進入21世紀以來，由於全球性教育品質競爭與教育人才的流動，使得各國將教育政策的制訂提升至國家的戰略層級，也因此加重了國家級教育教育研究智庫的重要性。有鑑於此，本研究特自相關先進國家中選擇美國、英國及新加坡等三國，就其國家級之教育智庫運作，以及與政策對應之互動性進行討論，並針對其運作後所得之成果，如何形成一具體之績效評估機制做出探討。在研究方法部分，本研究採取檔案文件分析以及焦點團體等質性研究方式進行。採前者研究方法之因，乃為補足現行學術研究文獻對於智庫角色探討之不足；採後者研究方法之因，乃為透過對學者與相關智庫領導人的第一手經驗資料蒐集，歸納智庫與教育政策之關聯與績效評估之道。並以上述之方法推導出下述研究發現：國家級教育研究機構之績效評估應以建立指標為先；績效指標應從經費「投入」和研究「產出」的概念著手；績效評估之實施順序應先從機構整體再到人員；各國之績效評估目前雖屬萌芽階段，但概念已形成。

Due to the global educational quality competition and the mobility of educated manpower, educational policy making has been raised to a higher level as the national strategy since the beginning of the 21st century. This development has resulted in the importance of the management of national educational research think tank. Therefore, this study took the USA, the UK and Singapore with their educational think tanks as examples to explore their operations and their interactions with the governments. The study adopted qualitative approach, documental analysis and focus group, as the research methodology. There are four main inductive findings. First, setting up a series of indicators is a must for educational research institutes before they undertake performance evaluation. Second, the setup of indicators should take budget investment and research production into consideration. Third, performance evaluation should start from the institute itself before proceeding to the research fellows of the institute. Finally, although performance evaluation in every country is still in its infancy, it is a received concept set in concrete.