2 options
Evidence-based policymaking: selected agencies coordinate activities, but could enhance collaboration : report to congressional requesters.
- Format:
- Book
- Government document
- Author/Creator:
- United States. Government Accountability Office, author.
- Language:
- English
- Subjects (All):
- United States. Office of Management and Budget--Government policy.
- United States.
- United States. Department of Education.
- United States. Department of Health and Human Services.
- United States. Department of Labor.
- Corporation for National and Community Service (U.S.).
- Interagency coordination--United States.
- Interagency coordination.
- Policy sciences--United States.
- Policy sciences.
- Policy sciences--United States--Decision making.
- Decision making--Evaluation.
- Policy sciences--Decision making.
- Public administration--Decision making.
- Physical Description:
- 1 online resource (v, 68 pages) : color illustrations
- Other Title:
- Selected agencies coordinate activities, but could enhance collaboration
- Place of Publication:
- Washington, DC : United States Government Accountability Office, 2019.
- Summary:
- Congress and OMB have taken steps intended to strengthen federal evidence- building activities. In September 2017, a federal commission found that agencies had uneven capacity to support, or did not fully coordinate, a full range of evidence-building activities. This report (1) describes selected agencies' actions that align with direction from Congress and OMB to strengthen evidence-building activities and (2) examines the extent to which selected agencies' processes for coordinating those activities reflect leading practices for collaboration. GAO is making a total of seven recommendations to DOL, CNCS, and HHS to better reflect leading collaboration practices in their evidence prioritization processes.
- Contents:
- Background.
- Selected agencies have taken actions that align with congressional and OMB direction to strengthen evidence-building.
- Selected agencies established processes to coordinate fragmented evidence-building activities, but processes to prioritize new evidence did not always reflect leading practices.
- Conclusions.
- Recommendations for executive action.
- Agency comments and our evaluation.
- Appendices.
- Notes:
- "December 2019."
- "GAO-20-119."
- Includes bibliographical references.
- Description based on online resource, PDF version; title from cover (GAO, viewed on Nov. 21, 2022).
- OCLC:
- 1351433708
The Penn Libraries is committed to describing library materials using current, accurate, and responsible language. If you discover outdated or inaccurate language, please fill out this feedback form to report it and suggest alternative language.