The main argument is that routine activities theory would provide a framework for the investigation of why researchers remain limited in their ability to influence political and policy decisions to allow for the empirical evaluation of programs and to strategically invest in policies grounded in sound research. The author calls upon researchers and practitioners to continue to advocate for robust and theoretically based studies designed to explore the underlying mechanisms of prosocial development in children. Researchers and practitioners should also come together to rally policy makers to fund programs that have been empirically demonstrated to be effective at reducing problem behavior among children and at increasing prosocial behaviors. The author stresses the fact that sound theory can provide insight into how programs might best serve clients as well as how to most effectively influence policy makers to fund research-based programs. In making this argument, the author illustrates how routine activities theory leads to the hypothesis that building consensus among policy makers will lead to a greater chance of policy adoption. Following this line of logic, researchers should communicate with and build consensus between and among policy makers capable of funding programs. Figures, references