ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2026
Payment integrity in government programs: Takeaways from incorporating the behavioral sciences in US federal evaluations.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Turning policy implications into policy impact: Lessons from behavioral science in financial markets.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Science in service: Behavioral research applications across federal agencies.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A primary way the US federal government delivers public goods and services is via monetary payments. Ensuring that these payments are calculated accurately, delivered on time, and made to the correct recipients is important for government fiscal health. Inaccurate or delayed payments can weaken public trust in the government and undermine government accountability. In this article, we examine findings from a set of impact evaluations assessing interventions designed to improve payment integrity in US federal programs. The low-cost, evidence-based interventions draw on insights from the social and behavioral sciences and include modification of forms, changes to how and when agencies request information, and altering existing communications. The evaluations were conducted by the US General Services Administration's Office of Evaluation Sciences in collaboration with agency partners. We extract three takeaways across four representative evaluations. First, the real-world evaluations validate a key implication of the behavioral science literature: interventions that reduce burdens for individuals have small effects that meaningfully improve payment integrity at scale. Second, effects attenuate across interventions and over time, suggesting a need for iterative evaluation. Finally, bureaucratic hurdles and administrative complexity are the main barriers to translating academic insights into real-world government programs. Addressing these challenges will require close collaboration between behavioral scientists and practitioners throughout the intervention design and evaluation process.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.