Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the GROW Evaluation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Early GROW results: pilots show planning progress but many lack rigorous evaluation
Summary
LFC evaluation staff said pilot projects funded through GROW have begun spending but evaluations often lack control groups and consistent outcome metrics; of $72M awarded for pilot projects in FY25, $13.8M (19%) reverted unspent, the team reported.
The Legislative Finance Committee's evaluation team gave members an early assessment of the Government Results and Opportunity (GROW) pilot projects and the junior appropriations that moved into the GROW framework.
"Of the $72,000,000 appropriated for pilot projects in FY25, a total of $13,800,000 or 19% went unspent," Deputy Director Rachel Garcia said, noting that reversions were concentrated in a few large projects (particularly CYFD and Early Childhood Education). The team said FY26 encumbrance and spending data (current as of late September) show agencies beginning to expend and encumber funds, with pilots averaging around 31% of FY26 balances committed.
Evaluation staff highlighted that many agencies are developing logic models and basic output measures, but few have rigorous causal evaluation plans (for example, comparison or control groups) that would permit credible conclusions about a project's impact versus the status quo. The team recommended formalizing legislative expectations for evaluation—requiring logic models, clear outcome metrics and plans to measure causal impact—and standardizing reporting templates for agencies and the seven regional councils of governments (COGs) that manage local junior appropriations.
The evaluators said the shift of junior appropriations into GROW has reduced large reversions and improved oversight for local projects, but that capacity building and clearer performance requirements are needed for consistent, comparable results across projects.
