About the Invest in What Works State Standard of Excellence

Overview

Results for America’s Invest in What Works State Standard of Excellence:

Serves as a “North Star” for how state governments can and should build and use evidence and data in their decision-making;
Celebrates the progress leading state governments have made in their efforts to build and use evidence and data in their decision-making; and
Motivates all state governments to learn from each others’ evidence and data efforts.

History

Results for America released the first Invest in What Works State Standard of Excellence in 2018, based on data provided under license by the Pew-MacArthur Results First Initiative (which was used to inform its 2017 report on states’ engagement in evidence-based policymaking) and input from state government officials and experts. Since then, Results for America has conducted annual surveys of states, with findings published in the Invest in What Works State Standard of Excellence. The 2024 Invest in What Works State Standard of Excellence shows growing momentum among states for building and using data and evidence to improve residents’ lives and make more efficient and effective use of taxpayer dollars.

Methodology

The Invest in What Works State Standard of Excellence is an annual benchmark developed by Results for America, aiming to showcase evidence-based policies and practices across U.S. states. The 2024 edition was developed between October 2023 and October 2024, capturing current advancements in data-driven governance and evidence-based policymaking.

Each year, Results for America collaborates with state governments to identify and document successful examples of policies and programs that align with a predefined set of criteria. For 2024, state governments were provided with criteria and sub-criteria designed to highlight impactful practices. Each state was asked to indicate whether it met each sub-criterion and, if applicable, provide a concise narrative describing the relevant policy or practice. Throughout the process, Results for America worked closely with government partners to refine these examples for clarity and precision before presenting them on the Invest in What Works State Standard of Excellence website.

When a state did not provide updates in 2024, Results for America conducted desk research to identify as many relevant examples as possible, aiming to provide a comprehensive and equitable representation of each state’s practices. Recognizing the complexity of summarizing diverse practices across states, Results for America relied on expert judgment and consulted with experienced leaders from within and outside government to fairly represent each state’s achievements. To ensure accuracy and provide transparency, state governments featured in the 2024 Standard of Excellence were given the opportunity to review and comment on the presentation and content of their submissions.

While we strive to be comprehensive, Results for America acknowledges that some effective state practices may not have been identified or communicated during the 2024 submission period. As such, these may not appear in the current edition. We welcome feedback and submissions to ensure that the Invest in What Works State Standard of Excellence reflects the most accurate and up-to-date information. Please feel free to email us at states@results4america.org with any additional insights. The Invest in What Works State Standard of Excellence will be republished annually with new information reflecting each state’s ongoing progress in utilizing evidence and data to drive positive outcomes and advance racial equity for residents.

Note: All hyperlinks within this report were functional at the time of publication; however, URLs may change over time. Results for America will address broken links in subsequent editions to enhance user experience.

2024 Criteria

Results for America developed the 12 criteria and 35 Subcriteria in our 2024 Invest in What Works State Standard of Excellence in consultation with more than 100 current and former government officials and key stakeholders nationwide, including our State Standard Advisory Committee members. Our 2024 State Standard includes publicly available information on the relevant state government websites. We gave each state government partner multiple opportunities to review and edit the information ultimately included in our 2024 State Standard. We then used this information to certify our seven leading state agencies at three levels: Platinum, Gold, and Silver.

1.1: There is a central/statewide Chief Evaluation Officer (or other staff role with similar authority)	1
1.2: There is a statewide evaluation team	1
1.3: There is a statewide evaluation governance structure (i.e., a formally established group of leaders from multiple parts of state government that contribute to decision-making on evaluation, as evidenced by a public artifact that lays out who is included and how the group plans, monitors, and enforces evaluation management policies)	1
Total Possible Score	3

2.1: There is a central/statewide Chief Data Officer (or other staff role with similar authority)	1
2.2: There is a statewide data team	1
2.3: There is a statewide data governance system (i.e., a formally established group of leaders from multiple parts of state government that contribute to decision-making on data, as evidenced by a public artifact that lays out who is included and how the group plans, monitors, and enforces data management policies)	1
Total Possible Score	3

3.1: The state education agency, workforce agency, and at least one other agency (i.e., an economic mobility agency, a central grant office, a budget office, an administrative agency) allocates at least 1% of discretionary funding for evaluation [and evidence building activities such as the collection, compilation, processing, analysis, and dissemination of data to create general purpose, policy- and program-specific statistics and datasets]

1 point for each agency

Total Possible Score

4.1: There is a statewide evaluation policy	1
4.2: There is a statewide learning agenda, research agenda, or key research priorities	1
4.3: There is a statewide policy (law, administrative rule or policy, executive order, etc) that directs all state-funded peer-reviewed research to be made publicly available at no cost upon publication	1
4.4: There is a statewide partnership between state officials and external researchers and/or a statewide system for connecting government agencies with external researchers	1
Total Possible Score	4

5.1: There is a statewide policy (law, administrative rule or policy, executive order, etc) that outlines how data are to be ethically collected and used to improve results and address the needs of people who are experiencing unfavorable outcomes	1
5.2: There is a statewide policy (law, administrative rule or policy, executive order, etc) that requires open data or a “share first” philosophy and appropriate privacy controls that allow for data sharing across agencies, with external partners, and to the public	1
5.3: There is a standardized data sharing agreement between the state education agency, workforce agency, and at least one other agency (i.e., an economic mobility agency, a central grant office, a budget office, an administrative agency) that allows data to be routinely shared OR There is an integrated data system with data from the state education agency, workforce agency, and at least one other agency (i.e., an economic mobility agency, a central grant office, a budget office, an administrative agency)	1
Total Possible Score	3

6.1: The state defines evidence of effectiveness and requires or rewards it in grants and contracts (details here and examples here) Greater of: A) 1 point for every $15 million spent through grants that define and prioritize evidence OR B) 1 point for every grant program that defines and prioritizes evidence. The calculation period runs from January 1, 2021 through June 30, 2024. (30 points) OR There is a statewide policy (law, administrative rule or policy, executive order, etc) that requires, where practicable, all competitive grant programs in economic mobility agencies to define and prioritize evidence of effectiveness (30 points) OR a senior state leader issues a letter, policy, executive order, or other authoritative document committing to define and prioritize evidence in grant programs valued at a specific amount within a specific period of time (points awarded at half the rate of formula above, up to 15 total)	30
6.2: The state has a policy (law, administrative rule or guidance, executive order, grant templates, etc) that requires all competitive grant programs in economic mobility agencies to, wherever practicable, prioritize grant applications based on how well they address the needs of people who are experiencing unfavorable outcomes.	1
Total Possible Score	31

7.1: The state directly administers evidence-based interventions using state dollars, formula funds, or federal dollars (that don’t already require evidence) Greater of: A) 1 point for every $200 million spent through direct interventions that define and prioritize evidence or B) 1 point for every 5 direct intervention programs that define and prioritize evidence. The calculation period runs from January 1, 2021 through June 30, 2024. (10 points)	10
7.2: The state has a policy (law, administrative rule or guidance, executive order, etc) that requires all economic mobility agencies to, wherever practicable, deliver programs in a way that addresses the needs of people who are experiencing unfavorable outcomes.	1
Total Possible Score	11

8.1: There is a statewide definition of evidence of effectiveness for purposes of budget development (i.e., the state or budget office has a clear definition of evidence of effectiveness for budget documents)	6
8.2: There is a default field for evidence collection on statewide internal budget documents (i.e., agency budget templates include a field for information on evidence supporting the proposal)	6
8.3: There are statewide evidence-based targets (i.e., there are statewide targets on what percentage of the budget or new proposals should go towards evidence-based programs)	6
8.4: There are evidence indicators in statewide public budget documents (e.g., the legislature’s/Governor’s budget includes information on the evidence-basis of each line item/proposal)	6
8.5: The state summarizes items signed into law that support evidence-based interventions (e.g., the legislature/Governor includes information on the evidence-basis of all items signed into law)	6
8.6: The state has a policy (law, administrative rule or policies, executive order, budget templates, etc) that requires budget documents to, wherever practicable, include consideration for how proposals address the needs of people who are experiencing unfavorable outcomes.	1
Total Possible Score	31

9.1: There is a statewide chief performance officer (or other staff role with similar authority) that oversees a statewide performance management system	1
9.2: There is a statewide performance management governance system (i.e., a formally established group of leaders from multiple parts of state government that contribute to decision-making on performance management as evidenced by a public artifact that lays out who is included and how the group plans, monitors, and enforces performance management)	1
9.3: The state has a policy (law, administrative rule or guidance, executive order, etc) that requires performance management reports to, wherever practicable, include data assessing how programs meet the needs of people who are experiencing unfavorable outcomes.	1
Total Possible Score	3

10.1: There is a statewide policy (law, administrative rule or policy, executive order, etc) that encourages results-focused contracts and/or active contract management	1
10.2: The state has a policy (law, administrative rule or guidance, executive order, etc) that requires procurement contracts to, wherever practicable, prioritize proposals that meet the needs of people who are experiencing unfavorable outcomes.	1
Total Possible Score	2

11.1: There is a statewide community engagement plan or policy that includes people who are experiencing unfavorable outcomes	1
11.2: There is a statewide leader and/or team dedicated to community participation and engagement 1 point for a statewide leader + 1 point for a statewide team	2
Total Possible Score	3

12.1: There is a statewide strategic plan with measurable outcome goals	1
12.2: There are statewide strategic plan goals that were informed by people who are experiencing unfavorable outcomes	1
12.3: The state tracks statewide progress on key outcomes	1
Total Possible Score	3

2024 Invest in What Works Federal Standard of Excellence

The Invest in What Works Federal Standard of Excellence is the federal-level counterpart to the State Standard, providing a tailored roadmap for evidence-based policymaking for federal agencies. While each Standard includes 12 criteria, 11 are shared between the State and Federal Standards, guiding agencies in both levels of government to use data and evidence for effective governance, with flexibility for the unique contexts of state and federal application. The 2024 edition highlights progress across 11 federal agencies, awarding certification to 11 leading federal agencies for exemplary commitment to data-driven, results-focused policies.

2024 What Works Cities Certification

The What Works Cities Certification program, launched in 2015 by Bloomberg Philanthropies and led by Results for America, is the first-of-its-kind standard of excellence for data-driven, well-managed local government. As of 2024, 83 cities across North, Central and South have achieved What Works Cities Certification for their use of data and evidence to inform policy, allocate funding, improve services, evaluate programs and engage residents. As of November 2024, the following cities have achieved 2024 What Works Cities Certification:

Key Findings Acknowledgments