aes24 International Evaluation Conference

Indy Johar, RIBA register architect, serial social entrepreneur, and Good Growth Advisor to the Mayor of London, UK

Keynote address: Navigating transitions through risk and uncertainties

Abstract to follow.

Authors: Sharon Marra-Brown (ARTD Consultants), Moya Johansson (ARTD Consultants, AU)

Think it's important to enable children and young people to have a voice in evaluations, but find it challenging? This paper presents tried and tested strategies for ensuring ethical engagement with children and young people and encouraging meaningful participation.

Involving children and young people in evaluation is critical to ensure that we arrive at evaluations that accurately reflect their experiences and capture the outcomes they consider most important. Children and young people have the right to have a say about their experiences, and evaluations that avoid their involvement risk perpetuating ongoing inequities.

However, involving children and young people in evaluations can prompt ethical concerns in relation to their comprehension of research, capacity to provide consent, potential coercion by parents, and the potential conflicting values and interests between parents and children. Depending on the subject, it can also create concerns about safety and readiness.

Based on our experience successfully achieving ethics approval for multiple evaluations of services for children and young people across Australia, which include interviews with children and young people who have accessed these services, we will talk through considerations for ensuring the voice of children and young people in evaluation while safeguarding them from unnecessary risks.

We will then take you through how we've overcome challenges engaging children and young people in evaluations with youth-centred innovative solutions, including carefully considering the language we use and how we reach out. We will demonstrate the developmental benefits of meaningful participation of children and young people once ethical considerations have been carefully considered and navigated.

Finally, we will take you through our tips for ensuring meaningful and safe engagement with children and young people. We will point you in the direction of Guidelines and practice guides for involving young people in research and evaluation in a safe and meaningful way.

The presenters are evaluators with extensive experience in designing, delivering and reporting on evaluations that include data collection with children and young people. This includes recently achieving ethics approval and commencing interviews with children as young as seven, accessing a suicide aftercare service.

While much attention is devoted to ensuring safe and inclusive data collection with various demographics, specific considerations for engaging children and young people remain relatively uncommon. Recognising the unique needs of this population, coupled with the understandably cautious stance of ethics committees, underscores the necessity for a thoughtful and deliberate approach to evaluations involving children and young people.

Given the additional complexities and ethical considerations involved, the default tendency can be to exclude children and young people from evaluation processes. However, it is important that children and young people are able to have a say in the programs, policies and services that they use. Participation in evaluations can be a positive experience, if risks are managed and the process is designed to be empowering.

This session will provide valuable insights, actionable strategies, and an opportunity for participants to reflect on their own practices, fostering a culture of inclusivity and responsiveness in evaluation.

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

Evaluation rubrics are increasingly used to help make evaluative reasoning explicit. Rubrics can also be used as wayfinding tools to help stakeholders understand and participate meaningfully in evaluation. Developing rubrics is conceptually challenging work and the search is on for additional navigation tools and models that might help ease the cognitive load.

As a preliminary step toward rubric development it is often helpful to co-create a theory of change, proposing a chain of causality from actions to impacts, documenting a shared understanding of a program, and providing a point of reference for scoping a logical, coherent set of criteria.

However, it's easy to become disoriented when getting from a theory of change to a set of criteria, because the former deals with impact and the latter with value. Implicitly, a theory of change may focus on activities and impacts that people value, but this cannot be taken for granted - and we argue that value should be made more explicit in program theories.

Specifying a program's value proposition can improve wayfinding between a theory of change and a set of criteria, addressing the aspects of performance and value that matter to stakeholders. Defining a value proposition prompts us to think differently about a program. For example, in addition to what's already in the theory of change, we need to consider to whom the program is valuable, in what ways it is valuable, and how the value is created.

In this presentation, we will share what we've learnt about developing and using value propositions. We'll share a simple framework for developing a value proposition and, using roving microphones, engage participants in co-developing a value proposition in real time. We'll conclude the session by sharing some examples of value propositions from recent evaluations.

Authors: Kristy Hornby (Grosvenor), Eleanor Williams (Australian Centre for Evaluation), Mandy Chaman (Outcomes, Practice and Evidence Network)

Navigating ethics is an essential part of any evaluation journey. As evaluators we often encounter complex situations that require thoughtful consideration of ethical principles and practice, far beyond the formal ethics process itself.

This session will explore real-world scenarios and provide attendees with actionable strategies to enhance ethical decision-making in their evaluation practice. The panel will speak to questions of managing commissioners' expectations, how to speak frankly to program areas where under-performance is found, issues of confidentiality, ensuring culturally sensitive practice, and ensuring power imbalances are acknowledged and addressed.

The panel presentation will take attendees through the journey of ethical practice and will consider:
- The overall significance of ethical thinking in evaluation
- Common ethical challenges faced by evaluators
- Practical tools and frameworks that empower evaluators to uphold their ethical standards and deliver meaningful results that can withstand scrutiny
- From an internal evaluator perspective, the balancing act of managing these tensions successfully
- Case studies that can illustrate the application of practical ethics in evaluation
- Takeaways and recommendations.

Eleanor Williams, Managing Director of the Australian Centre for Evaluation; Mandy Charman, Project Manager for the Outcome, Performance and Evidence Network in the Centre for Excellence in Child and Family Welfare; and Kristy Hornby, Victorian Program Evaluation Practice Lead at Grosvenor will be the panellists. Our expert panellists will talk to their deidentified war stories in their current and previous roles to set out exactly what kind of challenges evaluators can face in the conduct of their work, and learn from the panellists' hands-on experience on what to do about them. Attendees will be encouraged to participate in a dynamic dialogue with the panellists and with each other, to share their own experiences and strategies for addressing ethical concerns, building on the content shared through the session.

More details of the closing plenary, including panelists, to be confirmed.

John Gargani, President of Gargani + Company, former President of the American Evaluation Association, USA

As the AES 2024 conference comes to a close, we gather one last time to consider the journey ahead. We seek a destination none have seen—a profession that in ten years’ time fully supports societal and planetary health—along a path we have never traveled. The urgency of existential threats such as AI, global heating, and pandemics call into question the traditional ways our profession has navigated the future. And new players such as impact investors, social entrepreneurs, effective altruists, and socially responsible corporations ensure that the journey will be crowded and some routes cut off.

With this in mind, we pose two questions to our panelists.

1. What milestones and songlines should guide us on our way to an imagined future profession? How will we know if we have lost our way?
2.     How should we interact with other professions on a similar journey? Like commuters on a train who dare not speak, shipwrecked strangers who must quickly band together, or something else altogether?

Followed by:
Conference close by the AES President, and handover to aes25 Ngambri/Canberra