aes24 International Evaluation Conference

Authors: Claire Grealy (Rooftop Social ),Duncan Rintoul (Rooftop Social, AU),Virginia Poggio (Paul Ramsay Foundation, AU),Luciana Campello (NSW Department of Communities and Justice, AU),Kirsty Burow (NSW Department of Communities and Justice, AU),Jacqueline Webb (National Association for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect (NAPCAN), AU)

The evaluation of grant programs has long frustrated grantees and perplexed fund managers.
Evaluators often arrive at the end, and may find a strong narrative about the funded activity (assuming the project staff are still in place) but less of the documentation and data that demonstrates the impact or learning, or shows the link between each project to the fund objectives.

Fund managers have often had to be content with the limited results available to them, sometimes as basic as acquittals on activity and expenditure. This limits funders' ability to capture learning, feed into new fund designs, mount budget bids, or tell a compelling story about the work grant holders are doing.

This panel brings together a cross-section of key players and beneficiaries from a variety of contexts:
* a state government fund manager in the human services sector
* an evaluation lead from a large national philanthropic organisation
* an experienced project manager from a national NGO that receives grants from various sources
* two evaluation specialists who have deep experience working in this space, developing and delivering this kind of support.

Drawing on case studies from practice, this panel will share some innovative approaches from their work, which bring the right mix of expectation and support to the design stage of grant-based projects, from the time of submitting an EOI through to the point of evaluation readiness.

The fruit that hangs off this tree includes:
* strengthening the 'evaluability' of each project and the overall fund
* testing each project's assumptions and ambitions
* deep conversations between grant makes and grant holders about outcome alignment
* building the evaluative thinking and capability of project teams and organisations, activating the 'ripple effect' as participants share their newfound commitment and skills with their colleagues.
"You couldn't drag me to program logic workshop before this. And now look at me - I took that process you did with us and yesterday I ran it with my team on another project."

Authors: Emily Lapinski (Central Land Council ),Malkirdi Napaljarri Rose (Centre For Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University, AU), Glenda Napaljarri Wayne (Central Land Council, AU), Geoffrey Jungarrayi Barnes (Central Land Council, AU), Alex Gyles (Centre For Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University, AU)

For evaluation to support transformational change, research suggests strategies must focus on localised Indigenous values, beliefs and worldviews. Decolonising evaluation involves identifying and addressing power and considering what is being evaluated, by whom and how. In this paper we argue that these developments are necessary but insufficient and suggest a possible way forward for further decolonising the field of evaluation. To support change for Indigenous Australians the emphasis needs to move from simple evaluation of individual programs to more critical examination of their combined impact on communities from local perspectives.

This paper explores how Warlpiri and non-Indigenous allies are collaborating to create and use their own community-level impact assessment tool. The 5-year Good Community Life Project is supporting Warlpiri residents of Lajamanu in the Northern Territory to define, assess and take action for a 'good community life'. Warlpiri will explain how they created the approach for assessing wellbeing in Lajamanu, and how they are using emerging results to give voice to their interests and advocate for the life they envision for future generations.

The project involves collaboration between Warlpiri community members, land council staff and university researchers, drawing on Indigenous concepts of 'two-way' seeing and working, relationality, and centring Indigenous voice and values. Applying these concepts in practice is challenging, particularly for non-Indigenous allies who must constantly reflect and use their privilege to challenge traditional views on 'robust' evaluation methodology.

Warlpiri and the land council see potential for this work to improve life in Lajamanu and as an approach that could be applied across Central Australian communities. Going beyond co-designed and participatory evaluation to critical examination of impact is the next step in supporting change with Indigenous communities. This paper will focus on Warlpiri perspectives, plus brief reflections from non-Indigenous allies, with time for the audience to discuss broader implications.

Authors: Mark Power (Murawin ),Carol Vale (Murawin, AU)

This presentation explores the paramount importance of culturally sensitive engagement methodologies in ensuring meaningful contributions from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities to mission programs. Murawin, an Aboriginal-led consultancy, has developed a robust Indigenous Engagement Strategy Framework grounded in the principles of reciprocity, free, informed and prior consent, mutual understanding, accountability, power sharing, and respect for Indigenous knowledge systems. Our session aims to share insights into the necessity of prioritising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voices in engagement, co-design, and research, highlighting the significance of cultural competence in fostering mutual respect and understanding.
We will discuss three key messages: the imperative of deep knowledge and understanding of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures in engagement practices; the success of co-design processes in facilitating genuine and respectful engagement; and the strategic partnership with CSIRO to enhance cultural competence and inclusivity in addressing Indigenous aspirations and challenges. These points underscore the critical role of acknowledging cultural interactions and ensuring cultural sensitivity in building strong, respectful productive relationships with Indigenous communities.
To achieve our session's objectives, we have designed an interactive format that blends informative presentations with the analysis of case studies, complemented by engaging intercultural discussions. This approach is intended to equip participants with actionable insights drawn from real-world examples of our collaborative ventures and co-designed projects. Through this comprehensive exploration, we aim to enrich participants' understanding of successful strategies for engaging Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, ultimately contributing to the achievement of more inclusive and impactful outcomes in mission programs and beyond.

Authors: Victoria Pilbeam (WWF-Australia)

Across social and environmental movements, we are often reticent to talk about failure. But as innovation and learning gain greater emphasis across the sector, Not-for Profits are finding new ways to share and learn from their failures (eg: Engineers Without Borders failure reports, Save the Children Fail Fest, etc.). In this presentation, I will share both insights from the available research and reflect on my own journey developing failure programming at WWF-Australia. This presentation will provide practical guidance to evaluators and organisations navigating the challenging terrain of learning from failure.

Authors: Linda Kelly (Praxis Consultants), Mary Raori (UNDP Pacific, FJ)

This presentation outlines an approach to program assessment of a long-term governance program working across the Pacific, the UNDP Governance for Resilience program. It tells the story of the program’s maturing evaluation approach which has shifted from serving the information needs of those with money and power to focus more particularly on the values and interests of local participants and partners..
Despite the well-documented limitations of single methodology evaluation approaches for complex programs, many international development donors and corresponding international and regional organisations, continue to require program assessment that serves their needs and values. Typically, this includes narrowing evaluation to assessment against quantitative indicators. Notwithstanding the extensive limitations of this approach, it serves the (usually short-term) needs of international donors and other large bureaucracies. It generates simple information that can be communicated and showcased in uncritical forms. It provides numbers that are easily aggregated and used for concise reporting to senior and political masters.
Such approaches risk crowding out attention to the information needs of other participants and undermine attempts to support more locally led processes. This presentation will explain how this long-term and large-scale program has shifted, making use of a values-based evaluative approach to better serve the interests of partners and participants in the Pacific. This has involved both a methodological and political shift, broadening the range of data collection and analysis methodologies and approaches, increasing resourcing to accommodate different types of data and data collection and internal and external advocacy. This one program experience echoes wider views across the Pacific about the limitations of externally imposed measures and the lack of attention to what is valued by pacific countries and people.

Authors: Kate Nichols (Department of Jobs, Skills, Industry and Regions - Victoria), Milbert Gawaya (Department of Jobs, Skills, Industry and Regions, AU)

First Peoples/settler state treaties have been likened to marriage - an evolving and changeable (political) relationship, not an endpoint or divorce (Blackburn, 2007). But what does this look like in practice given marriage's checkered connection with power imbalance and violence through to romance and deep, trusting companionship?

Contemporary colonial 'settlerism' (after Aunty/Dr Lilla Watson, in Watego, 2021) is undergoing structural change in Victoria, with Victoria's First Peoples sitting down with the Victorian State Government in 2024 to commence statewide treaty negotiations. Treaty is an acknowledgement that British sovereignty did not extinguish Aboriginal sovereignty, opening-up a "third space of sovereignty" (after Bruyneel, 2007) where co-existing sovereigns can further contest the "sovereignty impasse" (ibid., 2007), while Indigenous people control their own affairs.

Treaty is expected to reshape how the Victorian state government operates, challenging state laws, institutions, policies, programs and processes, which together, have contributed to First Nations disadvantage and suffering. Government evaluation practices will need their own shake-up.

How can public sector evaluators help establish an equal, strong and nourishing treaty marriage? This short paper shares emerging ally insights into how local practices are evolving to support Victoria's Treaty and self-determination. It shares reflections from a recent evaluation of Traditional Owner grant programs, conducted in partnership between key Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal public sector staff. It is a story of both-ways practice and the time, trust and bravery required to achieve deep change. It also highlights the role of lifelong cultural learning and behaviour change for ally evaluators. Culturally responsive evaluation, Indigenous research practices, restorative justice and the AES First Nations Cultural Safety Framework provide useful framing. Although focused on the Victorian treaty context, the paper may be transferable to other jurisdictions and evaluations involving or impacting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in support of their sovereignty and self-determination.
ion trainers and facilitators.

Authors: Julian King (Julian King & Associates), Adrian Field (Dovetail)

The rapid growth of video-conferencing technology has increased the ability for evaluations to be conducted across multiple countries and time zones. People are increasingly used to meeting and working entirely online, and evaluations can in principle be designed and delivered without need for face to face engagement. Translational AI software is even able to break through language barriers, providing further efficiencies and enabling evaluation funds to be directed more to design, data gathering and analysis.

Yet the efficiency of delivery should not compromise the integrity with which an evaluation is conducted. This is particularly true in situations where different dimensions of equity come into question, and in an evaluation where two or more languages are being used, ensuring that the design and delivery are meaningful and accessible to all participants, not just the funder.

The growth of remote evaluation working presents a very real, if not even more pressing danger, of the consultant "parachuting in" and offering solutions that have little or no relevance to the communities who are at the centre of the evaluation process.

In this presentation we explore the wayfinding process in designing and implementing a Value for Investment evaluation of an urban initiative focusing on the developmental needs of young children, in Jundiaí, Brazil. We discuss the challenges and opportunities presented by a largely (but ultimately not entirely) online format, in leading a rigorously collaborative evaluation process, and gathering data in a way that ensures all stakeholder perspective are appropriately reflected. We discuss the trade-offs involved in this process, the reflections of evaluation participants, and the value of ensuring that underlying principles of collaborative and cross-cultural engagement are adhered to.