Scholars want their research to matter. They want to make a positive impact on the world through their science. The Society for Research in Child Development (SRCD) approached us about implementing the Research-to-Policy Collaboration (RPC) model because their members wanted their research to inform national policy. To do so, they needed an evidence-based practice for improving the uptake of science in Congress.

A year later, the SRCD team has transformed their practices and infrastructure for engaging members in timely conversations on the Hill. But the real story isn’t in the numbers—it’s in what makes the RPC approach fundamentally different from traditional advocacy, and why both researchers and congressional staff prefer it.

This Isn’t Another Advocacy Day

LaTasha Ireland joined the RPC Hill Day as her first Hill Day experience, bringing military policy experience rooted in backend research and evidence synthesis rather than direct legislative engagement.

“I was used to doing the backend work, so I was a bit nervous because the Hill Day format was new to me. The RPC model made me feel prepared and grounded,” she shared. During one meeting, a staffer told her, “I know this is not your first rodeo,” which felt especially rewarding because it actually was her first Hill Day.

“I love the RPC model approach,” she told us. Here’s what made the difference: She’s found policymakers are more receptive to honest brokerage over traditional advocacy. The training was structured differently, not just superficially, but because it was fundamentally geared toward nonpartisan engagement rather than lobbying tactics. The RPC training “provided significantly more preparation” for how to show up as an evidence resource rather than an advocate.

And it’s working. Since then, she’s had several legislative offices reach out to her after participating in RPC Hill Days. She never thought she’d enjoy this type of work, but now she does. In fact, she’s exploring how to start her own RPC model initiative within her nonprofit organization.

The congressional staff response confirms what Latasha experienced. A policy advisor for a U.S. Senator captured it simply: “I love that you don’t lobby.”

That statement is everything. Congressional staff are inundated with special interest groups pushing predetermined solutions. What they valued about SRCD’s approach was how researchers offered independent insights without advocating for specific legislative outcomes. As a legislative assistant for a U.S. Representative put it: “Bridging the raw data to real-world impact is so important.”

This isn’t about researchers being more polite or better prepared than advocates. It’s about transforming the fundamental relationship between scientists and government, from persuasion to partnership.

What Researchers Discovered

For many participating scholars, policy had always felt distant and inaccessible. “Policy always felt like something ‘over there,'” one researcher explained. “I never knew how I could engage in it.” 

The experience demystified the process and revealed something unexpected: their expertise was genuinely valued. “It was so nice to feel like I had something valuable to offer,” one participant noted. “This was a unique opportunity – one you don’t often get.”

What transformed nervousness into confidence wasn’t just generic preparation, it was training designed specifically for nonpartisan engagement. Brief, focused, and interactive training that clarified how to position themselves as honest brokers rather than advocates.

The results spoke for themselves. As one researcher put it: “I’m absolutely blown away by the amount of effort and preparation that went into these meetings.” Another noted: “I left feeling confident, inspired, and equipped to make meaningful contributions in policy conversations.”

Perhaps most importantly, researchers are now training the next generation. One participant shared: “Excited to talk to my students and energize them to do this work as well.” That ripple effect multiplies the impact far beyond a single Hill Day.

Building Sustainable Infrastructure

The visible success rested on infrastructure that SRCD built throughout our year-long partnership. We trained SRCD staff on RPC implementation: conducting needs assessments with congressional offices, managing rapid response processes, and coordinating researcher engagement.

SRCD also invested in digital systems, searchable scholar databases, project management platforms, and virtual community tools that could handle legislative requests efficiently. This wasn’t about implementing our systems; it was about helping SRCD design systems that fit their organizational context and could be maintained by their staff.

As one SRCD member participant emphasized: “The structure, logistics, and support you provided made all the difference. No other way for us to do this ourselves.”

What This Means for Professional Societies

SRCD’s experience offers clear lessons for other professional societies whose members want to make a positive impact through their science.

The honest broker stance supports research impact in ways that advocacy can’t. Congressional staff explicitly valued that SRCD scholars weren’t lobbying. That distinction matters. This model has the power to raise the public value of government funded science because it positions researchers as credible sources of evidence rather than voices for particular political agenda.

Brief, interactive training alongside matching them with legislators who share interests makes researchers effective in nonpartisan engagement. Multiple researchers noted that nervousness turned into confidence because they felt genuinely prepared.

Strategic matching transforms relationships. This isn’t just scheduling meetings with any available congressional offices. It’s using data on committee assignments, bill introductions, and legislative priorities to identify where research expertise aligns with active policy interests. That approach leads to ongoing partnerships rather than one-off conversations.

Infrastructure investment creates sustainability. You can’t run effective policy engagement on enthusiasm alone. Digital systems, trained staff, and clear processes matter. But the investment pays off: SRCD staff now have the capacity to execute member-facing policy engagement programs independently.

Moving Forward

SRCD’s work with Congress continues. The Hill Day was a milestone, not an endpoint. Building Congressional partnerships requires an enduring process involving follow-up conversations, action planning, and repeated cycles of engagement. This requires durability of system designs and staff protocols – which is why we focused on building SRCD’s capacity for member engagement, technical infrastructure, and operating procedures. Rapid response opportunities continue to connect researchers with legislative offices. The relationships built through initial meetings are deepening into ongoing partnerships.

For professional societies, the question isn’t whether your members’ research is relevant to policy—it almost certainly is. The question is whether you’re willing to invest in transforming the relationship between your members’ research and the way the government interacts with it. SRCD also found that the model complements their traditional lobby day for science funding. The RPC model provides infrastructure that makes scholarly research more useful to policymakers and ultimately improves the public benefit of science via evidence-based policies. Read more about the experimental evidence of the RPC model impact in ISSUES Magazine and PNAS.

SRCD made that investment. Their members are now representing developmental science on Capitol Hill with confidence, congressional staff are reaching out for their expertise, and the Society has built lasting capacity to continue this work for years to come.

That’s what success looks like – sustained and transformational shifts in the ways that the people doing the research share their insights for effective policymaking.

—

📩 Interested in building policy engagement capacity for your professional society? Contact TrestleLink to learn how we can help your organization implement the Research-to-Policy Collaboration model.

By Taylor Scott, Ph.D. & Sara DeLeon

Scott, T. (2026, January). How SRCD Transformed their Researcher-Government Relationships. https://trestlelink.org/how-srcd-transformed-their-researcher-government-relationships/