The federal Office of Management and Budget’s updated Uniform Grants Guidance clarifies that grantees may use a portion of their grants for data, evaluation, and integrated data systems. Moreover, OMB issued useful reference guides on data and evaluation to elaborate on these provisions and to explain how grant funds may be used for community engagement, which can build trust in government and incorporate the knowledge, needs, and lived experiences of affected individuals and communities into programs and research.

Why does OMB guidance matter?

While these updates are not considered new federal policy, they give grantees clear permission and encouragement to combine funds from multiple programs to build shared data infrastructure and analytics capacity, which many governments previously viewed as risky. As a result, programs that often serve the same client populations in areas such as health, nutrition, income support, education, employment, housing, criminal justice, transportation and other social services could share data to help program agencies and service providers improve coordination, effectiveness, and efficiency.

Which federal programs can support IDS?

Hear from Chief Data Officer Robert McGough how Arkansas uses funds from across policy areas to support its IDS.

While the revised OMB guidance states that federal grant funds can generally be used to pay for integrated data systems and evaluation capacity, it helps to have a starting place within the vast landscape of federal grants. The types of federal grants below are strong candidates based on their history, purpose, or particular guidance related to integrated data and evaluation:

• Major Health and Human Services Programs for Low-Income Populations. These include federal safety net programs such as Medicaid, Child Support Enforcement, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), Child Care, and Child Welfare programs under the Department of Health and Human Services and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women’s, Infants, and Children (WIC) program under the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Most of these programs authorize federal matching funds for state administrative costs and development and operation of data systems at rates between 50 and 83 percent, depending on each state’s per capita income. In the case of Medicaid, states may receive a 90 percent federal match rate for development of integrated systems used for eligibility determinations, claims processing and fraud control and may receive a 75 percent federal match for maintenance of these systems.

• Competitive grant programs for Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems (SLDS). The Departments of Education (ED) and Labor (DOL) administer parallel competitive grant programs to help states develop and implement SLDS that integrate individual-level data from education and workforce programs. A number of states have used SLDS grants as seed funding for expanded statewide systems – using the same SLDS architecture – that include health, human services and other data. See the field guide case study on how Kentucky used SLDS grants as seed funding to build toward a sustainable financing strategy.

Read the field guide case study on how Kentucky used SLDS grants as seed funding to build toward a sustainable financing strategy.

• Programs that Build Evidence about Effective State and Local Policies and Practices. Examples include research and development programs focused on determining what works in social programs. Also, certain ED, DOL, and HHS programs that fund services to individuals and families require each project to conduct or participate in a rigorous evaluation to study its effectiveness in improving outcomes.
• One-time Programs that Can Support IDS, Data Activities, and Evaluation. Recent programs where guidance has explicitly supported investment in data and evaluation activities include the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund (SL FRF) program from the American Rescue Plan Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). See the field guide case study on how Detroit used one-time American Rescue Plan Act funds to build the bedrock for integrated data.

Read the field guide case study on how Detroit used one-time American Rescue Plan Act funds to build the bedrock for integrated data.

• Other Ongoing Federal Grant Programs that Can Support IDS and Evaluation. Many ongoing formula and competitive grant programs offer resources that grantees could use to link data across programs and build data and evaluation capacity. These programs include low-income and service-oriented programs from HHS, DOL, ED, HUD, and others as well as asset-based programs from the Departments of Transportation (DOT) and Commerce, HUD, and USDA.

Hear Tennessee Chief Evaluation Officer Jonathan Attridge describe how federal funds can support evaluation.

• Grants to Tribal Governments. Most formula grants to states include a set-aside or parallel program for tribal governments. In accordance with federal laws and executive orders supporting tribal sovereignty and self-determination, tribes have significant flexibility to determine how to allocate resources and implement programs. One example is P.L. 102-477, the Indian Employment Training and Related Services Demonstration Act, which allows tribal governments to consolidate certain funding streams across federal agencies under a single plan, budget, and set of reporting requirements. This program offers an opportunity to direct a portion of funds from many programs to develop integrated data systems and evaluation capacity that can promote data sovereignty and inform decisions on tribal organizations´ top priorities. See more in the field guide highlight of how P.L. 102-477 could promote data sovereignty and self-determination.

Read the field guide highlight of how P.L. 102-477 could promote data sovereignty and self-determination.

Take Our 3 Question Survey!