Evidence and Beliefs Used in Congressional Hearings to Influence Federal Child Welfare Policy Making

Abstract

This study expands the evidence base informing policy practice through an empirical inquiry of federal child welfare policy making. To do so, the study examines the association between evidence and beliefs and determines the relationship between the political context in which policy making occurs and the types of evidence and beliefs presented during federal child welfare hearings. The study considered a random sample of 150 congressional child welfare hearings testimonies from the 10-year period covered by the 106th to the 110th sessions of the U.S. Congress (1999-2008). This research used a content analysis to examine variables related to (a) witness affiliation; (b) witness level of influence; (c) the committee to which testimony was submitted; (c) the Congress in which testimony was submitted; (e) priority of intervention type, and (f) proper distribution of authority; and (g) evidence. Logistic regressions were the primary statistical analyses used to cultivate study hypotheses. Results suggest that there were significant differences in the use of evidence based on beliefs. Results also suggest that the committee to which testimonies were submitted was a significant predictor of belief use. Furthermore, affiliation a partially significant predictor of belief use, with consumers as the only significant predictor group. On the other hand, Congress and level of influence were not significant predictors of belief use. With regard to political context and evidence use, affiliation and Congress were significant predictors. This research concludes with study limitations and implications for future research.