aes26 International Evaluation Conference: Full Schedule

This is the draft aes26 program, subject to change. To register for workshops and the conference, go to: https://www.aes26.aes.asn.au/

arrow_back View All Dates

9:00am ACST

Plenary: Bagele Chilisa "Making Space, Valuing Place: The 21st Century Evaluation Paradigms Challenge"

Thursday September 17, 2026 9:00am - 10:00am ACST

Hall 2

Making Space, Valuing Place: The 21st Century Evaluation Paradigms Challenge
Bagele Chilisa (Botswana), Professor of the Post Graduate Research and Evaluation Programme, University of Botswana

Evaluation systems are under pressure to deliver credible evidence that strengthens decisions, responds to place and context, and envisions the future. This talk invites us to improve policy effectiveness by bringing established Western evaluation approaches into dialogue with other knowledge systems, including place and space based paradigms of formerly colonised Peoples of the world. Paradigms help navigate dialogue on power distribution and how to amplify power for communities, address relationships and rights of Indigenous Peoples to their land and culture and navigate the complexity of context.

The People, Environment, Place, Space, and Time (PEPST) framework, derived from an Indigenous Science paradigm, is presented as a practical tool to enrich evaluation design and use. PEPST challenges decision makers to contextualise evaluation and check whether commissioning, governance, timelines, and success metrics narrow what counts as evidence. PEPST strengthens policy intelligence by centring Indigenous authority, while acknowledging institutional requirements.

This talk explores what changes when PEPST informs how evaluations are commissioned, governed, and used across development programs. It shows how the PEPST framework might connect traditional and new ways of evaluation, strengthen ethics and integrity in evidence making, and build durable bridges between Indigenous knowledge systems and multiple accountability requirements in evaluations.

Speakers

Bagele Chilisa

Professor of the Post Graduate Research and Evaluation Programme, University of Botswana

Bagele [Med, MA EdD (Research Design, Measurement, Statistics and Evaluation)] is a globally recognised scholar and a leading African thought leader who has written extensively on decolonizing research and evaluation methodologies. She currently drives the thinking on a Fifth research... Read More →

Thursday September 17, 2026 9:00am - 10:00am ACST
Hall 2

Plenary

Format Keynote address
Audience Level Advanced, Foundational, Intermediate

10:30am ACST

What works for whom? Developmental evaluation of a domestic violence prevention pilot for young men

Thursday September 17, 2026 10:30am - 11:00am ACST

Waterfront 2

Authors: Simon Alaba, ARTD Consultants, Rachel Aston, ARTD, Brad Astbury, University of Melbourne
Primary prevention programs targeting boys and young men at risk of using violence operate in a space where the evidence base is still developing, and knowing what works, for whom, and in what circumstances, is far from settled.

This presentation draws on 3 years of developmental evaluation of a primary prevention pilot to share three interconnected findings at the intersection of evaluation practice and implementation science.

First, we present evidence that participant and program alignment is among the most influential contextual factors shaping outcomes – a finding with direct implications for how programs like this should be targeted and resourced.

Second, we discuss how a significant program design shift, from targeting harmful gender norms directly to exploring participants' own values as an entry point, improved engagement and created the conditions for more meaningful reflection on masculinity and behaviour.

Third, we explore the adaptation dilemma: when evaluation signals resistance from participants, how should program designers respond?

Drawing on findings across multiple pilot phases, we discuss the tension between adapting to improve engagement and holding firm on program fidelity when discomfort is itself part of the change process. We close by examining what these findings mean for how evaluators interpret and communicate success in primary prevention settings, where uniform outcomes are neither expected nor realistic, and where the most meaningful impacts may be concentrated among a subset of participants.

Attendees will leave with practical insights applicable to developmental evaluation, pilot program design, and the evaluation of complex social programs more broadly. The session will close with audience discussion that invites participants to reflect on how these findings apply to their own evaluation contexts.

Speakers

Simon Alaba

Senior Consultant, ARTD

Thursday September 17, 2026 10:30am - 11:00am ACST
Waterfront 2 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Boundaries and bridges

Format Short paper
Audience Level Intermediate, Advanced
Industry Community and social services

10:30am ACST

From Paper to People: Community-Centred Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning for Vanuatu Education & Training Sector

Thursday September 17, 2026 10:30am - 11:30am ACST

Waterfront 1

Authors: Jill Juliane Wai, Vanuatu Australia Education Support Program, Fremden Yanhambath, Vanuatu Australia Education Support Program, Ellis Silas, Vanuatu Skills Partnership

How can MEL stay grounded in communities while producing findings useful to decision-makers and participants? Panel draws on the Vanuatu Australia Education Support Program and Vanuatu Skills Partnership to explore ethical MEL guided by Beauchamp and Childress’s principles. Leaders trace an MEL cycle: co‑design with communities, participatory collection and analysis, and intentional report‑back. Methods include outcome harvesting, positive deviance, and strategic communications to surface local knowledge and influence reform. Participants will examine examples and strategies for integrating community feedback into evaluation design.

Key insights:

1. Enabling conditions: institutional permission, trust, leadership.

2. Community‑defined success.

3. Decolonising reporting to inform reform.

Speakers

Jill Juliane Wai

Planning and Systems Coordinator, Vanuatu Australia Education Support Program

Fremden Yanhambath

Team Leader, Vanuatu Australia Education Support Program

Ellis Silas

Quality Systems Manager, Vanuatu Skills Partnership

Mr. Ellis Silas is a 38yr old male, currently employed under the Vanuatu Skills Partnership (an Australian Government funded program in Vanuatu) as the Quality Systems Manager. His key role is to be responsible for the ongoing consolidation of an effective implementation and monitoring... Read More →

Thursday September 17, 2026 10:30am - 11:30am ACST
Waterfront 1 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Ethics and integrity

Format Long paper
Audience Level Advanced
Industry Education and training
ID 249

10:30am ACST

Challenging power through MEL: What can Australian and international development evaluators learn from each other?

Thursday September 17, 2026 10:30am - 11:30am ACST

Rooms 1+2

Authors: Elisabeth Jackson (Centre For Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University), Thushara Dibley Centre For Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University, Shane D'Angelo Centre For Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University)

This roundtable explores MEL as a practice that can challenge existing power structures and strengthen community voices. It aims to promote sharing and learning between evaluators in domestic and international contexts and build new connections between evaluators who share similar approaches and principles.

Across diverse approaches such as culturally responsive and Indigenous evaluation, realist approaches, and place-based methods, practitioners are asking: whose worldview shapes what counts as evidence? While the language used in different sectors varies, there are strong common threads: centring marginalised voices, working collaboratively, reflecting on our own assumptions, and valuing local knowledge.

This session is designed for intermediate to advanced evaluators who are thinking critically about power, partnership, and the politics of evidence. Participants will explore what is common across approaches in domestic and international contexts and how these are creating space for different worldviews and supporting forms of evidence that are meaningful to communities.

After a short framing and brief examples, participants will move into structured small-group discussions to surface shared tensions and practical insights. Prompts will include: What is one way your current evaluation practice may reinforce existing power dynamics? Where have you seen MEL genuinely shift decision-making power? What institutional constraints limit these approaches? Groups will then report back in a facilitated plenary. Participants will be invited to identify one insight they will take back into their own practice and one structural barrier the evaluation field needs to address collectively. Key insights will be shared more broadly through a blog developed after the conference.

The roundtable aligns with the aes26 sub-themes Traditional and New Ways and Ethics and Integrity, inviting participants to reflect on their real-world experience of applying participatory and culturally grounded approaches in different contexts and exploring how these can help disrupt existing power relations.

Speakers

Elisabeth Jackson

Senior Research Fellow, La Trobe University - Centre For Human Security and Social Change

Dr Elisabeth Jackson is a Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Human Security and Social Change where she conducts research and evaluation in Southeast Asia and the Pacific. She is currently co-leading an impact evaluation of a program working with diverse marginalised groups... Read More →

Thushara Dibley

Centre For Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University

Shane D'Angelo

Centre For Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University

Thursday September 17, 2026 10:30am - 11:30am ACST
Rooms 1+2 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Traditional and new ways

Format Round table
Audience Level Intermediate, Advanced
Industry Community and social services, International development

11:30am ACST

Case studies – an overlooked technique in evaluation?

Thursday September 17, 2026 11:30am - 12:00pm ACST

Waterfront 2

Authors: Alan Woodward, Alan Woodward Consulting, Leanne Kelly, Alfred Deakin Institute, Deakin University
Evaluations of community-based and place-based programs regularly require methods capable of examining context, relationships, and emergent outcomes. While case studies are a long-standing qualitative research approach, they are often under-utilized or misunderstood within evaluation practice. Drawing on the evaluation of Australian Red Cross’ Community Resilience Teams as an applied example, the presentation demonstrates how case study design enabled exploration of contextual dynamics, stakeholder perspectives, and underlying mechanisms that would not have been visible through survey or indicator-driven approaches alone. Participants will be offered practical guidance on when case studies are suitable and considerations for conducting case study activities.

Speakers

Alan Woodward

Principal, Alan Woodward Consulting

My evaluation experience is broad, ranging from the conduct of evaluations of programs and services, the commissioning of evaluations, the engagement of communities on evaluation activities, the design of evaluation strategies and capacity building within organisations. I work in... Read More →

Leanne Kelly

Thursday September 17, 2026 11:30am - 12:00pm ACST
Waterfront 2 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Traditional and new ways

Format Short paper
Audience Level Advanced, Intermediate
Industry Community and social services, Public administration and safety, International development, Health and disability, Not for profit Philanthropy
ID 57

11:30am ACST

Walking in Two Worlds: evaluating First Nations programs in the public sector

Thursday September 17, 2026 11:30am - 12:30pm ACST

Hall 2

Authors: Anna Rasalingam (Attorney-General’s Department), Daniel Maher (Attorney-General’s Department)
This presentation will demonstrate an example of an internal government evaluation team working with First Nations communities in both traditional and new ways.
It will cover the experience of a First Nations-led evaluation team evaluating a Federal Government program, actively overlaying culturally appropriate evaluation methods as they come up against historic government policies and commissioning practices. It will highlight these systemic barriers, our efforts to navigate these barriers to ensure First Nations voices are not only included but central.
From our experiences at the last AES conference, there was a re-occurring theme from fellow evaluators on working with First Nations communities with integrity. This presentation will provide an example of working with and centring First Nations voices.
Utilising the theme of “Walking in Two Worlds”, the presentation will explore dichotomies of traditional and new ways of evaluation within the public sector. Key points will include:

Historical colonial barriers of commissioning, designing and implementing evaluations impacting First Nations peoples.
Challenges of designing culturally responsive evaluations within this colonial paradigm.
Centring First Nations voices, lived experiences, wisdom and perspectives.

The Big Room format would provide flexibility to facilitate culturally appropriate engagement and discussion, including impactful multi-media presentation and in-person discussions.
The presentation will include multiple perspectives of ACCOs engaged in the evaluation as well as the evaluation team.
The presentation will engage participants through inviting shared experiences tackling these barriers and challenges in their work.

Speakers

Anna Rasalingam

Daniel Maher

Thursday September 17, 2026 11:30am - 12:30pm ACST
Hall 2

Traditional and new ways

Format Big room
Audience Level Intermediate, Advanced
Industry Health and disability, Community and social services, Public administration and safety, Education and training
ID 306

12:00pm ACST

Evaluating ‘value for the public’: Public value as a framework for assessing impact

Thursday September 17, 2026 12:00pm - 12:30pm ACST

Waterfront 3

Authors: Danielle Thornton, The Social Research Centre, Stephen Cuttriss, The Social Research Centre
The concept of value is at the heart of evaluation, yet conventional approaches to assessing value tend to focus on effectiveness, utility or efficiency as defined by commissioning agencies and governments. Realist approaches can help push back against the insistence that programs meet narrowly conceived outcome metrics or return on investment but may still fail to capture the range of social benefits generated. The invisibility of these forms of value to policymakers and economists can lead to perverse outcomes: to the recommissioning of ‘effective’ programs of little obvious benefit to participants or the broader community, and the defunding of initiatives that may meet community needs but not policy agendas.

This disconnection, between the types of programs communities want and need, and the programs that get commissioned, feeds into cynicism and distrust of the political class and government as a whole, and left unchecked, risks weakening the social contract on which democratic governance rests.

In this context the concept of public value, that is the social value generated by governments when they act in the public interest, offers an alternative framework grounded in democratic values. Whether as a practical means of accounting for value where impact cannot be quantified, or as a form of evaluative practice which centres the lived experience of citizens, public value asks that we assess programs not only on the terms set by governments, but also the extent to which they contribute to our collective wellbeing.

Drawing on lessons from an evaluation of a program designed to promote respectful sexual relationships among young people, this paper explores the applicability of public value as a framework for accounting for a wider range of social impacts and a method for making an assessment not of ‘value for money’, but the benefits generated for and on behalf of the public.

Speakers

Danielle Thornton

Senior Research Consultant, The Social Research Centre

Stephen Cuttriss

Research Director, The Social Research Centre

Thursday September 17, 2026 12:00pm - 12:30pm ACST
Waterfront 3 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Roots and routes

Format Short paper
Audience Level Intermediate, Advanced
Industry Public administration and safety, Community and social services
ID 318

1:30pm ACST

Making Space for multiple perspectives: Collaborative design of Value for Investment evaluations

Thursday September 17, 2026 1:30pm - 2:00pm ACST

Waterfront 2

Author: Adrian Field, Dovetail Consulting
Value for Investment (VfI) is an emerging evaluation system that is gaining increasing traction internationally. The system is intentionally mixed methods, interdisciplinary and collaborative.
It is this collaborative positioning of VfI that this presentation is focused. In VfI framing, value draws from multiple perspectives of what makes a programme, intervention or policy valuable. Therefore, understanding and capturing value requires a fundamentally collaborative mindset, one that reaches beyond existing data sources and reporting, to explore from many different perspectives what it is that fundamentally matters about the intervention that is the evaluation’s focus.

This presentation draws on learning and approaches in exploring value through participatory design techniques. It will draw on approaches developed and refined across a range of VfI evaluations, in the health, mental health, justice, urban development, transport and creative sectors.
The session will describe a range of facilitative techniques adopted to draw on different stakeholders perspectives on value, and the strengths that they offer for building robust, relevant and actionable evaluations.

Using a VfI lens allied with participatory design techniques, the presentation will explore how value can be brought to life across key evaluation questions, theories of change and value propositions, evaluative rubrics, and collaborative sense-making.

Session participants will gain a clear sense of the possibilities and potential for applying participatory approaches in VfI, and the strengths these offer for evaluation practice.

Speakers

Adrian Field

Director, Dovetail Consulting

Thursday September 17, 2026 1:30pm - 2:00pm ACST
Waterfront 2 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Traditional and new ways

Format Short paper
Audience Level Intermediate, Advanced
Industry International development, Community and social services, Arts and recreation services, Health and disability

1:30pm ACST

From commissioning to learning: how funders can help shape the conditions for meaningful evaluation

Thursday September 17, 2026 1:30pm - 2:30pm ACST

Hall 2

Authors: Ximena Avalos (Ian Potter Foundation), Caroline Henwood (Ian Potter Foundation), Sarah Neill (Paul Ramsay Foundation), Jen Lorains (Childrens Ground), Adriaan Wolvaardt (Minderoo) , David Stuart (Creative Australia)

Philanthropy and other funding organisations play a powerful but often under examined role in shaping how evaluation is designed, resourced, interpreted, and used. While there is much discussion on approaches, methods, tools and capability, there is less attention paid to how funding structures, commissioning practices, and organisational cultures in funding organisations enable – or constrain – meaningful learning.

This session offers a funding perspective on different ways organisations try to “make space” for evaluation to be useful, ethical, and context-responsive. Drawing on experience from grantmaking organisations working across sectors and geographies, the session explores funders who are trying to shift beyond compliance-driven evaluation toward approaches that value learning, adaptation, and multiple ways of knowing.

The panel discussion will examine common pressure points – such as timelines, misaligned reporting expectations, and one-way data practices – and reflect on how these are often unintentionally created by funders and what funders are doing to try and address this. Panellists will discuss practical shifts funders are considering or making, including rethinking evaluation questions, sharing power over evidence, and supporting evaluation as a relational and iterative practice rather than a transactional product.

Rather than prescribing a single “right” model, the session invites dialogue across roles in the evaluation ecosystem, asking: what does good evaluation look like when funders actively value place, context, and relationships—and what changes when philanthropy sees itself as a learner, not just a commissioner?

Speakers

Jen Lorains

Director Research & Evaluation, Childrens Ground

Jen Lorains is the Director of Research & Evaluation at Children’s Ground. She works with each community to evaluate and evidence the impact of Children’s Ground’s empowerment, systems reform and integrated service platform.

Jen has undergraduate and postgraduate qualifications in applied social research and over 15 years experience designing and undertaking research and evaluation with communities and services. Her interest lies in working with communities to implement and evaluate approaches (within... Read More →

Ximena Avalos

Ian Potter Foundation

Caroline Henwood

Research, Evaluation and Learning Manager, Ian Potter Foundation

Adriaan Wolvaardt

Minderoo

Sarah Neill

MERL Manager, Paul Ramsay Foundation

David Stuart

Director Evaluation And Impact Measurement, Creative Australia

Thursday September 17, 2026 1:30pm - 2:30pm ACST
Hall 2

Boundaries and bridges

Format Round table
Audience Level Intermediate, Advanced
Industry Not for profit Philanthropy

1:30pm ACST

Process tracing in practice: testing causal claims with mixed evidence

Thursday September 17, 2026 1:30pm - 2:30pm ACST

Rooms 3+4

Author: Kizzy Gandy, Jacaranda Partners

Learning objective: Participants will be able to construct core and alternative hypotheses from a theory of change, design evidence tests to distinguish between them and make defensible causal claims.

Contribution analysis is now widely used in Australian evaluation practice, but many evaluators stop short of the next step: systematically testing whether something other than the program explains the observed outcomes. Process tracing does exactly this. It raises the rigour of causal claims not by collecting more data, but by being more deliberate about what the data needs to show — and what it would need to show if the alternative explanation were true instead.

This workshop uses a real evaluation of the Embrace Multicultural Mental Health Project as a case study. The Embrace evaluation combined contribution analysis and process tracing with a mixed-method design including a quasi-experimental quantitative survey and qualitative interviews. It produced a result that many evaluations encounter but few handle well: the quantitative analysis found the program had no detectable effect on key outcomes, yet qualitative evidence suggested it was working. Process tracing provided the analytical framework to distinguish between three plausible explanations — the program failed, the effects take time to materialise, or competing programs are producing the same outcomes.

Participants work through three structured exercises: translating a theory of change into core and alternative hypotheses; designing evidence tests that can distinguish between them; and applying evaluator judgement to weight mixed evidence and reach a defensible conclusion. Each exercise uses the Embrace case, with reflection prompts connecting the method to participants' own evaluations.

The workshop is aimed at intermediate to advanced evaluators working on complex programs.

Speakers

Kizzy Gandy

Jacaranda Partners

Thursday September 17, 2026 1:30pm - 2:30pm ACST
Rooms 3+4 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Roots and routes

Format Skill building
Audience Level Intermediate, Advanced
Industry Community and social services, Education and training, International development, Health and disability, Economic development tourism and infrastructure
ID 79

2:30pm ACST

Strengthening engagement with evaluation through the Signs of Success Framework

Thursday September 17, 2026 2:30pm - 3:00pm ACST

Waterfront 1

Authors: Giulia Capuzzo NSW DCCEEW, Liam Downing, Transport NSW, Tess Gordon, PLACE
Evaluators increasingly face the challenge of conducting evaluation in complex systems where diverse voices, shifting power dynamics and competing priorities shape both the process and products of evaluative work. This presentation shares practical insights from a Signs of Success (SoS) framework as applied in the NSW Department of Education. The framework is an adaptive impact measurement and reporting approach that foregrounds stakeholder engagement, transparency and shared ownership.

The session explores the cogeneration of concise sets of sequential outcome measures from full program theories with evaluators and program owners. We will demonstrate how this supported participatory evaluation practice by recognising stakeholder values and redistributing power in evidence generation. To support equity in program outcomes, the Signs of Success also surfaced enabling conditions, shifting conversations from sole attribution to the evaluand toward systemic responsibility.

We also found that strong relationships and ongoing skill‑building formed the foundations of the collaboration between evaluators and program owners. Building a strong evaluative culture was essential for conversations around prioritisation of resources as the program matured along its path of impact.

Our objective in this session is to demonstrate how evaluators can embed integrity, inclusion and accountability within system-level evaluation processes while supporting program improvement and public value. By fostering transparent decision making and adaptive processes, we will show how this approach created space for open dialogue about progress, uncertainty and failure where program owners felt confident using evidence to guide decisions, even at the highest levels of governance and accountability.

This session will appeal to intermediate and advanced evaluators who regularly work with leaders and decision makers. It aligns with the Roots and Routes theme by showcasing how evaluation can strengthen evaluative culture, improve communication with decisionmakers and ensure evaluation remains credible amid increasing complexity.

Speakers

Giulia Capuzzo

Senior Project Officer Evaluation, NSW DCCEEW

Thursday September 17, 2026 2:30pm - 3:00pm ACST
Waterfront 1 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Roots and routes

Format Short paper
Audience Level Intermediate, Advanced
Industry Education and training
ID 122

3:30pm ACST

Uncertain impacts, real decisions: measuring and communicating causal uncertainty in quantitative evaluations

Thursday September 17, 2026 3:30pm - 4:00pm ACST

Waterfront 1

Author: Dimitria Gavalyugova, NSW Department of Education
Evaluators face a core dilemma: decision-makers typically expect a definitive measure of program impact, yet the designs capable of delivering one are rarely feasible for large-scale government programs. Quasi-experimental methods and administrative data are often the only tools available to quantify long-term outcomes, but the assumptions needed to establish causal impact cannot always be met – or tested – with available data. This mismatch has driven evaluations into a sub-optimal equilibrium where uncertainty is understated, even though addressing it could lead to better-informed decisions. This presentation explores how to reconcile the need for reporting actionable findings with what the evidence can support.

The session draws on systematic analysis of the 22 combined outcome and economic evaluations published in the NSW Treasury library. By mapping the confidence of causal language attributing outcomes to programs across report sections, the analysis identifies a persistent "within-document gap." In many cases, findings are treated as causal in executive summaries and recommendations, even when underlying methodologies note that they should be interpreted with caution. Scoring each estimation strategy against a risk-of-bias framework reveals observable misalignment between evaluations’ methodological constraints and the confidence of causal claims.

When causality is uncertain, the program effect that gets monetised in economic evaluations contains the true impact plus some degree of bias. Existing guidance addresses uncertainty around monetary parameters and discount rates, but not around estimated program impacts. In the absence of such guidance, the evidence shows that potentially biased estimates routinely enter cost-benefit analyses as true effects. Using an anonymised real-world example, the presentation demonstrates how even small levels of bias can alter benefit-cost ratios and funding recommendations.

The session invites participants to collectively explore practical solutions across four areas: leveraging available methods and data to strengthen evidence, turning limitations into guidance for future evaluation design, communicating uncertainty effectively, and modelling uncertain impacts within economic analyses.

Speakers

Dimitria Gavalyugova

Senior Research and Evaluation Officer, NSW Department of Education

Thursday September 17, 2026 3:30pm - 4:00pm ACST
Waterfront 1 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Traditional and new ways

Format Short paper
Audience Level Intermediate, Advanced
Industry Education and training, Health and disability, Economic development tourism and infrastructure, Community and social services, Public administration and safety
ID 323

4:00pm ACST

Quality evaluation that makes a difference: continuing the conversation

Thursday September 17, 2026 4:00pm - 5:00pm ACST

Rooms 3+4

Author: Carina Calzoni, AES Rob Sale, nous

The AES has been exploring its vision of “quality evaluation that makes a difference” through a strategic project - engaging members and examining evaluation theory and practice. This work has surfaced a central challenge: while the phrase is compelling, its meaning is complex, contested, and shaped by context.

This roundtable begins from that complexity—but does not seek to resolve it. Instead, it focuses on what comes next.
We will briefly share insights from the journey so far, including the multiple dimensions of “evaluation”, “quality”, and “making a difference”. These span tensions between evaluation as process, product, and profession; competing perspectives on quality (e.g. standards, utility, impact, values); and diverse understandings of use and influence across contexts and stakeholders.

The primary purpose of the session is to co-design how this conversation continues across the AES community. Participants will engage in facilitated small-group discussions to explore key questions: What does quality evaluation mean in your context? Who defines it? What does “making a difference” look like—and for whom? How should these conversations evolve as contexts, practice, and membership change?

Participants will then work together to identify practical ways to sustain and deepen engagement, such as ongoing communities of practice, publications, podcasts, or future conference formats. The session will capture and share these ideas to inform AES’s ongoing work.

Designed for intermediate to advanced evaluators, this roundtable creates space for collective reflection and future-oriented dialogue. By centring plurality and participation, it supports the AES vision by keeping the conversation alive—recognising that what constitutes “quality evaluation that makes a difference” must continue to evolve with the field.

Speakers

Rob Sale

Nous

Carina Calzoni

AES

Thursday September 17, 2026 4:00pm - 5:00pm ACST
Rooms 3+4 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Boundaries and bridges

Format Round table
Audience Level Intermediate, Advanced
Industry Arts and recreation services, Economic development tourism and infrastructure, Community and social services, Education and training, Environment and climate change, Health and disability, Information media and telecommunications, International development, Natur
ID 266

4:00pm ACST

Meeting new challenges with better theories of change

Thursday September 17, 2026 4:00pm - 5:00pm ACST

Hall 2

Authors: Patricia Rogers, Footprint Evaluation Initiative, Emil Laurberg Morgensen, University of Southern Denmark
Theories of change are now commonly used to design initiatives, including projects, programs and policies, and to shape monitoring and evaluation. But 40 years after first being showcased at an AES conference, these are often developed and used in ways that don’t fit what is needed, especially to support adaptation across different settings and in changing contexts. This session will present common mistakes, what they are, why they matter, and examples of better strategies. Participants will engage with exercises to identify issues, try out strategies and explore possible applications in their own work and in shaping organisational requirements and procedures.

Speakers

Patricia Rogers

Co-founder, Footprint Evaluation Initiative

Founder of BetterEvaluation and former Professor of Public Sector Evaluation at RMIT University. Now working as consultant and advisor. My work has focused on supporting appropriate choice and use of evaluation methods and approaches to suit purposes and context. I am currently working... Read More →