Families have long been recognized for the contributions they make to their members and to society. Yet families are seldom substantively incorporated into the normal course of policy and program development, implementation, and evaluation. We propose the family impact lens as one way to shift the rhetoric from appreciating families to prioritizing them as worthy of study, investment, partnership, and political action. This paper provides the theoretical and empirical rationale for the family impact lens and introduces a toolkit for professionals who conduct or manage programs, teach about families, communicate with policymakers and program administrators, or evaluate programs and policies. Five guiding principles comprise the core of the family impact lens—family responsibility, family stability, family relationships, family diversity, and family engagement. To operationalize these principles, three methodologies are proposed—Family Impact Discussion Starters, the Family Impact Checklist, and Family Impact Analysis. Next steps are proposed for implementation and evaluation.

This decade review centers on 2 disconnects between rhetoric and reality. First, public investments in families continue to grow, yet family policy is still not a term widely used by policymakers or the public. Second, social science studies increased in number and sophistication, with some family sensitive and others policy relevant. Few focus on both, which is what is most needed if research is to inform family policy. In exploring these disconnects, we summarize recent trends in family policies and the influence of research on family policymaking. We suggest a rationale for family policy and illustrate its value using the examples of early childhood, welfare reform, and parent education policies. We conclude with suggested next steps.In the spirit of a decade review, we look forward by first looking back. In the past decade, we have observed that family policy remains undeveloped as a focus of intellectual inquiry despite the growing reach of public policy on families. On the basis of our assessment of the current state of the field, family policy has not merited sufficient attention

This article explores growing pessimism among those scholars who wish to see rigorous research used more frequently to formulate public policy. That commonsense aspiration is threatened by the impoverished dialogue between the communities that conduct studies (researchers) and those that apply them to decisions (policymakers). To examine this disconnect, the authors advance community dissonance theory, which proposes that a better understanding in the research community of the inhabitants, institutions, and cultures of the policy community could increase communication and trust. Community dissonance theory extends earlier two‐communities theories by deconstructing the cultural impediments to optimal communication. Building on previous literature and supported with in‐depth interviews of state policymakers, this article examines professional culture and institutional culture (e.g., preferred decision‐making processes, interactional preferences, favored epistemological frameworks, dominant influence loops, salient goals, salient stakeholders). The article presents several frictions that occur when cultures clash, discussing their promise and peril for improving research use in policymaking.

No abstract

No abstract