Individuals or organizations who have a foot in both the research and the practice or policy world are key to supporting evidence use. Often interchangeably known as knowledge brokers, intermediaries, or boundary spanners, these individuals or organizations play a key role in the evidence use ecosystem by actively facilitating knowledge exchange between the production and use of evidence to support decision-making.
In the last blog post in this series we discussed the central role relationships play in supporting evidence use. Intermediaries, boundary spanners, and brokers focus on building trusted relationships to know what evidence is most useful and why. They aim to have a pulse on opening policy windows or decisions that may be informed by evidence in order to provide timely and topically relevant knowledge. Organizations and individuals in this role often work with both knowledge producers and users to discuss issues, problems, solutions, and even to offer guidance that can strengthen the links between evidence and policy.
To play this function, knowledge brokers may negotiate shared research agendas, organize joint meetings between research and practice, act as a communication bridge, or build capacity to use knowledge . Sometimes boundary spanners are from the research team while other times they may be people with an interest or some training in research who sit within the practice or policy organization. Those playing this function may struggle to know whether to identify as a R (i.e. researcher) or a P (i.e. practitioner or policymaker) because they often find themselves moving between these roles fluidly.
Lomas describes a good intermediary, boundary spanner, or broker as “entrepreneurial, trusted, credible, clear communicators, understand the cultures of both communities they serve, are able to find and assess research, and understand adult learning.” Boundary spanners play a critical part in identifying opportunities to bring evidence into the conversation, understanding how and when decisions are made to introduce evidence at the most useful moments, and see the issue at hand as both an evidence producer and user.
Boundary spanners or intermediaries may also be organizations such as technical assistance providers, professional associations, and think tanks. These organizations aim to stay current on the needs of the field and identify open policy windows or practice needs. These organizations are trusted by the intended users of evidence and can translate the evidence into formats useful for their audience. For example, juvenile court judges reported turning most often to intermediaries such as their professional association for identifying research, assessing the quality of the research, and applying research to their practice.
Training and technical assistance providers (TTA) are important boundary spanning supports in the government. ACF invests in many TTA providers to provide support and guidance to grant recipients. These TTA providers are trusted organizations to grant recipients and often the first point of contact for resources and guidance. ACF’s TTA partners, such as the Office of Child Care’s State Capacity Building Center (SCBC), and the Office of Head Start’s National Center for Early Childhood Development, Teaching and Learning (NCECDTL), are influential knowledge brokers who do important work in curating, integrating, and translating OPRE’s research to inform program administrators and practitioners. For example, SCBC regularly develops resources for Child Care and Development Fund Lead Agencies in states, territories, and Tribes that translate or integrate findings from the National Survey of Early Care and Education into broader discussions about key topics of interest, such as How Do Parents Make Decisions about ECE Arrangements (PDF)? (In another example, OHS’ National TTA Centers curate information and resources into various formats (e.g., topical landing pages, tip sheets, webinars, online and in-person trainings) to address critical issues for local Head Start programs, including highlighting particularly relevant research reports and project s. The NCECDTL and OHS’ other national centers incorporate findings from OPRE studies such as FACES and BabyFACES in trainings for Regional TTA partners who deliver TA directly to the staff of local Head Start programs.
We need to better understand how we can partner with and leverage the work of TTA providers as key boundary spanners connecting research and practice. Sometimes as researchers we often put ourselves in the center of efforts to facilitate evidence use, ignoring the powerful levers that exist in individual and organizational intermediaries, boundary spanners and brokers in the existing system. How would efforts to support evidence use look if we shifted our efforts to partner strategically with other intermediary or boundary spanning organizations? How can we more deeply understand TTA providers work and how evidence can support them in achieving their goals? For intermediaries, we would welcome a dialog and potential opportunities for joint research to understand these questions. Finally, for both researchers and intermediaries, working together to build tools to support being able to access evidence when it is most relevant and within existing work processes would be an important next step.
Lauren Supplee is the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Planning, Research, and Evaluation at the Administration for Children and Families (ACF).
Ann Rivera is a Senior Social Science Research Analyst at OPRE's Division of Child and Family Development.