[Is it] possible to have philosophically driven policies without adhering to party politics?

So here's something data driven: Look at every democracy in the world. They all have political parties as organizing structures. Parties take very different forms depending on the specific system, but they exist everywhere in one form or another. There doesn't seem to be any other way to get the masses involved in politics. In many ways, a couple of the founding fathers kind of thought that was the point. Madison, for example, thought that mob rule was the least desirable possible outcome from a democracy, and he thus proposed the senate as the supreme authority, and whose members would basically be appointed for life (and they would be chosen from a basic oligarchy). In this system the people really don't have a voice, even if it would certainly comprise a more "deliberative" body, as he envisioned. So you and me and your friend and my cousin and his girlfriend get together and say, "Sure we don't agree on everything, but we share the same basic values, and if you agree to support X I'll support Y," and thus our party of many can try to grab the power that otherwise would be held by the few. Parties are stand ins for your values. And in America the basic divide is and always has been rural vs. urban, agrarian vs. cosmopolitan, planters vs. manufacturers, etc. So while you and I can have our personal political philosophies, how do we connect with Tom from Little Rock and Jenny from Sacramento? Without a party structure it's essentially impossible.

I wonder also, if whether or not we don't always implement data driven policies is because we allow partisan ideology to get in the way.

Again, I think the form of the question is incoherent. "Data driven policies" are not a thing. Data driven results can be, but they need to be guided by a policy vision that derives from a political philosophy. Let's say we all decide that global warming is bad and that it should be mitigated. That's the thing that matters. How we get there can be science or data driven, but science and data can't tell us what is right. Pure technocracies are probably the worst form of government imaginable.

Trust me that you don't want to live in one. That's essentially the idea behind communism, and the result is always going to be mass murder. Techno-utopians crop up often throughout history and they're basically always wrong. There's no algorithm for humanity. It's up to you and me to decide what's right and wrong. "Partisan ideology" is a red herring in this case. There almost is no such thing, as the ideology of both parties is far from immutable.