Loading…
This is the draft aes26 program, subject to change. To register for workshops and the conference, go to: https://www.aes26.aes.asn.au/
Company: Short paper clear filter
arrow_back View All Dates
Thursday, September 17
 

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
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
SA

Simon Alaba

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

11:00am ACST

When tools meet context: Piloting the WM2A wellbeing measure in Top End renal care
Thursday September 17, 2026 11:00am - 11:30am ACST
Author: Victoria Thanasos, Menzies School of Health Research
Introducing new tools into complex health service environments is rarely straightforward, particularly where they intersect with diverse ways of knowing, being, and valuing. This short paper shares insights from piloting the What Matters 2 Adults (WM2A) tool with dialysis patients in the Top End of the Northern Territory, focusing on how feasibility, appropriateness, and potential risks are assessed in practice.

Drawing on a formative evaluation approach, the project combined yarning circles, interviews, and reflective sessions with renal patients and stakeholders. Rapid qualitative analysis, informed by implementation science, was used to identify key barriers, enablers, and contextual factors shaping the tool’s potential use.

Three key insights emerged. First, feasibility is not just about logistics, but about meaning – how questions are understood and experienced. Second, appropriateness is not fixed but negotiated in place, requiring ongoing adaptation to language, delivery, and context. Third, introducing new tools carries risks – including burden, misinterpretation, and unintended consequences – that must be actively surfaced and managed.

Rather than presenting final outcomes, this paper focuses on the decisions, tensions, and trade-offs that shaped the pilot, including the deliberate decoupling of tool administration from routine service delivery to minimise burden on patients and staff while enabling deeper exploration. Participants will be invited to reflect on how they assess feasibility, appropriateness, and risk in their own contexts.

Overall, this paper positions evaluation as critical to assessing not just whether a tool works, but whether it fits – offering practical insights for context-sensitive, responsible approaches in complex, culturally diverse settings.
Speakers
VT

Victoria Thanasos

Research Project Coordinator and Phd Candidate, Menzies School Of Health Research
Thursday September 17, 2026 11:00am - 11:30am ACST
Waterfront 2 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

11:30am ACST

Creating Starlight’s First Social Impact Report: What We Learnt
Thursday September 17, 2026 11:30am - 12:00pm ACST
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.  
Speakers
avatar for Claire Treadgold

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

11:30am ACST

Case studies – an overlooked technique in evaluation?
Thursday September 17, 2026 11:30am - 12:00pm ACST
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
avatar for Alan Woodward

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

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
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.

Speakers
avatar for Gerald Onsando

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

12:00pm ACST

Embedding Ethical Practice in an Evaluation Across Diverse Communities: Lessons from Bangladesh
Thursday September 17, 2026 12:00pm - 12:30pm ACST
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.


Speakers
JH

Jagath Happuhannadige

Senior Program Quality Advisor, Fred Hollows Foundation
MM

Maud Mukova-Moses

Fred Hollows Foundation
avatar for A K M Badrul Huq

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

12:00pm ACST

Impact beyond food: How Community Pantries function as places of social connection
Thursday September 17, 2026 12:00pm - 12:30pm ACST
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.


Speakers
JC

Joanne Cummings

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

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
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
DT

Danielle Thornton

Senior Research Consultant, The Social Research Centre
SC

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

1:30pm ACST

Walking alongside each other at the pace of trust: how evaluation is only the destination
Thursday September 17, 2026 1:30pm - 2:00pm ACST
Authors: Skye Gooch, Djirra, Rebecca Steunenberg, Djirra, Lesly Zambrano, Djirra ,Taylor Rawson, Djirra
Djirra is proposing short paper presentation about our experience of designing a self-determined program and Monitoring and Evaluation Framework using an Aboriginal-led participatory approach for our specialist Alcohol and Other Drugs service. We aim to demonstrate the value of Aboriginal-led participatory program design approaches.

In our short paper, we will cover the three following core learnings:

•The power of relationships
At Djirra, our Design, Monitoring and Evaluation Officers are embedded in each program area, and our Program Development Lead is also an internal role. The roles' positioning fosters strong, trusting relationships with the teams. This relational approach allows for the design of a rich and empowered program design, for Aboriginal people, by Aboriginal people.
•Walking at the pace of trust
We had the opportunity to take our time with this process, allowing the space for trusting and dynamic dialogue to be fostered. We saw many benefits to this approach, such as the Program Development staff guiding the team while still being led by their expertise, allowing everyone to be able to deeply consider their practice and the evolution of the project, and time to centre rich data and narratives, making the vision and impact about more than just numbers.
•The design journey becomes an outcome in itself
In doing the program design in this approach, the overall process achieved outcomes in being completed itself. By the end of the project, we saw mutual benefits for everyone. Our Program Development staff grew deeper knowledge of the team’s deep and complex context, and the team itself grew their skills and knowledge of systems work.

We aim to deliver this in a slide show format, focusing on engaging visuals and simplicity. We will be opening the presentation up to the audience at the end for a yarn with the presenters.


Speakers
SG

Skye Gooch

Manager of Individual Support Services, Djirra
RS

Rebecca Steunenberg

Team Leader of Alcohol and Other Drugs, Djirra
Thursday September 17, 2026 1:30pm - 2:00pm ACST
Waterfront 3 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

1:30pm ACST

From Panic to Practice: Putting AI to Work in Evaluation
Thursday September 17, 2026 1:30pm - 2:00pm ACST
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.

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

1:30pm ACST

Making Space for multiple perspectives: Collaborative design of Value for Investment evaluations
Thursday September 17, 2026 1:30pm - 2:00pm ACST
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
AF

Adrian Field

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

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
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.

Speakers
avatar for Stephanie Quail

Stephanie Quail

Senior Manager, ARTD
SH

Sophie Henness

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

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
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.
Speakers
AW

Annette Waters

NSW Department Of Education
ZB

Zina Baghi

NSW Department Of Education
Thursday September 17, 2026 2:30pm - 3:00pm ACST
Hall 2

2:30pm ACST

Strengthening engagement with evaluation through the Signs of Success Framework
Thursday September 17, 2026 2:30pm - 3:00pm ACST
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
GC

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

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
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.


Speakers
CJ

Cally Jennings

Strategic Lead - Research Translation And Impact, Commission On Excellence And Innovation In Health
Thursday September 17, 2026 3:30pm - 4:00pm ACST
Waterfront 3 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

3:30pm ACST

Is the value of evaluation hiding in the shadows?
Thursday September 17, 2026 3:30pm - 4:00pm ACST
Authors: Robert Grimshaw (Australian Taxation Office), Megan Lugg (Australian Taxation Office)

As evaluation practitioners in a large government agency, we recognise the value of learning and insights created by applying evaluation thinking, tools and techniques at all stages of the policy or program life cycle. We’re less practiced however in naming and demonstrating to decision-makers and other diverse stakeholders the value created from applying evaluation thinking and practices long before a final evaluative judgment is made and reported.

In this presentation we will share practical examples of how evaluation strengthens the design of new programs early in their development and causes reflection on the appropriateness of established, long-standing programs.

We will use a case study related to the ATO shadow economy program to share experiences and reflections of observed value created for program management and decision making by applying evaluation thinking and practices early in and throughout the program cycle – leading to a stronger evidence base and improved policy response. This provides a practical demonstration of Gullickson’s (2020) discussion of how defining evaluation to include activities that ‘fully describe’ the evaluand allows space for us to ‘explain…how what we have done…fits into the general process of evaluation.’

We will also share reflections from a recent evaluation of our own Evaluation Hub activities that provide valuable insights and lessons for collaborating with and developing the evaluation capability of people from diverse roles and disciplines. This includes findings about commonly used evaluation capacity building approaches including leading a community of practice, delivering learning events and resources, and providing expert advice and support.

Our observations are positioned within the context of how we anticipate continued steady progress over time. As McDonald, Rogers and Kefford (2003) recommend, it’s important to both allow sufficient time to build evaluation capacity, and ‘to quickly and repeatedly get ‘points on the board’, to be seen as…of some use immediately’.
Speakers
ML

Megan Lugg

Director, Evaluation and Performance Measurement, Australian Taxation Office
avatar for Robert Grimshaw

Robert Grimshaw

Evaluation Manager, ATO
Robert works in the Australian Taxation Office Evaluation Hub, helping business areas to build their evaluation culture, capacity and practice. This includes providing advice and support for using fit-for-purpose evaluation to inform evidence-based policy and program delivery, and... Read More →
Thursday September 17, 2026 3:30pm - 4:00pm ACST
Rooms 3+4 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

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
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.

Speakers
SJ

Sarah Jane Springer

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

3:30pm ACST

Is this going somewhere? Using evaluations to broker organisational change
Thursday September 17, 2026 3:30pm - 4:00pm ACST
Author: Victoria Pilbeam (SPC), India Lynn (SPC)

How many robust evaluations get left on shelves? What can we do when good evaluations are overlooked? The true value of evaluative practice lies not in the reports or their recommendations, but what comes after, how we use them to broker organisational change is the route to success.
To ground these questions, our session will use a case study on capability development – a fundamental part of our work at the Pacific Community (SPC) Fisheries Aquaculture and Marine Ecosystems division. At SPC, our scientists and technical staff travel across the Pacific delivering training on a wide range of topics with the goal of enhancing the sustainable management and economic, food security, and cultural benefits of Pacific fisheries. Our capability development aims to achieve change on the ground, in the ministries, communities and industries of our member countries and territories. But successive evaluations have told us that, despite all this training, we are not necessarily seeing the desired results and that we need to explore different modalities to bring about true capability strengthening.
So, how did we dust off these evaluations and use them to chart a new pathway to impact? In this session, we will discuss how we used a combination of behaviour change research, co-design, and organisational change management to move the dial using existing reviews. This approach is rooted in theoretical, cultural and contextual considerations, including behaviour change models and Pacific pedagogies. Our paper will illustrate how taking a grounded approach can make evaluation relevant and learning strategic. Whilst, inviting participants to reflect on their own experiences and their roles in shepherding evaluations from good recommendations towards genuine organisational change.    
Speakers
avatar for Victoria Pilbeam

Victoria Pilbeam

MEL Adviser, Pacific Community | Communauté du Pacifique
At the Pacific Community, I support MEL for fisheries, aquaculture and marine ecosystems across the Pacific Islands region. Previously, I worked for WWF-Australia and in consulting with a range of not-for profit, government , and philanthropic partners. I like MEL that is approachable... Read More →
avatar for India Lynn

India Lynn

MEL Officer, Pacific Community | Communauté du Pacifique
Thursday September 17, 2026 3:30pm - 4:00pm ACST
Rooms 1+2 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

3:30pm ACST

Uncertain impacts, real decisions: measuring and communicating causal uncertainty in quantitative evaluations
Thursday September 17, 2026 3:30pm - 4:00pm ACST
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
DG

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

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
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.


Thursday September 17, 2026 4:30pm - 5:00pm ACST
Waterfront 2 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia
 
  • Filter By Date
  • Filter By Room
  • Filter By Type
  • Format
  • Audience Level
  • Industry
  • ID
  • Timezone

Share Modal

Share this link via

Or copy link

Filter sessions
Apply filters to sessions.
Filtered by Date -