In our previous blog, we explored how scaling evidence-informed policies requires a comprehensive approach. This includes building partnerships, strengthening capacities, and negotiating systemic change. 

In many ways, using evidence effectively is like cooking a fine meal. It requires the right ingredients and a precise method. But without the ability to replicate both consistently, success is short-lived. 

This post takes a closer look at this challenge: How can governments move beyond one-off wins to make evidence use a routine part of decision-making? 

This question matters. Population needs evolve constantly. Governments must remain agile and continuously design policies informed by robust data and evidence. Without dedicated teams focused on data-driven execution and long-term sustainability, even well-designed reforms risk stalling or disappearing.

Governments cannot rely on one-off initiatives championed by individuals or organizations. Governments need the right “ingredients” at the right time. This ensures that emerging challenges are consistently met with evidence-informed solutions. 

At IPA, we tackle this challenge through Embedded Evidence Labs (Labs). These are permanent, in-house teams within government that systematically link data and research to policymaking, turning evidence into routine practice.

Changing the System from Inside

Governments are complex systems made up of networks of people, each with unique goals, skills, and constraints. Effective and sustained evidence use depends not only on these individuals’ capabilities and incentives. It also depends on how they interact with the structures, processes, and resources around them.

Institutionalizing evidence requires working within these systems. This means strengthening the capacity of government teams and implementing systemic changes that embed evidence into the policy cycle.

This approach requires a team with dual expertise. The team needs deep knowledge of evidence generation and practical insight into how the agency operates. They must understand what is feasible, and who can support and approve change.

At IPA, we embed staff inside the government agencies to work side-by-side with officials, co-designing Labs and implementing evidence reforms. This approach provides the skills, legitimacy, and access needed to drive lasting institutional change.

Combining Systemic and Individual Approaches

This team works at both the systemic and individual levels, focusing on four core components:

	Processes – integrating evidence into policy design and implementation: The team defines clear steps for delivering Lab services. This includes co-designing evidence with government teams and implementing strategies that support decision-making and execution (through a multi-pronged approach).
	Structures – building teams and partnerships that facilitate generation and use of evidence: This includes designing the Lab’s composition and institutional location. It also involves developing strategies to engage both internal and external partners such as university researchers for co-designing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to internal champions advocating for policy adoption.
	Capacities – strengthening both individual skills and information systems: The team provides training, mentorship, and learning-by-doing on evidence generation and use. The team also ensures reliable data systems are available to inform decisions consistently.
	Resources – securing financial, legal, and political support: The team negotiates budgets and formalizes the Lab within legal frameworks. The team also advocates for political support from senior officials and stakeholders. This support is essential for long-term relevance and sustainability.

During a Lab’s establishment, the team tracks its progress toward institutionalization using observable indicators. Table 1 highlights examples of Labs that have successfully become institutionalized within government agencies. It presents selected indicators of institutionalization, including administrative orders that formalize the Lab, dedicated budget allocations to support teams and activities, and partnerships with universities and other organizations that provide technical and political support.

Table 1. Examples of Institutionalized Labs

An Incremental, Negotiated, and Iterative Approach

Designing and institutionalizing an Embedded Evidence Lab is a gradual process. It involves testing and refining processes and structures before formalizing them. It requires strengthening capabilities through learning-by-doing, and guiding lengthy negotiations with stakeholders to secure regulatory or budgetary changes. 

For example, MineduLab took about two years to become institutionalized, and ICBF around three years.

Labs often begin with quick wins to gain political support early; projects that can be delivered within existing resources and short timelines, while aligning with political priorities. These early successes demonstrate the Lab’s value to senior decision-makers, spark demand from other government units and create opportunities to learn and refine the Lab’s processes.

Financing usually begins with co-funding. External donors cover IPA staff time, while governments pay for their own personnel. As the Lab proves its worth, the government gradually increases its share, replacing external staff with internal hires and covering Lab activities, just as is the case of the Labs in Table 1.

Over time, several factors collectively foster a culture of evidence use. These include the creation of formalized channels for utilizing evidence, the strengthening of capacities to effectively apply such evidence, legitimization through legal frameworks, and enforcement supported by budgets and political backing. As a result, IPA’s role gradually diminishes, and the Lab becomes fully government-led.

Conclusion: Moving from One-off Wins to Lasting Institutional Change

In today’s fast-changing world, governments cannot rely on ad hoc initiatives or the efforts of a few champions. Lasting impact requires embedding evidence into the very DNA of policymaking.

Institutionalizing evidence creates more than better policies. It builds resilient governments capable of learning, adapting, and responding effectively to emerging challenges.

Embedded Evidence Labs drive this change by addressing both systemic and individual factors. Labs, link evidence to decision-making and implementation while advocating for the long-term sustainability of reforms.

In the next blog in this series, we will explore how IPA’s Embedded Labs use diverse research and learning strategies to produce evidence and data products tailored to government needs. Stay tuned!