aes26 International Evaluation Conference: Full Schedule

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

arrow_back View All Dates

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

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

1:30pm ACST

Process tracing in practice: testing causal claims with mixed evidence

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

Rooms 3+4

Author: Kizzy Gandy, Sax Institute

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

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

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

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

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

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

Kizzy Gandy

Head, Evidence and Impact, Sax Institute

Dr Kizzy Gandy is Head of Evidence and Impact at the Sax Institute. She leads the institute’s consultancy arm, providing systems intelligence to health and wellbeing organisations. This work spans evidence synthesis, program/policy/system evaluation, dynamic simulation modelling... Read More →

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

Roots and routes

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

2:00pm 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

3:30pm ACST

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

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

Waterfront 1

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

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

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

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

Chair

Megan Anderson

Associate Director, HealthConsult

Speakers

Dimitria Gavalyugova

Senior Research and Evaluation Officer, NSW Department of Education

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

Traditional and new ways

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

4:00pm ACST

Quality evaluation that makes a difference: continuing the conversation

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

Rooms 3+4

Author: Eleanor Williams, Kara Scally-Irvine, Anabelle Chen, Caitlin Morton, Carina Calzoni

The AES has been exploring its vision of “quality evaluation that makes a difference” through a strategic project - engaging members and examining evaluation theory and practice. This work has surfaced a central challenge: while the phrase is compelling, its meaning is complex, contested, and shaped by context.
This roundtable begins from that complexity but does not seek to resolve it. Instead, it focuses on what comes next.
We will briefly share insights from the journey so far, including the multiple dimensions of “evaluation”, “quality”, and “making a difference”. These span tensions between evaluation as process, product, and profession; competing perspectives on quality and diverse understandings of use and influence across contexts and stakeholders.
The primary purpose of the session is to continue this conversation across the AES community. Participants will engage in facilitated small-group discussions to explore key questions: What does quality evaluation mean in your context? Who defines it? What does “making a difference” look like and for whom? How should these conversations evolve as contexts, practice, and membership change?
Participants will then work together to identify practical ways to sustain and deepen engagement. The session will capture and share these ideas to inform AES’s ongoing work.
Designed for intermediate to advanced evaluators, this roundtable creates space for collective reflection and future-oriented dialogue. This supports the AES vision by keeping the conversation alive recognising that what constitutes “quality evaluation that makes a difference” must continue to evolve with the field.es a difference” must continue to evolve with the field.

Chair

Marion Norton

Manager Research and Evaluation, Qld DJAG

Speakers

Eleanor Williams

Managing Director, Australian Centre for Evaluation

Eleanor Williams is the Managing Director of the Australian Centre for Evaluation in the Commonwealth Department of the Treasury. She has worked in a variety of senior executive roles in the Victorian and Australian Governments, and is a former board member of the Australian Evaluation... Read More →

Kara Scally-Irvine

Ksi Consulting

Anabelle (Pin-Ju) Chen 陳品儒

President/Evaluator, Taiwan Pride Sydney

Hi, I am Anabelle. I am an evaluator, data analyst and the President of Taiwan Pride Sydney. You might notice my profile picture is from my work as a DJ (O’a Gem, sound-alike for oyster omelette in Taiwanese 🇹🇼 ). I kept it because the skillsets are surprisingly identical... Read More →

Caitlin Morton

Independent Consultant

I’m Dr Caitlin Morton, I’m passionate about turning knowledge into power to help people solve the world’s biggest problems. I do this as an independent evaluator based on Awabakal Country in Newcastle, NSW Australia. I can help you use data and evidence to improve outcomes by... Read More →

Carina Calzoni

AES

I have been a member of the AES for over 25 years, and am now part of the AES management team - as the Policy Officer. It's an exciting role that brings together my experiences in evaluation and policy working in government and the private sectors. I am committed to creating positive... Read More →

QETMAD Consultation Paper Final docx

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

Special

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

4:30pm 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

Cathy Gong

Speakers

Lucie Moore

Director, Health Impact Evaluation Unit, Australian Centre for Evaluation (ACE)

Thursday September 17, 2026 4:30pm - 5:00pm ACST
Waterfront 2 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Boundaries and bridges

Format Short paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Education and training, Economic development tourism and infrastructure, Community and social services, Environment and climate change
ID 224

11:30am ACST

1:30pm ACST

2:00pm ACST

2:00pm ACST

3:30pm ACST

4:00pm ACST

4:30pm ACST

Get help with the event