Making Decisions When Washington’s Numbers Go Dark

Against this backdrop, a panel of experts convened at a recent seminar organized by Harvard University’s Shorenstein Center to explore the stakes and offer guidance. The group—Allison Plyer, chief demographer at The Data Center in New Orleans; Denice Ross, former U.S. chief data scientist; and Erika Groshen, former Bureau of Labor Statistics Commissioner—examined how the evolving landscape of federal data affects industries that rely on these numbers. Their discussion highlighted the importance of flexibility, vigilance, and collaboration in navigating these new challenges.

Rethinking Data Sources

Adapting to these fluctuating data conditions calls for ingenuity and foresight. Plyer has observed firsthand that “many decision makers assume data exists to answer nearly any question they have,” but this is not a guarantee in the current climate. When federal statistics are missing or in flux, business executives may need to look to state agencies or local associations to fill in gaps, sometimes consolidating disparate sources themselves to recreate a credible national picture. Plyer suggests that collaborating with statisticians and analytics experts can be essential for interpreting datasets that may have changed in subtle or significant ways.

Private Sector’s Limits and Value

Ross points out that while private data providers and nonprofit organizations offer important supplementary information, neither can match the scale or consistency of the federal government. She encourages industry professionals to weigh the limitations of private sources carefully, but not to overlook their value in a pinch. Ross emphasizes the value of “making a statistician your new best friend” when faced with incomplete or altered datasets, and she cautions that archived data—although useful—cannot replace the need for up-to-date information. Building networks with local experts and data-savvy community partners, she says, strengthens resilience against future interruptions.

Spotting Trouble and Responding

The potential for data delays or changes brings with it a critical need for creative risk management. Groshen explains that not all disruptions or revisions are nefarious, but operational challenges remain real for those who depend on regular updates. Groshen argues that indicators such as sudden shifts in release timing, unexplained changes to methodologies, or unusual staff turnover within agencies should be seen as signals to diversify information sources, without immediately assuming the worst. She advises monitoring for transparency, consistency and the presence of advocacy groups who can interpret and validate official communications.

Pairing Local Knowledge With Numbers

Pairing hard numbers with proven local expertise becomes essential when federal sources falter. Plyer and Ross underscore the importance of blending “on-the-ground anecdotes” and local market observations with available national data to add nuance and credibility to analysis for investors and stakeholders. Community insights, feedback from industry associations, and even input from clients and tenants can fill important gaps while telling a more complete story. Plyer notes, for example, that the cessation of the USDA’s food security survey has left some organizations scrambling, but local observations and state-level reports on programs like SNAP can serve as valuable proxies.

Building a Resilient Data Strategy

Ross reminds executives that combining multiple data types—official releases, state and local figures and anecdotal evidence—requires deliberate effort. Successful contingency planning may mean building new partnerships with data experts or academic institutions and advocating for broader participation in surveys and advisory roles. Groshen stresses that engaging with sector watchdogs and professional organizations can give industry players a critical early warning of changes in data reliability.

Ready for What Comes Next

As government agencies continue to navigate shutdowns and other operational risks, CRE leaders must remain forward-looking. Groshen recalls prior periods when staffing shortages at BLS and federal budget constraints slowed the recovery of data quality and reliability, forcing executives to lean more heavily on alternate market signals and local relationships.

The rise of uncertainty in federal data underscores a fundamental lesson: resilience in CRE depends on a dynamic mix of quantitative diligence and qualitative insight. Sourcing additional numbers from local and private entities, validating official statistics with community intelligence, and maintaining networks among expert groups all contribute to a nimble response strategy. This approach—rooted in both the rigor of statistical methods and the narrative strength of firsthand experience—enables CRE professionals to navigate today’s uncertain landscape with confidence, adaptability and perspective.