(Illustration by iStock/phototechno)
What makes a person more likely to thrive? It isn’t a job, housing, or childcare, but all three factors working together. For decades, however, the government has delivered and measured each of these in isolation, even though the outcomes we care about most—economic mobility, community stability, and healthy families—can’t be achieved within the confines of one agency’s purview.
Realizing the Promise of a Truly Responsive Government
Deep misalignment exists between what the American people want from their government and what they believe they are getting from it. To address this problem and unlock the possibility that our government can be a true partner, truly responsive, and a more effective force for good in our lives, we must shift how entire government agencies do their work, and most importantly, what they understand their responsibility to the communities they serve to be. Sponsored by Third Sector
Misalignment comes at a cost. Administrators track Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) participation without linking data to long-term earnings. We measure high school graduation rates without acknowledging the behavioral health support that helped get students there. We manage programs and count outputs instead of investing in what people need and accounting for outcomes that cut across systems and evolve over time.
In our work across three federal administrations and in multiple states, we’ve witnessed the fallout when well-meaning programs fail to prioritize what families need. As longtime public servants, we’ve seen both the urgency of getting this right and the prospect of success. Now is the moment to define a national vision for human services based on upstream interventions, shared data, and bold collaboration across agencies. Rather than new programs, we need a new approach to ensure effective government.
The Need for Vision
Given that public agencies around the country have expressed interest in becoming more outcomes-focused but lack a shared vision, the present moment is consequential. Government systems often define success using narrow program metrics when the real outcomes—whether someone secures stable housing or finishes school, for example—involve several policy areas and agencies.
After decades of working in education, youth justice, public health, and family services, we know that community-led systems change is possible, but only communities are willing to rethink how government defines and delivers support.
What Government Gets Right
Bipartisan consensus has emerged around the need to shift from outputs (what and how many services are delivered) to outcomes (what changed). At the federal level, efforts such as the US Council on Economic Mobility have brought together agencies to coordinate on strategies that support individuals and families seeking to achieve long-term success. State agencies are using data in creative ways to improve service delivery and inform decision-making. Most of these initiatives are products of cross-agency task forces or partnerships between state government, academic institutions, and nonprofits, offering a model for broader systems transformation.
A recent collaboration between Mississippi state agencies and researchers at the University of Mississippi used matched data to evaluate TANF participation against long-term earnings and employment, a trend in several states that have embraced matched-data analysis for TANF work outcomes.
Kentucky has emerged as a national leader in integrated data infrastructure after building a cross-agency data system that connects information on education, the workforce, health, and human services. By linking these datasets, Kentucky has better informed policymaking, using initiatives such as a 1115 Medicaid waiver. This approach not only improves program design but also enables the state to direct supports earlier and more equitably.
In Ohio, the PAX Good Behavior Game, an evidence-based classroom practice that enables teachers to proactively reduce the likelihood of future behavioral health interventions and justice system involvement, has been scaled statewide.
But those three cases are still exceptions. Without a national strategy or the infrastructure to connect data and track outcomes across systems, most states are left to devise their own tools from scratch, slowing progress, duplicating efforts, and missing critical opportunities to scale what works.
Where Systems Fall Short
Despite these bright spots, many public systems remain siloed, reactive, and constrained by short-term funding. Budget cycles prioritize short-term outputs, not long-term outcomes. Data systems rarely talk to one another. When outcomes in one system depend on inputs from another, as they often do, the gaps are compounded.
We’ve seen states spend billions to create bespoke data systems, each with different technical requirements, only to build the same silos these systems were intended to dismantle. Educational success may depend on mental health support, which relies on housing stability, but the systems designed to measure and fund these services operate independently. As a result, data infrastructure that is supposed to enable coordinated service delivery reinforces fragmentation.
The absence of shared infrastructure at the national level exacerbates these problems. Bearing the cost of duplicative systems that can’t communicate across jurisdictional lines or agency boundaries, states are left with inefficiencies, missed opportunities for coordination, and a patchwork that limits our ability to understand or act on cross-system outcomes.
Even where strong data exists, it’s often underused. In Connecticut, a Pay for Success project examined how a lack of access to diapers contributed to maternal depression, a Medicaid-covered condition. Universal diaper provisioning would have reduced maternal mental health costs, but budget constraints redirected prevention funding. This pilot revealed both the opportunity and fragility of systems-level innovation.
Lack of shared infrastructure among federal and state systems fuels duplication, inefficiency, and delay. Civil servants are ready to lead on outcomes, but without clarity, data access, or direction, their efforts often stall before starting.
What’s Needed: A National Vision and Shared Infrastructure
Rather than resisting change, public servants are asking for more defined goals, better tools, and alignment among agencies to help them succeed. A national vision for human services should:
- Remain grounded in data that reflects cross-system impacts
- Adapt to state contexts while upholding equity standards
- Work with communities and individuals most impacted by these systems to cocreate change instead of imposing it.
We can no longer afford to track outputs in isolation. Policy makers and funders must ask, What changed? For whom, and why?
The good news is that the means to support this transformation already exist. Technologies like Salesforce’s Data Cloud allow government agencies to connect data across platforms in real time, without duplicating or dismantling systems. This architecture enables us to visualize relationships and tailor interventions in more precise ways.
A new vision for outcomes must include indicators of emotional and intergenerational well-being, not just economic metrics. If a child reaches third grade without literacy proficiency, for example, we might be able to predict a host of downstream challenges. Preventing that outcome means investing early and tracking long-term gains, not just annual program participation.
Call to Action
The shift to outcomes-focused governance requires more than new tech or pilot programs. It calls for courage. We must “burn the boats” by letting go of outdated frameworks and committing to a bold direction, even if the path is unfamiliar.
We have the research, technology, and leadership. What’s missing is a shared commitment and understanding of governance that invests upstream, empowers civil servants, and reconnects government to its purpose: helping communities thrive.
A vision for human services must start with the premise that people are not problems to be solved. They are partners in the work of creating thriving communities. And just like in any strong partnership, we must be willing to listen, adapt, and evolve together.
Read more stories by Roderick Bremby & Mishaela Durán.