aes26 International Evaluation Conference: Full Schedule

Presenter and chair information page, resources for conference presenters, authors and session chairs.

arrow_back View All Dates

9:00am ACST

Plenary: Emmanuel Jimenez "Putting Money Where the Evidence Is: a perspective from international development"

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

Putting Money Where the Evidence Is: a perspective from international development
Emmanuel Jimenez, Director General, Independent Evaluation Department of the Asian Development Bank

As resources become increasingly constrained, organizations face growing pressure to make better decisions with limited funding. Evidence of what works is needed even more when resources are tight. In this environment, evaluation matters not simply because it generates knowledge, but because it helps organizations learn, adapt and improve as they optimize the allocations of their resources.

As richer countries reprioritize their spending due to economic pressures and geopolitical shifts, the downward trend in donors’ aid budgets may weaken the impetus for strengthening evaluation ecosystems – just when credible evidence is most needed to guide difficult choices.

Drawing on experiences from the Asian Development Bank, this plenary will reflect on the institutional opportunities and challenges for evaluation in a resource-constrained world. The questions are practical and pressing: how do we strike an appropriate balance between accountability and learning in generating credible evidence when incentives are not always well-aligned, when there are debates on the credibility of methods, and when there is uneven capacity to undertake evaluation? How do we ensure that evaluation findings, once generated, are communicated well and used effectively by decision-makers?

The lessons from answering these questions are relevant to governments, organizations and evaluators as the need for evidence is growing and the resources to produce and use it are under pressure.

Chair

Christabelle Darcy

Director, Evidence and Evaluation, NT Department of Treasury and Finance

I'm co-convenor of aes26, along with Alison Reedy. In my day job, I lead the Program Evaluation Unit within the Department of Treasury and Finance in the Northern Territory Government. We aim to help government achieve the best outcomes within the allocated budget and build an evidence-base... Read More →

Speakers

Emmanuel_Jimenez

Director General, Independent Evaluation Department of the Asian Development Bank

Being the Director General of the Independent Evaluation Department of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), I report to ADB’s Board of Directors, with responsibilities including assessing ADB’s development effectiveness, as well as providing lessons to inform ADB operations. Prior... 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

aes26 Fellows Forum Philanthropy and Evaluation – What Gives?

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

Waterfront 3

Author: Rick Cummings, Program Evaluation Services, Alan Woodward, Alan Woodward Consulting, Jen Lorains, Childrens Ground, Chelsea Arten, Minderoo, Catherine Wade, Parenting Research Centre

It is estimated that over $2.4 billion is given annually in philanthropic and charitable causes in Australian. This is a very significant amount of funding and yet there is little to no research on how these funds and programs are evaluated. The AES Fellows are conducting an interactive session to look both at the role of evaluation in philanthropy and the role of philanthropy in evaluation.
The aim is to identify issues in this field, to generate discussion between attendees and philanthropic organisations, and to build some bridges between evaluators and philanthropists for future research and evaluation activities. We have representatives from three of the key stakeholder groups in this area – philanthropic organisations, agencies relying on philanthropic funding, and evaluators who have worked in this area - to give short presentations on their experiences working in this area and issues which they face.
These presenters will form a panel, with a Fellow as moderator. Based on these talks, audience groups will be formed and facilitated by a panel member or a Fellow to discuss issues and experiences. From these discussions, the panel will then respond to these audience generated issues/questions.

Chair

Delyth (Del) Lloyd

Speakers

Nicola Johnstone

Principal, Impact and Insights, Minderoo Foundation

Jess Dart

CEO, Clear Horizon

Dr Jess Dart is the founder and CEO of Clear Horizon, an Australian-based specialist evaluation company. Having received the 2018 Outstanding Contribution to Evaluation Award from the Australian Evaluation Society (AES), Jess is a recognised leader with over 25 years of experience... Read More →

Rick Cummings

Emeritus Professor, Murdoch University

Rick Cummings is an Emeritus Professor in Public Policy at Murdoch University. He has 40 years of experience conducting evaluation studies in education, training, health, and crime prevention primarily for the state and commonwealth government agencies and the World Bank. He currently... Read More →

Catherine Wade

Principal Research Specialist, Parenting Research Centre

Dr Catherine Wade is Principal Research Specialist at the Parenting Research Centre and a Research Affiliate with the Faculty of Health Sciences at the University of Sydney. Catherine is leading a programme of research at the Parenting Research Centre investigating aspects of the... Read More →

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... Read More →

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 →

Caroline Henwood

Research, Evaluation and Learning Manager, The Ian Potter Foundation

I am always intrigued by how we come to definitions, how words resonate differently for individuals and what it all means. On a more practical note! I am interested in people's perceptions on proportionality, how we think about it, and how we support it when it is often not what appears... Read More →

Thursday September 17, 2026 10:30am - 11:30am ACST
Waterfront 3 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Special

Format Panel
Audience Level Intermediate, Foundational
Industry Not for profit Philanthropy
ID 1010

10:30am ACST

"Yalalamirri mala-djarr’yun – “and then we check” Understanding and sensemaking the Yolŋu way"

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

Hall 2

Authors: Melanie Williams (ARDS Aboriginal Corporation), Sylvia Ŋulpinditj (ARDS Aboriginal Corporation), Wuṯpurrŋu Wununŋmurra (ARDS Aboriginal Corporation)

Yolŋu people are the Indigenous people from Northeast Arnhem Land. Yolŋu have their own strong ways of watching carefully, seeing small signs, and knowing when something in wäŋa (land/country, including people) is changing. From these signs, Yolŋu understand what is happening and what they should do – this is the heart of evaluation. We will take the audience on a journey to see the world, and the work of trying to make sense of it, through Yolŋu eyes.

From the start, ARDS has followed the guidance of Yolŋu ŋaḻapaḻ (elders). They have given us the values and framework we work with. This ARDS-ku buyu’ (methodology) is rooted in Yolŋu rom (law) and has been followed for a long time. At ARDS this is our foundation for all our work, including how we think about evaluation.

There are many wataŋu mala (owners and decision-makers) we must think about. Everyone’s räl (hard work and effort) is needed to make the project strong. When we show respect, integrity and trust, we can come to a shared agreement together. This is the Yolŋu way.

Yolŋu metaphors help us appreciate how Yolŋu people have been understanding and valuing growth for many generations. These stories, together with ARDS-ku buyu', are the foundation of our shared evaluation work. We will use the metaphor of the ḻipaḻipa (canoe) to explain our evaluation framework. It has been used in many of our projects.

In this presentation, we will share one example from a child protection project in remote Northeast Arnhem Land. It shows how our approach works in practice.

We want to show you the strength, beauty and depth of Yolŋu ways of understanding, making sense of change, and taking steps forward—and how we do this side-by-side with our non-Yolŋu family and partners.

Chair

Rod Reeve

MD, Ninti One Limited

First Nations advancement

Speakers

Joy Bulkanhawuy Dhamarranḏji

Lead Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning - Senior Cross Cultural Facilitator, ARDS

Maminydjama Maymuru

ARDS Aboriginal Corporation

Maminydjama Maymuru is a proud Manggalili woman, she is a young emerging Yolŋu leader for her clan group and people of Yirrkala. She has spent many of her years advocating for First Nations rights and for youth justice while embracing a career in acting and modelling. Maminydjama... Read More →

Wuṯpurruŋu Wunuŋmurra

Wuṯpurruŋu Wunuŋmurra is a Dhaḻwaŋu woman from Gapuwiyak in Northeast Arnhem Land, with family connections to Gurrumuru and Baḻma homeland. A respected community leader, she has lived and worked in Gapuwiyak all her life. At ARDS, Wuṯpurruŋu leads child and family work... Read More →

Thursday September 17, 2026 10:30am - 11:30am ACST
Hall 2

Traditional and new ways

Format Big room
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Not for profit Philanthropy, Community and social services
ID 170

11:00am ACST

Developmental Evaluation and Value for Investment: A New Pathway for Complex Systems Change

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

Waterfront 2

Authors: Zoe Enticott, Clear Horizon, Kate McKegg, The Knowledge Institute Ltd
Governments are increasingly investing in complex systems change initiatives that challenge conventional approaches to evaluation and value for money. In Australia, the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing is undertaking significant aged care reform, including a $77 million investment in a networked stewardship approach. Evaluating such dynamic policy initiatives requires approaches that can support both real-time learning and adaptive decision-making, while also providing credible assessments of value.

We will present how we combined developmental evaluation and complexity-aware VFI in order to bridge the gap between operational learning and adaptation, and future policy decision-making. We will share how our approach accommodated uncertainty, integrated diverse forms of evidence and stakeholder views, and enhanced the capacity for learning and adaptation in complex and rapidly changing systems-change initiatives.

This supports the conference sub-themes of ‘Boundaries and bridges’ and ‘Roots and routes’ by demonstrating the interplay between economics, evaluation, innovation and policy, and how combining approaches across disciplines can help us navigate new pathways for relevance and impact. We will pay particular attention to how we used participatory and user-centred methods to support reflection and learning, including in our rubric-based VFI approach which was based on democratic deliberation. Our VFI evaluation used a novel approach to considering the diverse types of value created through complex and systems-change initiatives, including the potential value to create future systems change, which is often not considered.

We will also share the challenges and practical strategies we used to manage the resource and time demands of iterative cycles and deliberative processes, as well as the need for evaluator competencies in systems thinking, facilitation, and relational awareness. The session will focus on practical lessons and emerging insights, with time for participants to reflect on their own contexts and share experiences of evaluating complex systems change.

Chair

Phillip Belling

Senior Evaluator, Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation, NSW Department of Education

Talk to me about evaluation that transforms lives and enables social change. I’m interested in realist, developmental, embedded and responsive evaluation; evaluation in complex education systems; evaluation capacity building; and how we make credible evaluative judgements about... Read More →

Speakers

Zoe Enticott

Principal Consultant, Clear Horizon

An evaluator and facilitator working for social impact, I'm passionate about developmental, collaborative and trauma informed approaches that elevate the voices of people and communities. Over the past 10-years I have worked across the government, not-for-profit and community sectors... Read More →

Kate McKegg

Director, The Knowledge Institute

Kate has specialist skills in supporting evaluative thinking and practice in complex settings where people are innovating to create systems change. She has been applying these skills for over 25 years in government, non-government, philanthropic and community contexts, including many... Read More →

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

Roots and routes

Format Short paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Health and disability, Public administration and safety
ID 227

11:30am ACST

Creating Starlight’s First Social Impact Report: What We Learnt

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

Waterfront 3

Author: Claire Treadgold, Starlight Children's Foundation, Erika Fortunati, Starlight Children's Foundation
Transparency and accountability are paramount for not-for-profit organisations, with public social impact reporting increasingly becoming an expected practice. While guidance on creating Social Impact Reports is growing in the field, there is still a paucity of clear and accessible resources for not-for-profit organisations looking to create Social Impact Reports, especially those producing one for the first time.

This short paper presentation will share our experience at Starlight Children’s Foundation, an Australian not-for-profit dedicated to brightening the lives of seriously ill children, young people, and their families, in developing and publishing our first Social Impact Report this year. The presentation will cover our experience creating the report, including the decisions and challenges we encountered during the process.

We will discuss how we approached selecting which data to include and leave out, how we navigated balancing different priorities, e.g. the tension between including “pure” research and evaluation data while also presenting data in a marketable and engaging way for external audiences, and how to create a cohesive story of impact that fits within the constraints of one short report.

The objective of this presentation is to share our experience with other evaluators and knowledge sharers to provide realistic, practical insights for other organisations beginning their own Social Impact Report journey. This presentation is suited to foundational and intermediate audiences who are curious about impact reporting or are preparing to undertake it for the first time.

Chair

Delyth (Del) Lloyd

Speakers

Claire Treadgold

National Manager, Research & Evaluation, Starlight Children's Foundation

Dr Claire Treadgold is the National Manager of Research and Evaluation for Starlight Children’s Foundation and an Adjunct Associate Professor with the Discipline of Paediatrics,UNSW Medicine & Health, UNSW Sydney She has over twenty years' experience in for-purpose organisations... Read More →

Thursday September 17, 2026 11:30am - 12:00pm ACST
Waterfront 3 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Roots and routes

Format Short paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Not for profit Philanthropy, Community and social services
ID 268

11:30am ACST

Ubuntu in Evaluation Practice: Bridging Traditional African Ways of Knowing with Contemporary Program Evaluation

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

Waterfront 1

Author: Gerald Onsando, Ubuntu Impact Consulting

This short paper presents an Ubuntu-informed evaluation of the Black Rhinos Basketball Program, a grassroots community crime prevention initiative supporting young African Australians in metropolitan Melbourne. The topic centres on how traditional African ways of knowing, being, and valuing – specifically the African philosophy of Ubuntu – can be meaningfully integrated into contemporary evaluation practice to enhance cultural responsiveness, ethical engagement, and practical relevance in Australia.

The objective of the presentation is to demonstrate how Ubuntu philosophy, often articulated by the maxim “I am because we are”, was operationalised as both a conceptual and methodological foundation for evaluation, and why this culturally responsive approach matters in contexts where communities experience marginalisation and overrepresentation in justice systems. The importance of the topic lies in addressing persistent gaps in evaluation practice where dominant Western frameworks may inadequately capture relational, collective, and community-defined notions of value and impact.

The core argument is that Ubuntu offers a robust bridge between traditional and emerging evaluation approaches. Three key messages will be shared: first, how Ubuntu reframes evaluation purpose from individual outcomes to relational and collective wellbeing; second, how an Ubuntu transformative methodology supports culturally responsive design, data collection, and interpretation; and third, how the Ubuntu framework of support enables evaluators to assess social impact beyond conventional value-for-money metrics, including family connectedness, community engagement, and participation in society.

The presentation will be structured as a short paper, combining conceptual explanation with applied examples from the evaluation’s process and outcomes findings. To promote interactivity and engagement, the audience will be invited to reflect on their own evaluation contexts through guided prompts, considering when and how traditional philosophies like Ubuntu could reshape their evaluation designs and judgments of value.

Chair

Annabel Prescott

Speakers

Gerald Onsando

Principal Consultant, Ubuntu Impact Consulting

Dr Gerald Onsando is a Queensland-based evaluation specialist and Principal Consultant at Ubuntu Impact Consulting, a practice grounded in the African relational philosophy of Ubuntu; “I am because we are”. Dr Onsando brings extensive experience across government, community, and... Read More →

Thursday September 17, 2026 11:30am - 12:00pm ACST
Waterfront 1 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Traditional and new ways

Format Short paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Public administration and safety, Not for profit Philanthropy
ID 252

11:30am ACST

When the story turns against the evidence: Navigating media scrutiny as evaluators

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

Rooms 3+4

Authors: Stephanie Carter (Healthconsult), Megan Anderson (Healthconsult), Felicity Miles (Healthconsult)

Evaluation findings do not exist in a vacuum. Evaluators increasingly operate in environments where public and media narratives form alongside, and sometimes ahead of, emerging evidence. In some cases, this scrutiny is heightened even when programs are demonstrating early signs of effectiveness.
This roundtable explores ethical, practical, and relational challenges evaluators face when evaluation findings are still emerging yet are already subject to public scrutiny, interpretation or debate.
This session will draw on real-world examples where early media attention was significant but subsided following the public release of independent evaluation findings, highlighting the role of timing, transparency and credibility in shaping public discourse.
Evaluators operate within complex social, cultural and political “places,” where narratives influence how evidence is understood and trusted. These dynamics are particularly relevant in place-based contexts, where community expectations and local perspectives shape interpretation and use of findings.
Participants will consider questions such as:
• What is the evaluator’s role when media scrutiny oversimplifies findings?
• How do we uphold principles of integrity and independence when public narratives are misaligned with evidence that is still being assessed?
• What strategies help evaluators support clients and communities when media attention becomes a risk?
• How can we strengthen transparent communication without breaching confidentiality or compromising methodological rigour?
The session will be highly interactive, and use structured facilitated reflection to encourage participants to share experiences, unpack dilemmas, and co-develop strategies.
This roundtable will generate practical principles and strategies through:
• Provocation scenarios based on real evaluation–media tensions to spark discussion.
• Small‑group discussion rounds where participants unpack dilemmas, share experiences, and co‑develop strategies.
• Collective synthesis where groups contribute key principles, strategies, and questions to a shared summary.

Chair

Jemima Walsh

Evaluator on sabbatical. I’m attending the conference to reflect on past practice and keep up with emerging trends. Tell me what you’re currently finding energising or challenging in the sector or just chat to me about your favourite books and holidays!

Speakers

Stephanie Carter

Director, HealthConsult

Megan Anderson

Associate Director, HealthConsult

Felicity Miles

Senior consultant, Healthconsult

Thursday September 17, 2026 11:30am - 12:30pm ACST
Rooms 3+4 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Ethics and integrity

Format Round table
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Not for profit Philanthropy, Health and disability, Public administration and safety, Community and social services
ID 244

11:30am ACST

Evaluating with the Vanua: A Practical Framework for Relational, Place Based Evaluation in Indigenous Contexts

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

Rooms 1+2

Author: Elisabeta Torava
Evaluation practice in Indigenous communities across the Pacific and Australia often rely on Western tools that overlook relational obligations, kinship structures, and place based ethics. This session introduces a practical, culturally grounded evaluation approach based on vanua ontology, a relational worldview that positions land, people, and relationships as inseparable. Drawing from my doctoral research with iTaukei communities in Fiji, the session demonstrates how evaluators can design and implement evaluations that honour Indigenous values, strengthen relational accountability, and generate findings that communities recognise as meaningful.
The objective is to demonstrate how evaluators can redesign Western tools and methods to honour Indigenous relational ethics, strengthen cultural integrity, and generate findings that communities recognise and relate with. This work is important because many evaluation tools used across the Pacific and Australia continue to erase relational systems, producing invisibility, misinterpretation, and unintended harm.
The core argument is that evaluation practice must shift from individualistic, decontextualised measures to relational, place‑based approaches grounded in Indigenous worldviews. Three key messages will be shared:
- Western evaluation tools often embed assumptions that conflict with Indigenous relational logics.
- Vanua‑aligned principles offer a culturally coherent foundation for ethical, rigorous evaluation.
- Practical redesign is possible when evaluators centre relationships, place, and collective wellbeing.
Designed as a skill‑building session, the presentation uses hands‑on activities rather than lecture. Participants will analyse a standard Western evaluation tool, identify where invisibility occurs, and collaboratively redesign selected questions using vanua‑based principles. A case vignette and mapping template will guide this process.
Interactivity is promoted through small‑group work, collective mapping, movement‑based clustering, and facilitated dialogue. Participants will leave with a practical mini‑framework and concrete tools they can apply immediately in their own evaluation practice.

Chair

Anne Stephens

Director, Ethos of Engagement

Anne is the Director and Co-Founder of Ethos of Engagement Consulting a global and women-led research and evaluation firm. We work in Africa, the Asia-Pacific, Central America, UK and USA. We use Inclusive Systemic Thinking to guide our methodology and approaches and diversity is... Read More →

Speakers

Elisabeta Torava

PhD Researcher, Monash University

Known among my colleagues as the All Rounder, I move across issues in Fiji with a depth shaped by lived experience, cultural grounding, and decades of navigating systems as an iTaukei woman. Born and raised in my village, I carry the wisdom of my ancestors through my grandmother’s... Read More →

Thursday September 17, 2026 11:30am - 12:30pm ACST
Rooms 1+2 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Traditional and new ways

Format Skill building
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Education and training, Economic development tourism and infrastructure, Environment and climate change, Natural resources and energy, Community and social services

12:00pm ACST

Embedding Ethical Practice in an Evaluation Across Diverse Communities: Lessons from Bangladesh

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

Waterfront 1

Authors: Maud Mukova-Moses, Fred Hollows Foundation, A K M Badrul, Huq Fred Hollows Foundation, Jagath Happuhannadige, Fred Hollows Foundation
Reflecting on a predominantly qualitative evaluation, this paper explores how internally led evaluation can strengthen ethical practice, integrity, and inclusion in complex program settings. Drawing on The Fred Hollows Foundation’s mid-term evaluation of a Gender Equity, Disability and Social Inclusion (GEDSI) eye health project in Bangladesh, the paper examines how the evaluation navigated ethical practice in a context where power imbalances and language differences influenced whose voices were heard.

The evaluation engaged diverse groups, including ethnic minority communities and persons with disabilities. This raised practical ethical questions about language access, interpretation, voice and power. In navigating these complexities, the evaluation sought to incorporate equity, cultural sensitivity, and power-awareness to create space for diverse voices, reveal hidden barriers, and enable more ethical decision-making. Through use of document review, interviews, focus groups and a partner validation workshop, the evaluation intentionally foregrounded lived experience while maintaining analytical independence.

The paper demonstrates that ethical evaluation is not only about safeguarding participants, but also about how evaluators navigate competing priorities, institutional constraints, and contextual power dynamics. By conducting the evaluation internally, the team was able to deepen its understanding of gender, disability, and ethnic inclusion dynamics; build trust with community stakeholders; and generate insights that may have remained invisible.

The paper also explores tensions encountered during validation and interpretation: What does ethical evaluation look like when stakeholder priorities differ? How can evaluators recognise and address power dynamics within interviews, focus groups, and validation workshops? And how can evaluators transparently acknowledge limitations in ways that strengthen trust and learning? By sharing practical strategies and reflective insights, evaluators are invited to move beyond procedural compliance towards a deeper practice of relational accountability and integrity across diverse contexts. The paper offers practical examples of embedding ethical considerations into internal evaluation and using findings to inform practice improvement.

Chair

Annabel Prescott

Speakers

Jagath Happuhannadige

Senior Program Quality Advisor, Fred Hollows Foundation

Maud Mukova-Moses

Fred Hollows Foundation

A K M Badrul Huq

Senior Program Manager - Bangladesh, The Fred Hollows Foundation

I am a development professional with approximately 16 years of experience, including eight years of engagement in evaluation-related work. My professional expertise includes monitoring and evaluation, disability inclusion, health program development, strategic planning, and evidence-informed... Read More →

Thursday September 17, 2026 12:00pm - 12:30pm ACST
Waterfront 1 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Ethics and integrity

Format Short paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry International development
ID 98

12:00pm ACST

Impact beyond food: How Community Pantries function as places of social connection

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

Waterfront 2

Author: Joanne Cummings, Anglicare Sydney
Community food programs are commonly assessed through output-focused lenses, emphasising quantities of food or financial relief provided. This paper draws on a mixed methods evaluation of Anglicare Sydney’s Community Pantry program to argue for an expanded evaluative frame that recognises community pantries as third spaces—informal, non-commercial places beyond home and work where social connection, belonging and trust are built.

The evaluation combined customer and volunteer surveys (n=709), interviews and observations across 10 locations in NSW. While affordable food remained a critical entry point, findings show that many significant outcomes emerged through the Pantry’s role as a third space: a predictable, welcoming environment where people could linger, converse, build relationships and experience dignity without stigma. Customers reported reduced isolation, new friendships and feelings of belonging, while volunteers experienced increased wellbeing, purpose and community connection. These relational conditions also enabled “soft pathways” into further support services that were not easily captured through standard referral metrics alone.

The study offers several practical insights for evaluators. First, place-based programs require outcome frameworks that extend beyond material provision to include dignity, trust, connection and shifting social norms. Second, place itself should be treated as data: physical layouts, hospitality practices and local context shaped experiences and outcomes, making systematic observation an essential method. Third, mixed methods designs were vital for understanding not only what changed, but how third space dynamics generated change over time. Finally, incorporating multiple stakeholder perspectives revealed benefits for communities and volunteers, which may be invisible in customer-based evaluations.

The presentation will walk through the mixed methods approach, share visual examples illustrating how place-based conditions shaped outcomes, and distil three key insights about the relational impact of community pantries. It will conclude with a guided reflection inviting participants to consider how they currently assess belonging, dignity and connection in their own work.

Chair

Phillip Belling

Senior Evaluator, Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation, NSW Department of Education

Speakers

Joanne Cummings

Senior Researcher Anglicare Sydney, Anglicare Sydney

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

Ethics and integrity

Format Short paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Community and social services, Not for profit Philanthropy
ID 32

1:30pm ACST

From Panic to Practice: Putting AI to Work in Evaluation

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

Rooms 1+2

Author: Dorothea Huber
Lessons management in emergency management typically relies on mixed method approaches, with qualitative analysis carrying much of the analytical burden. Evaluators are increasingly expected to synthesise large volumes of unstructured material under tight timeframes, often in resource constrained public sector environments. Against this backdrop, artificial intelligence is alternately framed as a threat to professional judgement or as a solution to chronic capacity pressures. This paper argues that both framings are unhelpful.

Rather than replacing evaluative expertise, this presentation positions AI as a methodological assistant that can undertake defined, low risk tasks while leaving interpretation, sense making and ethical judgement firmly with the evaluator. Using real world examples drawn from emergency management lessons processes, the paper explores where AI has demonstrated practical value across the evaluation lifecycle. These include rapid document triage, support for qualitative coding within pre specified frameworks, identification of recurring themes and contradictions, synthesis of lessons learned, and surfacing gaps that may be missed under time pressure.

The paper also addresses common methodological and governance concerns, including transparency, bias, over reliance on fluent outputs, and the risk of mistaking confidence for insight. It outlines practical strategies for supervised AI use that protect rigour, credibility and accountability, particularly in settings where evaluative findings must withstand scrutiny and inform high stakes decisions.

Structured as a short paper, the presentation will focus on three key messages: where AI adds genuine value; where it should not be used; and how evaluators can establish clear boundaries for its application. Audience interaction will be built in through targeted questions and discussion, inviting participants to share their own experiences of using—or choosing not to use—AI in evaluation practice. The presentation reframes the central question from whether AI is the enemy, to how evaluators can use it well.

Chair

Magdeline Hawkins

Evaluation Lead, Attorney General's Department

Speakers

Dorothea Huber

Evaluation Advisor, AMSA

Dorothea Huber is a senior evaluation and lessons management professional with extensive experience across Commonwealth and state government, spanning maritime emergency response, health, employment, innovation, research and natural resource management. She is passionate about informed... Read More →

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

Roots and routes

Format Short paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Public administration and safety
ID 292

2:00pm ACST

An open discussion on research and evaluation that works for remote communities

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

Waterfront 3

Authors: Jillian Marsh, Charles Sturt University, School Of Indigenous Australian Studies, Kate Dixon, Schools Plus, Laura Bird, Paul Ramsay Foundation
This panel features panellists representing all layers of the evaluation ecosystem, and focuses on an evaluation conducted in remote schools in the Northern Territory, Western Australia and Queensland. This panel discussion will centre on the question: How can we, as an evaluation ecosystem, make space and value place in the design and implementation of programs, projects, and evaluations?

Our panel includes a representative from the evaluation funders, the program facilitator and a community-based representative. The panel will be facilitated by a member of our evaluation and research team who is leading the project. The discussion will reflect on and unpack some of the realities of negotiating a place-based evaluation in remote communities, and how these reflections effect planning, design and delivery of evaluations. Our funders will explain their priorities, what they are aiming to achieve and why they are funding the evaluation, as well as explaining why a place-based approach is important to them.

The program facilitator will discuss how this evaluation project complements other existing projects, as well as how it was designed and why it was designed in that way. Our community-based representative will talk about their role in the project and the value that they bring through their community-based expertise, experience and relationships. This panel offers a unique look at how space is created for collaborative evaluation design and implementation, and how place can be centred throughout all stages of evaluation, even in a national project.

Chair

Mardi Grundy

Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Human Security and Social Change

Speakers

Jillian Marsh

Professor, Indigenous Knowledges, Charles Sturt University, School Of Indigenous Australian Studies

Laura Bird

Paul Ramsay Foundation

Kate Dixon

I am a passionate educator and Schools Plus Coach with more than 20 years of experience supporting schools and communities across rural, regional, and remote Australia to create meaningful, sustainable impact for young people. A current PhD candidate in education, I am driven by curiosity... Read More →

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

Ethics and integrity

Format Panel
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Not for profit Philanthropy, Education and training
ID 312

2:00pm ACST

Ignites

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

Waterfront 2

Ethics for Evaluation
Author: Trina O'Donnell, Bellberry
Why do we have ethics reviews, who makes up the HREC, and when is a HREC review required? What are common issues that arise in the review of evaluations from the HREC perspective?

How can these be addressed to make the ethics application process smoother? The session will focus on the ethics review in contexts such as community-based evaluation, and policy or program evaluation, and we will explore issues that arise from the ethics review from Human Research Ethics Committees (HRECs) for evaluation.

Practical insights from HREC reviews will exemplify common issues from a HREC perspective. Examples of common HREC comments will introduce issues including study design, consent, community engagement, respecting Indigenous perspectives and local knowledge, managing language and cultural differences, and responding ethically to the growing use of artificial intelligence and data technologies in evaluation.

Presence builds trust: How place-based engagement transformed participation in NSW First Nations Digital Inclusion evaluation
Authors: Megan Brewer, Nous Group, Rodney Williams, Nous Group, Taliah King, Nous Group
Evaluating programs with First Nations communities requires time, presence, and trust. An evaluation of First Nations Digital Inclusion meant learning and adapting, shifting to a snowballing, place‑based approach – spending extended time in community and working with trusted navigators through a three-way partnership model. Participation increased substantially. Being physically present in remote and regional communities enabled rapport‑building, referrals, and engagement with people unlikely to participate through conventional methods. Higher participation led directly to stronger survey response numbers, deeper qualitative insights, and more credible evaluation findings. We show why investing time in-place, relationships, and partnership is central to evaluation quality.

Shifting the power: evaluation enabled, embedded and used in local contexts
Authors: Jessie Meaney-Davis Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology Sydney, Satib Nisha Khan Khan, Birth Fiji, Mary Raori, Australian Volunteers Program (Fiji)
Organisational capacity assessments in international development are often experienced by organisations in Asia and the Pacific as externally driven compliance exercises. This paper presents an alternative model in which 14 organisations in Fiji, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, and Vietnam led participatory research on organisational capacity strengthening over three years, supported by the Australian Volunteers Program and the Institute for Sustainable Futures at the University of Technology Sydney.
Drawing on reflections from BIRTH Fiji, the paper identifies three shifts in power. First, embedding evaluative inquiry into organisational routines created space for learning and reflection, making evaluation a tool for adaptation rather than reporting. Second, organisations built confidence, skills, and ownership by leading the evaluation process, with external actors as facilitators. Third, peer learning across the 14 organisations created networks of exchange that shifted knowledge and influence away from donor-centric models. Meaningful power shifts in evaluation require locally led, embedded, and sustained evaluative practice.

Brokering and interpreting evaluation: An iTaukei experience
Authors: Marilyn Vilisoni, Solve Pacific Consultancy
This presentation follows an iTaukei (Fijian) evaluator’s transition from a donor‑driven MEL role to independent consultancy, where evaluation becomes an act of brokering between donor logic and Indigenous priorities grounded in the preservation and revitalisation of iTaukei (Fijian) culture and traditions. It highlights three insights: (i) the evaluator’s role as a cultural broker navigating the space between external accountability and Indigenous values; (ii) the importance of cultural humility, emotional intelligence, and comfort with ambiguity in this intermediary work; and (iii) the centrality of trust in shaping MEL systems that honour both accountability requirements and the lived realities of Pacific communities.

Chair

Jade Maloney

CEO, ARTD

I work with government agencies, not-for-profits and citizens to co-design, refine, communicate and evaluate social policies, regulatory systems and programs. I am passionate about ensuring citizens have a voice in shaping the policies that affect their lives, translating research... Read More →

Speakers

Rodney Williams

Principal, Nous Group

Rodney is an Aboriginal man (Guwa/Koa) with diverse industry experience across the private, public and community sectors where he has held board, senior executive and management roles. He brings over 25 years’ experience in consulting, Indigenous economic development, banking and... Read More →

Marilyn Vilisoni

Managing Director, Solve Pacific Consultancy

Megan Brewer

Director, Nous Group

Trina O'Donnell

Director Of Strategic Projects, Bellberry

Nisha Khan

Founder and CEO, Birth Fiji

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

Ignite session

Format Ignite
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Arts and recreation services, Community and social services, Economic development tourism and infrastructure, Education and training, Environment and climate change, Health and disability, Information media and telecommunications, Natural resources and energy, No
ID 93, 146, 148, 200, 290, 2, 220

2:00pm ACST

Is there room in the C-suite for evaluators?

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

Rooms 1+2

Authors: Dana Cross, Piacarmel Andrews, Lyn Alderman

Across sectors, evaluators are increasingly seeking to move beyond assessing programs to shaping strategy, informing investment, strengthening accountability and supporting learning. Recent initiatives such as the Strengthening Evaluation in the Australian Government – Action Plan 2026–2030, with its emphasis on evaluation leadership, culture and use (and a call for Chief Evaluation Officers), reflect a broader trend: evaluation is being positioned as a core contributor to governance and decision making rather than a purely technical or advisory function.

This shift raises a provocative and timely question for the evaluation community: is there room in the C-suite for evaluators?

The presenters will explore whether closer proximity to executive power is necessary to strengthen evaluation’s influence and what might be gained or lost in the process. Rather than assuming that seniority automatically delivers impact, the discussion will examine different models of leadership, authority and positioning for evaluation across diverse organisational contexts.

Presenters will explore tensions such as:

Whether executive level access enhances evaluation use or risks compromising independence and credibility.
How evaluation leadership can be exercised without formal C suite roles.
What “good” evaluation leadership looks like in different sectors, cultures and places

Drawing on lived experience from across settings, the panel will reflect on how evaluation currently shows up, or fails to show up, in senior decision making forums, and what alternatives exist for strengthening its influence. Audience pulse questions will be used to give live insights to broader experiences and views, with time for questions at the end of the session inviting participants to share perspectives from their own contexts and challenge assumptions about status, power and professional identity in evaluation.

Chair

Magdeline Hawkins

Evaluation Lead, Attorney General's Department

Speakers

Dana Cross

Associate Director, Grosvenor Public Sector Advisory

Dana is a public sector expert, possessing almost 20 years of deep experience advising government organisations on program evaluation, organisational review, service optimisation and performance management. She is the Practice Lead for Program Evaluation. Dana has designed and conducted... Read More →

Lyn Alderman

Professor, University of Southern Queensland

Pia Andrews

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

Roots and routes

Format Round table
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Not for profit Philanthropy, Economic development tourism and infrastructure, Arts and recreation services, Community and social services, Environment and climate change, Education and training, Health and disability, Information media and telecommunications, Nat

2:30pm ACST

Monitoring on a shoestring: How reproducible reporting can help make better use of data.

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

Rooms 3+4

Authors: Stephanie Quail (ARTD), Sophie Henness (ARTD)

Non-government organisations (NGOs) and small organisations often face a range of barriers, such as limited funding and staffing, to collecting, analysing, and utilising client and program data to support continuous improvement and decision making. For these organisations, taking an empowerment evaluation approach, which enables them to assess and improve their own programs while building capacity and ownership, has the potential to provide sustainable and ongoing value. Empowerment evaluation strengthens organisational capacity and equips organisations with tools to collect, analyse, and interpret data for ongoing program improvement.

This presentation explores low-cost and high-impact opportunities for embedding monitoring, as demonstrated by our recent work with Bonnie’s Support Service to develop internal capability to administer and analyse a new client satisfaction survey. We will highlight common challenges for small NGOs, and our approaches for setting up monitoring on a shoestring, including:

How data is collected, including an overview of free or low-cost survey platforms, and their advantages and disadvantages
How data is analysed, including how the free, open-source software R can be used to set up reproducible analysis that once established can be re-used without needing internal quantitative expertise
How reports and other outputs are created, including how polished reports incorporating text, figures and tables can be generated using R.

Audience members will leave this presentation with an understanding of common challenges to setting up and analysing client satisfaction survey data, the advantages and disadvantages of available open-source platforms, and practical approaches for setting up reproducible analysis and reports. Attendees will receive a free online toolkit we have developed which organisations can use to guide the development of their own low-cost monitoring and reproducible reporting.

Chair

Justine Smith

Principal Consultant, Nation Partners

With a background spanning research, government, non-government organisations and consulting, Justine brings technical knowledge and over 10 years of experience to the projects she works on. As a highly experienced program evaluator and strategic thinker, Justine has applied her skills... Read More →

Speakers

Stephanie Quail

Senior Manager, ARTD Consultants

Sophie Henness

Consultant, ARTD Consultants

Thursday September 17, 2026 2:30pm - 3:00pm ACST
Rooms 3+4 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Boundaries and bridges

Format Short paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Community and social services, Not for profit Philanthropy
ID 276
about <br>

2:30pm ACST

When Worlds Collide: Evaluation at the Intersection of Policy, Curriculum and School Improvement

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

Hall 2

Authors: Zina Baghi (NSW Department Of Education), Annette Waters (NSW Department Of Education)
What happens when evaluation is asked to make sense of a program that simultaneously spans curriculum reform, evidence-based resource design, data analytics and school capability-building - across thousands of schools, amid widespread disruption? This paper presents the findings of a process evaluation of a large-scale government education program and uses that experience to interrogate what evaluation distinctively contributes when it operates at the boundaries of multiple disciplines, sectors and organisational roles.
Operating within a complex policy space - where multiple related initiatives ran concurrently, each targeting overlapping aspects of school improvement - the program layered differentiated support from self-directed access to quality-assured, evidence-based resources, through to shoulder-to-shoulder guidance from educational leaders. Evaluating this required the team to engage fluently with education research, data analytics, evidence-based pedagogy, professional learning design and school improvement methodology - not as a methodological luxury, but as a necessity for understanding what was working, for whom, and why.
The evaluation also operated across organisational boundaries. Two evaluation teams, one embedded within the program's delivery unit, the other in a central evaluation function, worked concurrently on different components, with findings integrated into a shared report. This arrangement surfaces rarely examined questions about co-production, methodological consistency and what happens to evaluation's integrity when the boundary between evaluator and implementer is not just navigated but structurally blurred.
The findings reveal where bridges within the program held and where they fractured: between system policy intent and school-level practice, between co-designed improvement partnerships and variable local capacity, and between a program designed predominantly for primary schools and a secondary sector left largely overlooked. For the evaluation community, this paper argues that understanding these fractures - and building the cross-disciplinary bridges needed to address them - is precisely where evaluation's value is most needed, and most often undersold.

Chair

Duncan Rintoul

Managing Director, Rooftop Social

ECB devotee, mentor in the AES group mentoring program, used to be on the AES board, run a rad consulting firm that specialises in evaluation, lifelong learner. Keeping busy doing research and evaluation and facilitation work in education and justice and sustainability and health... Read More →

Speakers

Zina Baghi

NSW Department Of Education

Annette Waters

NSW Department Of Education

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

Boundaries and bridges

Format Short paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Education and training
ID 291

3:30pm ACST

From insight to action: A pragmatic, participatory approach to improving cancer clinical trial systems

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

Waterfront 3

Author: Cally Jennings, Commission On Excellence And Innovation In Health
Change in complex systems rarely fails because of a lack of ideas. It fails because people do not share a common understanding of what needs to change, or why. This presentation describes a pragmatic, participatory process used to develop shared priorities for improving cancer clinical trial start‑up across South Australia.

In 2025, the South Australian Comprehensive Cancer Network, working with the Commission on Excellence and Innovation in Health, led a statewide review of ethics and governance processes for cancer clinical trials across public, private, and regional providers. The aim was to develop a shared understanding of how the system operates in practice and to identify agreed priorities for improvement.

A mixed qualitative approach, which included structured interviews, sponsor surveys, comparative system mapping and facilitated workshops, was used. These methods were selected to identify variation across sites, highlight common bottlenecks, and draw on interstate and international examples to explore what good could look like. The findings were synthesised into a concise set of system‑level insights and tested through collaborative workshops to identify a small number of priorities that formed the foundation of a broader reform program.

The presentation will share three lessons:
1.How participatory process methods can build shared understanding and readiness for change.
2.How participatory approaches can promote ownership but also reveal the limits of readiness for change.
3.Why even well designed, collaborative processes must demonstrate early wins to build and maintain trust.

Designed for a foundational to intermediate audience, the session will invite participants to reflect on balancing rigour with pragmatism, including exploring how early evidence and shared insight can move complex systems from talking about change to taking the first steps.

Chair

Chee Wee Koh

Deputy Director (Performance & Evaluation), Ministry of Finance, Singapore

Speakers

Cally Jennings

Strategic Lead - Research Translation And Impact, Commission On Excellence And Innovation In Health

I’m Cally Jennings, Strategic Lead, Research Translation and Impact at CEIH. I work on system-level health reform, with a focus on bringing together research, policy and practice to improve how the system actually works. My background is in research translation and evaluation, and... Read More →

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

Boundaries and bridges

Format Short paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Health and disability, Public administration and safety
ID 187

3:30pm ACST

Culturally Governed Evaluation: Reframing First Nations Engagement from Consultation and Co-design to Governance

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

Hall 2

Authors: Sarah Jane Springer (Springer Health Consultants), Catherine Boekel (Whereto Research)
Evaluation involving Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples has historically positioned First Nations engagement as a consultation activity occurring after evaluation priorities, frameworks and methods have already been determined. Even approaches framed as co-design can unintentionally reproduce existing power structures in knowledge generation and limit the capacity of evaluation to reflect First Nations governance, priorities and ways of knowing.

This paper introduces the Culturally Governed Evaluation Framework, an emerging methodological approach that embeds First Nations authority within the governance structures that determine evaluation purpose, design, interpretation and accountability. In this approach, engagement is not positioned as advisory input, but as a governance function within the evaluation system itself.

The framework is grounded in three interconnected principles:

First Nations authority, embedding leadership within governance structures that shape priorities and definitions of success;
Relational accountability, ensuring evaluation is grounded in trust, reciprocity and sustained engagement; and
Shared interpretation, enabling findings to be interpreted through First Nations knowledge systems with shared authority in meaning-making.

By foregrounding governance and relational accountability, this approach contributes to national discussions on ethics, power and methodological legitimacy. It aligns with reform agendas including the National Agreement on Closing the Gap and has direct implications for how evaluation is commissioned, governed and interpreted across government, research and community settings.

The presentation will invite critical reflection on how culturally governed approaches can reshape evaluation practice and strengthen both the legitimacy and effectiveness of evaluation outcomes.

Chair

Zoe Enticott

Principal Consultant, Clear Horizon

Speakers

Sarah Jane Springer

Director, Springer Health Consultants

I am a Wiradjuri woman, rural generalist doctor, cultural governance lead and consultant working across health system reform, evaluation, medical education and First Nations-led policy development. My work focuses on how organisations can move beyond consultation and compliance toward... Read More →

Catherine Boekel

Partner, Whereto

Thursday September 17, 2026 3:30pm - 4:00pm ACST
Hall 2

Ethics and integrity

Format Short paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Health and disability, Public administration and safety, Community and social services, Education and training
ID 228

3:30pm ACST

Finding your space - the psychological, organisational and political dynamics of being a resilient evaluator

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

Waterfront 2

Authors: John Stoney, DSS, Kim Grey, AES President, Ruth Nicholls, Australian Centre for Evaluation, Samantha Mayes, Systems, Planning and Analysis Australia
The idea of keeping going in the face of obstacles is a recurring cultural theme: Nelson Mandela asked us not to judge him by his successes, but by how often he fell down and got back up again. Wise evaluator Eleanor Chelimsky told us that evaluators need to understand our context to win allies and collaborate.

The panel aims to support practitioners to identify, understand and navigate challenges from ethical, good practice and self-care perspectives.

The panel draws on many sources - our favourite proverbs and inspiring leaders - as well as psychology, philosophy and the evaluation literature.

The beneficial effects of identity and belonging will be unpacked, along with how each of us can nurture these powerful drivers of self-care through engaging with evaluation as a profession. This draws on social identity theory and the evidence for the ‘social cure’, which suggests that social groups and a sense of community may be as beneficial as regular exercise - promoting adjustment, coping and well-being.

What do evaluators think supports their resilience? Research into evaluator resilience identifies features of individual and institutional dimensions that support adaptability, including soft skills, relationships, communication skills, flexibility, and professional confidence to refer to codes of ethics, plus organisational mechanisms for discussing rigour and integrity with stakeholders, managers or commissioners, normalising ethical practice.

We’ll also explore the contexts in which we often practice - the barriers, set-backs or cycles, in the dynamic world that evaluation is part of, including the drivers of expansion and contraction in evaluation activity, variation across levels of change (global, national, organisational or people driven), and the dynamic interacting forces that drive cycles to flow at varying or contradictory pace. This can have implications for us as practitioners, requiring adaptability, resilience and self-care, but can also affect the evaluation discipline and profession.

Chair

Cathy Gong

Speakers

Kim Grey

President, Australian Evaluation Society

Ruth Nicholls

Director, Treasury

I live and work on Ngunnawal Country. I’ve worked in research and evaluation roles for over 20 years, mainly within government across of range of social policy including health, disability, community development, and First Nations contexts. In my current role with the Australian... Read More →

Samantha Mayes

Lead - Evaluation and Review, Systems, Planning and Analysis Australia

Samantha is an experienced evaluation practitioner and social psychology researcher. With a background in government and consulting she has specialised in policy development, program evaluation and capacity building. She pairs advanced technical training with ongoing doctoral research... Read More →

John Stoney

A/g Director, DSS

I’m the A/g Director of the Evaluation Hub in the Department of Social Services. With my team mates I provide technical advice and support on evaluation to policy and program colleagues across the department and develop strategic advice to senior executive. The nature of my work... Read More →

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

Boundaries and bridges

Format Long paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Environment and climate change, Health and disability, Public administration and safety
ID 192

4:00pm ACST

Is the evaluation market contracting? What now?

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

Rooms 1+2

A participant-led conversation exploring what’s happening in the evaluation market and what it means for our sector. Kate and Jess will set the scene with evidence of what’s happening internationally, before opening the discussion: What are we seeing and experiencing? Where are the challenges - and are there glimmers of opportunity emerging?

Speakers

Jess Dart

CEO, Clear Horizon

Kate McKegg

Director, The Knowledge Institute

Thursday September 17, 2026 4:00pm - 5:00pm ACST
Rooms 1+2 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Boundaries and bridges

Format Round table
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Community and social services, Education and training
ID 136

4:00pm ACST

A social worker, an astrophysicist and an economist walk into a bar...

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

Waterfront 1

Authors: Kate Cherry, CSIRO, Jake Clark, CSIRO, David Marchant, Inform Economics
Stepping into the unknown and daunting space of economic evaluation represented a new challenge for the Impact and Evaluation team in the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) Education and Outreach. In collaboration with our more experienced guide, external consultant Inform Economics, we successfully delivered a cost benefit analysis of CSIRO’s Generation STEM Links program, funded by the New South Wales Government through the Science and Industry Endowment Fund. This evaluation generated valued learnings for all involved and created new impact evidence. This economic evidence was utilised by our program delivery and industry engagement teams and was significant to our government funders and current public policy.

Economic evaluations are a rare approach in program evaluation, and almost non-existent in the STEM education sector, which prioritises learning outcomes and lacks economic evaluation capability. Navigating between theory and the realities of practice to deliver a cost-benefit analysis was challenging; by sharing our experiences and learnings we aim to inspire others to take up the challenge.

As Australia’s national science agency, the CSIRO has been engaging partners in STEM education programs and evaluations for over 40 years. The Impact and Evaluation team is generating and sharing new evidence to inform practice and decision-making in our work and the STEM education ecosystem.

This session features insights from CSIRO and Inform Economics, with a focus on their collaboration to undertake a cost benefit analysis. This session will cover:

•deciding to undertake an economic evaluation
•data collection and analysis methods used
•capabilities required to do a CBA
•findings from the Generation STEM Links cost-benefit analysis
•experiences of this cross-sector partnership
•key lessons learned from the project and future implications

This session will be of interest to those have undertaken or are considering undertaking an economic evaluation.

Chair

Megan Anderson

Associate Director, HealthConsult

Speakers

Kate Cherry

Principal Advisor, Impact and Evaluation, CSIRO

Jake Clark

Principal Advisor, Impact and Evaluation, CSIRO

Dr Jake Clark is a Principal Advisor within CSIRO’s Education and Outreach Impact and Evaluation Team, where he leads the design and implementation of monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL) tools for the STEM Community Partnerships Program. He brings extensive expertise in quasi-experimental... Read More →

David Marchant

Founder and Managing Director, Inform Economics

Thursday September 17, 2026 4:00pm - 5:00pm ACST
Waterfront 1 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Roots and routes

Format Long paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Education and training
ID 225

4:30pm ACST

Making Space for Evaluation: How the UK and Australia Are Improving Evaluation Across Government

Thursday September 17, 2026 4:30pm - 5:00pm ACST

Waterfront 2

Author: Lucie Moore, Commonwealth Treasury
Across governments, there is growing recognition of the need to make space for high quality evidence and embed evaluation into policy design and decision‑making. This presentation examines what two national governments, the UK and Australia, are doing to improve the quality, quantity and use of evaluation across the public sector, drawing on my personal experience working within both the UK Government’s Evaluation Task Force (ETF) and the Australian Government’s Australian Centre for Evaluation (ACE).

In the UK, the ETF is a joint Cabinet Office–HM Treasury unit established to ensure that evidence and evaluation sit “at the heart of spending decisions”. It works to improve how government programmes are evaluated, providing advice on designing and delivering evaluations and challenging departments to be transparent by including evaluations on the publicly accessible, Evaluation Registry website. The ETF also leads cross‑government capability building, including the Evaluation Academy, which has trained hundreds of evaluation experts who have in turn trained thousands of public servants on evaluation. These initiatives aim to expand both the volume and quality of evaluation activity and strengthen its use in decision‑making.

In Australia, ACE was established to “put evaluation evidence at the heart of policy design and decision‑making,” with a mandate to improve the volume, quality and use of evaluation evidence across government. ACE supports the Commonwealth Evaluation Policy, strengthens evaluation capability, delivers evaluations, and improves evaluation planning in the budget process. Together, these reforms seek to build an evaluative culture across the Australian Public Service.

The objective of this presentation is to share these cross‑government efforts with the wider evaluation community, highlighting traditions and new ways, boundaries and bridges, and the roots and routes shaping reform, and to provide space for attendees to ask questions and explore implications.

Chair