the Evaluation Officer for the Department of Education (ED) and member of the Evaluation Officer Council, I have been privileged to help make the vision of the Evidence Act a reality. Along the way, I have been struck by the energy, enthusiasm, and expertise of my colleagues across government and deeply grateful for the support from our colleagues at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This isn’t to say there aren’t areas of growth—there most certainly are! But I am more convinced today than ever before that the federal evaluation community is well-positioned to make evidence-based policymaking a reality across government and, as a result, a real difference in the lives of those we serve.

The Important Role of the Evaluation Officer Council. As many readers will already know, the Evidence Act creates three new roles: Evaluation Officers (EOs), Statistical Officials, and Chief Data Officers. How it arrays and organizes those roles across government, though, varies. Although every federal agency is required to appoint a Chief Data Officer, for example, only CFO Act agencies are required to appoint a Statistical Official and EO. (Though I should note many non-CFO Act agencies have appointed all three positions.) More variation is seen in how roles organize themselves to complete their work. For whatever reason, the Evidence Act organizes Chief Data Officers and Statistical Officials into formal councils but does not do the same for EOs. Evaluators are not ones to be left out, though, and thanks to OMB we don’t have to be: with their support, the Evaluation Officer Council was codified in guidance (OMB M-19-23) and kicked off in the fall of 2019. And thank goodness for it.

The Evaluation Officer Council—or EOC—is the official community of practice for EOs across government. Our ranks are further augmented by “plus ones,” typically EO’s chief deputy in their home agency. Taken together, the membership of the EOC has hundreds of years’ worth of collective experience in program evaluation, both in and out of government. Importantly, that experience goes well beyond how to design a randomized trial or an implementation evaluation—it includes deep expertise in the competencies required to make evaluation happen in government. This includes skill in procurement, contracts, and grants; leading teams and managing multimillion dollar/multi-year projects; statistical analysis and data visualization; plain writing and effective dissemination of complex information; and coalition building and political savvy. From my perspective, the most critical role of the EOC is ensuring that each EO—and each agency—has access to that deep well of talent whenever they need it. Further, some non-CFO Act agencies, sub-agencies, and bureaus have also recognized the importance of evaluation in evidence-building and use and have appointed an EO when not required to do so. Their expertise, and that of their staffs, is being leveraged through the Interagency Council on Evaluation Policy (ICEP).

The EOC also provides a forum for solving problems that are new to each of us as we seek to implement the Evidence Act and to coordinate with other councils and committees whose work bears upon our own. In the first year of Evidence Act implementation, no EO really knew how to craft the three statutory deliverables that are core to our work—the Learning Agenda, Annual Evaluation Plan, and Capacity Assessment—even if they’d done something similar for their agency in prior years. Luckily, the EOC became a forum for brainstorming, group problem solving, peer mentoring and feedback, and sharing promising practices. EOC meetings and events are also forums for EOs to connect with peers in adjacent functions to ensure our work is aligned. For example, the work of EOs is tightly coupled to the work of agency Performance Improvement Officers (PIOs) due to the statutory connection between Evidence Act deliverables and Agency Strategic Plans. In many agencies, the PIO’s office is a finely oiled machine, and the need to collaborate with EOs could have thrown a wrench in their work. Thanks to OMB, though, the EO and PIO Councils met together early in our first year of Evidence Act implementation, making sure each agency started off on the best possible foot, EOs and PIOs working together to achieve their mutual goals. Similar relationships exist with the Chief Data Officers’ Council and the federal Advisory Committee on Data for Evidence Building.

Challenges, and Looking Ahead. No effort, particularly as one as young and complex as the implementation of the Evidence Act, proceeds without a hitch. It should come as no surprise, then, that there are still areas of growth for individual EOs, our work within our own agencies, the EOC, and the EOC’s collaboration with our peers. From my perspective, three are of note:

If EOs and our partners keep working together, continuing along the strong positive trajectory we’ve seen over these past two years, I have every confidence we can meet the challenge the Evidence Act sets for us: policymaking driven by the best available evidence. When we do, it’ll be a technical, managerial, and—yes—bureaucratic feat for which all involved should feel rightly proud. But, as we all know, this work is about much more than new deliverables, processes, and structures. Government isn’t the beneficiary of evidence-based policymaking. Instead, it’s the infant and new mother who benefitted from higher-quality home visits; the middle-schooler who participated in a college access program with a proven track-record of success and was catapulted along the pathway to a career with family-sustaining wages; or the entrepreneur who received evidence-based technical support to open their small business. That’s who really wins when evidence drives policy. Time to get back to work.


❮   Back to News

An official website of the Federal Government

Looking for U.S. government information and services?