Non-Traditional Data and the New Public Measurement Problem
Dr. Stefaan Verhulst’s article, “Non-Traditional Data and the Challenge of Measurement in the United States,” offers an important account of how public measurement is changing in an era when traditional statistical systems are under pressure. The article was prepared to inform the June 30, 2026 NAPA Technology Standing Panel, CODE, and Bridge Alliance webinar, “Meeting the Challenge of Measurement,” and should be credited to Dr. Stefaan Verhulst. (Medium)
The central insight is that official statistics remain essential, but they are no longer sufficient by themselves. Verhulst explains that public agencies face declining survey response rates, rising collection costs, heightened privacy concerns, and reduced trust in government information, even as policymakers need faster and more granular insight into digital inclusion, financial resilience, climate effects, mobility, and economic opportunity. Non-traditional data, generated through commercial transactions, digital platforms, connected devices, satellites, financial institutions, mobility services, and online interactions, can help close that measurement gap when it is responsibly governed and combined with surveys, censuses, and administrative records. (Medium)
For federal contractors, this is not merely a statistical issue. It is a governance, procurement, and performance issue. Agencies increasingly need contractors that can help them acquire, validate, integrate, protect, and explain data that was not originally created for government measurement. The promise is significant: surveys provide representativeness and context; administrative records provide broad coverage; and non-traditional data can contribute timeliness, granularity, and visibility into change as it occurs. Verhulst’s examples, including Opportunity Insights, Meta’s Social Connectedness Index, Microsoft telemetry research, Mastercard’s Inclusive Growth Score, Zillow housing indices, ADP payroll data, and Census Bureau experimental products, show that public measurement is moving toward a hybrid ecosystem rather than a single-source model. (Medium)
The article’s caution is equally important. Non-traditional data cannot simply be inserted into public decision-making because it is large, real-time, or commercially available. Verhulst identifies several unresolved barriers: limited awareness among decision-makers, representativeness problems, fragile access to privately held data, insufficient methodological transparency, weak social license, institutional capacity gaps, and the need for common governance standards. These concerns go directly to federal contracting risk. A contractor that supplies data, analytics, AI tools, dashboards, or measurement systems may create exposure if the underlying data is biased, poorly documented, inconsistently available, contractually restricted, or impossible to validate. (Medium)
The practical lesson is that data innovation must be paired with data stewardship. Contractors should expect agencies to ask not only what a data tool can measure, but whether the data is fit for purpose, how bias is corrected, how privacy is protected, how continuity is assured, and whether the public can understand and trust the resulting measurement. In that sense, non-traditional data presents both opportunity and obligation. It can help government see faster and act better, but only if contractors and agencies build the legal, technical, methodological, and ethical infrastructure necessary to make that data trustworthy.
Recommended FedContractPros.com Tool:
Ethics & Compliance Builder.
Disclaimer:
This article is for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, procurement, data governance, or compliance advice. Contractors should consult qualified counsel and technical advisors before relying on non-traditional data in federal proposals, performance systems, or agency-facing analytics.