aes24 International Evaluation Conference

Authors: Awuor PONGE (African Policy Centre (APC) )

Indigenous Knowledge Systems (IKS) in Africa have long been marginalized and undervalued, despite their potential to offer sustainable solutions to pressing challenges faced by communities across the continent. This presentation explores the perspectives, challenges, and opportunities for incorporating IKS into evaluation practices that create value for both people and the planet.

From a people-centric perspective, IKS offer a holistic and culturally relevant approach to understanding local contexts, priorities, and value systems. By embracing these knowledge systems, evaluations can better capture the multidimensional nature of well-being, including spiritual, social, and environmental aspects that are often overlooked in conventional evaluation frameworks. However, challenges arise in reconciling IKS with dominant Western paradigms and navigating power dynamics that have historically suppressed indigenous voices.

From a planetary perspective, IKS offer invaluable insights into sustainable resource management, biodiversity conservation, and climate change adaptation strategies that have been honed over generations of lived experiences. Integrating these knowledge systems into evaluation can shed light on the intricate relationships between human activities and ecosystem health, enabling more informed decision-making for environmental sustainability. Nonetheless, challenges exist in bridging the divide between traditional and scientific knowledge systems, as well as addressing concerns around intellectual property rights and benefit-sharing.

This presentation will explore innovative approaches to overcoming these challenges, such as participatory and community-based evaluation methodologies, capacity-building initiatives, and cross-cultural dialogue platforms. By fostering a deeper appreciation and understanding of IKS, evaluation practices can become more inclusive, relevant, and effective in creating value for both people and the planet in the African context.

Authors: Eugenia Marembo

Representatives of First Nations communities have been advocating for changes in the way initiatives are planned, prioritised, and assessed. This includes greater visibility on where funding is going, more partnerships on designing initiatives and more evaluation on the outcomes being achieved, to inform government decision making.

This paper presents key insights on what constitutes good practice when designing and appraising initiatives that affect First Nations people and communities. The National Agreement on Closing the Gap is built around four new Priority Reforms that will change the way governments work with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and communities. Priority Reform Three is about transforming government institutions and organisations. As part of this Priority Reform, parties commit to systemic and structural transformation of mainstream government organisations to improve accountability, and to respond to the needs of First Nations people.

The findings presented in this paper draw on insights from consultations with various First Nations community representatives and government stakeholders in New South Wales, and the subsequent process of developing a government department's First Nations investment framework which seeks to strengthen the evidence on what works to improve outcome for First Nations people. Additionally, the frameworks to improve practice across government processes and better inform how initiatives are designed, prioritised and funded.

Authors: Rhiannon Birch (Victorian Department of Education ),Hayden Jose (Urbis, AU),Joanna Petkowksi (Victorian Department of Education, AU),Ekin Masters (Victorian Department of Education, AU)

How can an evaluation balance the need to generate pragmatic insights while meeting central agency requirements for rigorous measurement of outcomes? What ingredients can facilitate the effective evaluation of a government initiative and achieve improved outcomes? This paper explores the essential ingredients for evaluating a large-scale government program using an example of a statewide initiative aimed at attracting and retaining suitably qualified teachers in hard-to-staff positions in Victorian government schools.

We showcase how an adaptive and evidence-led method of enquiry helped identify program implementation bottlenecks and probe potentially unintended program outcomes over a three-year evaluation. We discuss enablers for the integration of evaluation recommendations into program implementation and future policy direction, particularly on participatory action approaches and deep relationships with policy and implementation teams. We will also present the robust and varied methodology, particularly the novel use of system data to facilitate a quasi-experimental design that aligned with central agency requirements and met stakeholder needs.
This presentation will benefit policymakers, program evaluators, and others interested in evaluating government programs, by sharing key learnings on how evaluations can balance pragmatic insights with central agency requirements and identifying the key elements for influencing such programs and achieving improved outcomes.

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: Caroline Crothers (Allen + Clarke Consulting)

A collaborative effort between community organisations and Victoria Police has demonstrated significant impact in addressing youth offending in Victoria's northwest metropolitan region. This initiative brought together 12 partner organisations from various sectors, including police, legal services, and youth support services around the shared goal of reducing youth offending. By diverting young offenders from the criminal justice system, the initiative seeks to enhance overall justice, health, and wellbeing outcomes for vulnerable youth. Allen + Clarke was commissioned to evaluate the success of this initiative during its inaugural year. In this presentation, we share key lessons learned from the evaluation including how minimally resourced and small-scale interventions can have an outsized impact on organisational change to culture and practice. We also reflect on the journey embarked upon and explore how the evaluation process itself serves as a tool for navigating through complex challenges and adapting to changes encountered along the way. Through critical reflection, the presentation delves into the differing perspectives of the delivery partners involved highlighting how the evaluation journey facilitates a shared understanding of the path forward and shaping future strategies and interventions.

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: Laura Faulker (NSW Treasury)

This paper presents the key findings from research and engagement on how cost-benefit analysis (CBA) has been applied to First Nations initiatives to date. CBA is an important tool used by governments to help prioritise budget funding decisions. It assesses the potential impacts of an initiative - economic, social, environmental, and cultural - to determine whether it will deliver value for money.

The paper explores the methods in which the value of First Nations cultures has been incorporated into CBAs, along with the associated challenges and opportunities to improve current practice. The findings have informed the development of an investment framework for the design and evaluation of initiatives that affect First Nations people and communities. The framework focuses on the key principles for embedding First Nations perspectives and ensuring culturally informed evaluative thinking.

Authors: Stephanie Button (Assessment and Evaluation Research Centre, University of Melbourne), Allison Clarke, Carolyn McSporran (Blue Light Victoria, AU)Authors: Stephanie Button (Assessment and Evaluation Research Centre, University of Melbourne), Allison Clarke (Assessment and Evaluation Research Centre, University of Melbourne, AU), Elissa Scott (Blue Light Victoria, AU)

This presentation aims to provide a case example of how two small-scale, standard process/outcomes evaluations for a low-budget community organisation increased value for the organisation by identifying and seizing opportunities for evaluation capacity building. Formal evaluations represent a significant financial commitment for low-budget community organisations. By maximising the value provided by such evaluations, evaluators can contribute more to these organisations' mission and ultimately to social betterment.

There are numerous different evaluation capacity building models and frameworks, many of which appear to be quite complex (for example: Volkov & King, 2007; Preskill & Boyle, 2008). Many emphasise planning, documentation, and other resource intensive components as part of any evaluation capacity building effort. This session provides a case example of intentional but light-touch and opportunistic evaluation capacity building. Through such an approach, evaluators may need to do only minimal additional activities to provide extra value to an organisation. Reflection-in-action during the evaluation process is as important as the final reporting (Schwandt & Gates, 2021). The session emphasises, though, that a critical enabler will be the organisation's leadership and culture, and willingness to seize the opportunity offered by a formal evaluation. The session is co-presented by two members of the evaluation team and the Head of Strategy, Insights, and Impact of the client organisation.

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: Amanda Reeves (Victorian Department of Education), Rhiannon Birch (Victorian Department of Education, AU), Eunice Sotelo (Victorian Department of Education, AU)

To provide insight to complex policy problems, evaluations need to adopt a systems perspective and examine the structures, relationships and contexts that influence program outcomes.

This paper outlines the design of a 4-year strategic evaluation that seeks to understand how a portfolio of over 25 education programs are interacting and collectively contributing to system-level outcomes. In this context, policy makers require evaluation to look beyond the boundaries of individual programs and assess the holistic impact of this investment to inform where and how resources can be directed to maximise system outcomes.

The strategic evaluation presented is theory-based and multi-layered, using logic modelling to identify outcomes at the program, cluster and system level and draw linkages to develop a causal pathway to impact. The strategic evaluation and the evaluations of individual education programs are being designed together to build-in common measures to enable meta-analysis and synthesis of evidence to assess system-level outcomes. The design process has been broad and encompassing, considering a diverse range of methods to understand impact including quantitative scenario modelling and value for money analysis.

The authors will describe how the strategic evaluation has been designed to respond to system complexity and add value. The evaluation adopts an approach that is:
• interdisciplinary, drawing on a range of theory and methods to examine underlying drivers, system structures, contextual factors and program impacts
• collaborative, using expertise of both internal and external evaluators, to design evaluations that are aligned and can tell a story of impact at the system-level
• exploratory, embracing a learning mindset to test and adapt evaluation activities over time.

This paper will be valuable for anyone who is interested in approaches to evaluating the relative and collective contribution of multiple programs and detecting their effects at the system level to inform strategic decision-making.

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.

Authors: Kathryn Erskine (Cube Group), Michael Maher (Cube Group, AU)

The session is intended to provide a practical example of how a traditional program evaluation was re-orientated to allow the application of findings to inform broader system transformation. This echoes current discourse in evaluation - particularly since the global pandemic - whereby traditional notions about how the field of evaluation is viewed and developed are being challenged (Ofir, Z. 2021). Specifically, there are calls to rethink and elevate evaluation practice to actively contribute to and support systems transformation (see Dart 2023; Norman 2021), beyond a narrow programmatic focus.

This session will illuminate this discussion by examining a mental health program evaluation in the context of significant service reform across the Victorian mental health system. The presentation will outline insights and techniques about how to lift and reconfigure a tightly defined program evaluation into one which can have broader application to the system ecosphere. It outlines how and why the pivot was made; changes we made to the methodology and the key benefits that arose from taking an expansive view of the sector in which the program operated within.

The design of the session will be a presentation format supported by a PowerPoint slide deck, comprising:
•    Introduction and purpose of session
•    Overview of the program we evaluated
•    Key challenges which required an evaluation 'pivot' - and how we worked with our client
•    Key changes made to the methodology
•    Key benefits from elevating from a programmatic to systems focus.

Authors: Kristy Hornby (Grosvenor)

There is a lot of interest in rapid M&E planning and rapid evaluations at present; partially borne out of rapid contexts in a COVID-19 policy context; and partially borne out of constricting appetites for time and money spent on evaluations. It is unlikely this trend will reverse in the short-term, so what do we do about it to acquit our responsibilities as evaluators, ethically and appropriately, in a rapid context? This session sets out a step by step approach to conducting a rapid evaluation, inviting attendees to follow along with their own program in mind, to come away from the session with a pathway for conducting their own rapid evaluation. The session uses a fictional case study as the construct to move the rapid evaluation approach forward, describing throughout the session how you can use literature reviews, qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis techniques, and report writing approaches innovatively to save you time while not compromising rigour.

We contend it is possible to do a rapid evaluation ethically and appropriately, but the backbone of doing so is good planning and execution. This session shares practical tips and approaches for doing so through each key phase of an evaluation, so attendees are well-equipped for their next rapid evaluation.

To consolidate the learning, attendees will be provided a framework to come away from the session with a high level plan of how to conduct their own rapid evaluation, to increase their chance of success.

Authors: Sandra Ayoo (University of North Carolina Greensboro)

With quality in improving interventions to improve societal and planetary wellbeing being the desired destination of evaluation, it is imperative that evaluators reflect on the meaning of quality and methods to assess if evaluation is achieving it. Meta-evaluation, coined by Michael Scriven in 1969, evaluates evaluations and aids in understanding how evaluations contribute to addressing structural and systemic problems in interventions and evaluation practice. Meta-evaluation has evolved over the past five decades and is included in the program standards by major professional associations. While the field of evaluation is confronted with major concerns regarding the centrality of social justice, there is currently there are no one-size-fits-all guidelines for meta-evaluation and for addressing social justice in evaluations. To address this, we reviewed meta-evaluation literature, mapped the American Evaluation Association's foundational documents with the United Nations Evaluation Group's Norms and Standards to explore their intersectionality on social justice, and analyzed 62 United Nations Population Fund evaluation reports alongside their management responses. The study findings indicated that meta-evaluation is contingent on context rather than established standards. Thus, it's crucial for evaluators to intentionally prioritize social justice in evaluation design and implementation and to select quality assurance tools that match the evaluation context and professional association guidelines to improve the quality of the intervention. I will share key characteristics of the United Nations Group's Norms and Standards on social justice to stimulate discussions on evaluators' efforts to address systemic issues. Collectively, participants will benefit from discussing and reflecting on their own practice by responding to questions like (a) what are the examples of their work in collaborative and systems-informed ways to intentionally include social justice in their evaluations, and (b) what should the field of evaluation do to ensure that evaluations add value for people and planet?anagement response.

Authors: Eleanor Kerdo (Attorney Generals Department ),Claudia Oke (Attorney Generals Department, AU),Michael Amon (Attorney Generals Department, AU),Anthony Alindogan (Attorney Generals Department, AU)

To embed a culture of evaluation across the Australian Public Service (Commonwealth of Australia, 2021), we must first have an accurate understanding of the current state of evaluation capability and priorities across Commonwealth agencies. This paper shares tools on how to build an effective measurement framework for evaluation culture, and discusses how to use these for evaluation capability uplift.
We explore quantitative and qualitative methods to gather and analyse data to measure an organisation's readiness to change its culture towards evaluation. This includes assessing staff attitudes towards evaluation, the level of opportunity for staff to conduct and use evaluation, and confidence in their knowledge of evaluation.
We discuss the development of a staff evaluation culture survey based on Preskill & Boyle's ROLE and how behavioural insight tools can be utilised to boost engagement. The paper discusses the utility of holding focus groups with senior leaders to understand authorising environments for evaluation and key leverage points. Also discussed, are challenges and innovative solutions that were encountered throughout the assessment process.
This paper will be valuable for those who work in, or with, any government agency with an interest in evaluation capacity building and driving an evaluation culture within organisations. This paper explains each stage of measurement design, data analysis and results, and discussing opportunities for action.
1 Preskill, H., & Boyle, S. (2008). A Multidisciplinary Model of Evaluation Capacity Building. American Journal of Evaluation, 29(4), 443-459. ://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1098214008324182

2 Michie S, Atkins L, West R. (2014) The Behaviour Change Wheel: A Guide to Designing Interventions. London: Silverback Publishing. www.behaviourchangewheel.com.

3 Lahey, R. (2009). A Framework for Developing an Effective Monitoring and Evaluation System in the Public Sector: Key considerations from International Experience. Framework for developing an effective ME system in the public sector (studylib.net)

Authors: Jake Clark (Questacon - The National Science and Technology Centre), Jenny Booth (Questacon - The National Science and Technology Centre, AU), Sharon Smith (Questacon - The National Science and Technology Centre, AU), Nick Phillis (Questacon - The National Science and Technology Centre, AU)

Join our Monitoring and Evaluation team on an exciting journey as we delve into the untapped potential of output data in evaluation and how to reach beyond the 'low-hanging fruit'.

Notwithstanding to the importance of evaluating outcomes to measure program success, monitoring implementation and reach of initiatives is fundamental to good program management and evaluation. Output data on activity reach, target groups and participants often hold hidden gems of potential that are frequently overlooked. In this presentation we shine a spotlight on its significance and actionable tips to elevate monitoring data.

Our objective is to make this exploration enjoyable and enlightening, especially for foundational to intermediate level evaluators. We offer practical and universally applicable strategies for making the most of output data on to enhance program insights.

KEY MESSAGES

Using existing tools and tapping into open-source data sets you can create powerful visualisations and draw deeper inferences about your program reach and participants.

I. Understanding equity and inclusion
• A better understanding of who is and isn't involved in your initiative.
• Looking for patterns using socio-demographic variables.
• Benchmarking your initiative against relevant population data.

II. Connecting outputs to outcomes
• Analysing participant characteristics and program journey to illuminate differences in outcomes.
• Uncover program and policy questions that need further exploration.

Design of the Session: Drawing tangible examples from the education and informal learning STEM sector, we bridge the gap between theory and practice. Real-world strategies are shared to encourage active participation along with useful resource links.

Authors: Kizzy Gandy (Verian (formerly Kantar Public) )

As evaluators, one of our key ethical responsibilities is to not cause psychological harm or distress through our methods. We often start workshops or interviews with a warning that the topic may be upsetting and provide contact information for mental health services to participants under the assumption this is the most ethical practice.

Trigger warnings are used with good intentions and are often recommended in evaluation ethics guidelines. However, what do we know about their impact? Is there a risk they actually trigger people more?

This talk examines the evidence on whether trigger warnings are an effective strategy for reducing the risk of trauma and re-traumatisation when discussing topics such as sexual assault, mental health, violence, drug use, and other sensitive issues. It also touches on new evidence from neuroscience about how emotions are understood differently now compared to in the past.

This session will not provide a definitive answer on when or how to use trigger warnings but aims to challenge the audience to think critically about whether trigger warnings are useful in their own work.

Authors: Candice Butler (Queensland Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Child Protection Peak ),Michelle McIntyre (Queensland Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Child Protection Peak, AU),John Prince (JKP Consulting, AU)

There is increasing recognition that evaluations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander programs must be culturally safe and appropriate, and represent the worldviews, priorities, and perspectives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have the cultural knowledge and cultural authority to design appropriate evaluations that are safe, and that tell the true story of the impacts of our ways of working.

As a peak body for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community-controlled organisations we wanted to ensure that the worldviews and perspectives of our members and communities are embedded in any evaluations of services delivered by our member organisations. This is a necessary step towards building an evidence base for our ways of working, developed by and for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. To that end we developed an evaluation framework to enable self-determination and data sovereignty in evaluation, and to build capacity among our member organisations to undertake and/or commission culturally grounded evaluations. Culturally grounded evaluations are led by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and guided by our worldviews and knowledge systems - our ways of knowing, being and doing.

This paper reports on the development and implementation process used in the project and describes the standards and principles which underpin the framework. An example of how the framework is being applied in practice is also outlined. Our principles for evaluation describe the core values which underpin culturally grounded and safe evaluation including self-determination; cultural authority; truth-telling; two-way learning; and holistic approaches. The evaluation standards and associated elements operationalise our principles and embed them in evaluative practice.

Authors: Stephanie White (Victoria Department of Education )

Evaluators can fail in many ways. The consequences of these failures can be relatively contained or wide ranging within the evaluation and can also flow on to program operations. But failure is a part of life and can be a useful catalyst for professional growth. What happens when you find yourself failing and can see the risks ahead? How do you keep going?

The session focuses on the experiences of an emerging evaluator who failed while leading a large-scale education evaluation. When some elements of the evaluation became untenable, they struggled to find the right path forward and could foresee the risks materialising if the situation wasn’t addressed. On the other side of it, they reflect on how they drew on tools in every evaluator’s toolkit to start remedying their previous inaction and missteps to get the evaluation back on track…and improve their practice along the way!

This session is relevant to any evaluator who grapples with the messiness of expectations and reality in their practice.