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/
Subject: Education and training clear filter
arrow_back View All Dates
Thursday, September 17
 

10:30am ACST

From Paper to People: Community-Centred Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning for Vanuatu Education & Training Sector
Thursday September 17, 2026 10:30am - 11:30am ACST
Authors: Jill Juliane Wai, Vanuatu Australia Education Support Program, Fremden Yanhambath, Vanuatu Australia Education Support Program, Ellis Silas, Vanuatu Skills Partnership
How can MEL stay grounded in communities while producing findings useful to decision-makers and participants? Panel draws on the Vanuatu Australia Education Support Program and Vanuatu Skills Partnership to explore ethical MEL guided by Beauchamp and Childress’s principles. Leaders trace an MEL cycle: co‑design with communities, participatory collection and analysis, and intentional report‑back. Methods include outcome harvesting, positive deviance, and strategic communications to surface local knowledge and influence reform. Participants will examine examples and strategies for integrating community feedback into evaluation design.

Key insights:

1. Enabling conditions: institutional permission, trust, leadership.
2. Community‑defined success.
3. Decolonising reporting to inform reform.
Speakers
JJ

Jill Juliane Wai

Planning and Systems Coordinator, Vanuatu Australia Education Support Program
F

Fremden Yanhambath

Team Leader, Vanuatu Australia Education Support Program
avatar for Ellis Silas

Ellis Silas

Quality Systems Manager, Vanuatu Skills Partnership
Mr. Ellis Silas is a 38yr old male, currently employed under the Vanuatu Skills Partnership (an Australian Government funded program in Vanuatu) as the Quality Systems Manager. His key role is to be responsible for the ongoing consolidation of an effective implementation and monitoring... Read More →
Thursday September 17, 2026 10:30am - 11:30am ACST
Waterfront 1 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

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.


Speakers
ET

Elisabeta Torava

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

11:30am ACST

Walking in Two Worlds: evaluating First Nations programs in the public sector
Thursday September 17, 2026 11:30am - 12:30pm ACST
Authors: Anna Rasalingam (Attorney-General’s Department), Daniel Maher (Attorney-General’s Department)
This presentation will demonstrate an example of an internal government evaluation team working with First Nations communities in both traditional and new ways.
It will cover the experience of a First Nations-led evaluation team evaluating a Federal Government program, actively overlaying culturally appropriate evaluation methods as they come up against historic government policies and commissioning practices. It will highlight these systemic barriers, our efforts to navigate these barriers to ensure First Nations voices are not only included but central.
From our experiences at the last AES conference, there was a re-occurring theme from fellow evaluators on working with First Nations communities with integrity. This presentation will provide an example of working with and centring First Nations voices.
Utilising the theme of “Walking in Two Worlds”, the presentation will explore dichotomies of traditional and new ways of evaluation within the public sector. Key points will include:
  • Historical colonial barriers of commissioning, designing and implementing evaluations impacting First Nations peoples.
  • Challenges of designing culturally responsive evaluations within this colonial paradigm.
  • Centring First Nations voices, lived experiences, wisdom and perspectives.

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

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

1:30pm ACST

Process tracing in practice: testing causal claims with mixed evidence
Thursday September 17, 2026 1:30pm - 2:30pm ACST
Author: Kizzy Gandy, Jacaranda Partners

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

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

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

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

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

Kizzy Gandy

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

1:30pm ACST

Establishing an Indigenous owned and led evaluation process for the Timor-Leste Tais Weaving Ecosystem
Thursday September 17, 2026 1:30pm - 2:30pm ACST
Authors: Nea Harrison, Pandanus Evaluation, Maria do Céu Lopes da Silva

This presentation shares the journey by Timor-Aid and members of the Tais Weavers Network to develop an Indigenous evaluation process that supports intergenerational transmission of knowledge across Timor-Leste. 

The process of building evaluation skills and planning is beginning in Oé-cusse and will extend to other municipalities, enabling the 1,625 Weavers’ Network members to take charge of evaluating the National Tais Weaving Ecosystem themselves.

Tais is an intricate and beautiful fabric that is deeply embedded in Timorese culture. It is a symbol of identity and heritage and is used in traditional ceremonies and celebrations. Weaving Tais is a sacred process that has been passed down from generation to generation. UNESCO recognised Timor – Leste Tais as an Intangible Cultural Heritage in urgent need of safeguarding in 2021. 

This participatory and developmental evaluation work helps preserve this precious tradition. It is supported by an Asia Pacific Evaluation Association (APEA) and EvalIndigenous seeding grant provided to promote culturally responsive, Indigenous-led evaluation practices across the region.

The interactive presentation will share our work so far to: 
- build local evaluation knowledge and skills;
- develop locally owned and led, equitable, and inclusive evaluation plans that acknowledge the social, cultural and governance practices of Indigenous Timorese peoples;
- develop Indigenous evaluation data collection and information sharing resources that showcase the evaluation learnings, celebrate and build awareness of the importance Tais to Timor Leste people’s cultural traditions, values and languages;
-coach and mentor young weavers and Timor Aid staff to build their confidence and leadership skills to lead ongoing evaluation activities.

The audience will have the opportunity to explore some of these evaluation strategies. They will engage in an interactive discussion about the importance of inclusive evaluation strategies that build on local knowledge and skills and promote Timor-Leste’s cultural traditions, values, and languages.

Speakers
avatar for Nea Harrison

Nea Harrison

Director, Pandanus Evaluation
I have been an evaluator and member of the AES for over 20 years. I live in Darwin and work in Australian and international evaluation spaces.  I support government, non-government, First Nations, multilateral and community agencies to develop responsive, practical and rigorous MEL... Read More →
Thursday September 17, 2026 1:30pm - 2:30pm ACST
Waterfront 1 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

2:00pm ACST

An open discussion on research and evaluation that works for remote communities
Thursday September 17, 2026 2:00pm - 3:00pm ACST
Authors: Jillian Marsh, 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.
Speakers
JM

Jillian Marsh

Professor, Indigenous Knowledges, School Of Indigenous Australian Studies
LB

Laura Bird

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

2:00pm ACST

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


Cultural identity as a shield: Measuring the social value of Culture and Kinship
Authors: Louise Green, Victorian Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation, Lily Edwards
This presentation shares learnings from research by VACCHO and Victorian Aboriginal Community-Controlled Organisations (ACCOs), exploring how strengthening Identity and Cultural connectedness and practice, drives positive long-term health and wellbeing outcomes.

Building on a 2022 evaluation of the Culture and Kinship Model, the research is driven and sustained by Aboriginal leadership and Cultural governance and uses a SROI methodology to understand drivers of change and inform future recommendations.

Supported by Kowa Collaboration, Aboriginal-led evaluation consultancy, the approach is grounded in culturally responsive stakeholder engagement — including Impact and Value Yarning — to enable participatory interpretation and translation of knowledge and evidence.

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, disconnected from everyday decision-making. This paper presents an alternative model in which 14 organisations in Fiji, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, and Vietnam — including some with no prior research experience — 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 interrelated shifts in power. First, embedding evaluative inquiry into organisational routines created space for learning and reflection in contexts dominated by delivery pressures and compliance-focused monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL). Evaluation became a tool for adaptation and strategic thinking rather than reporting alone. Second, organisations developed confidence, skills, and ownership by leading the evaluation process themselves, with external actors acting as facilitators rather than controllers. Evaluation therefore contributed directly to organisational capacity strengthening. Third, the process fostered peer learning across the 14 organisations, creating horizontal networks of exchange and redistributing knowledge and influence away from donor-centric models. The paper argues that 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.
Speakers
LG

Louise Green

Strategic Project Manager - Culture and Kinship, VACCHO
avatar for Rodney Williams

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 →
MV

Marilyn Vilisoni

Managing Director, Solve Pacific
LE

Lily Edwards

Project Officer, Wathaurong
MB

Megan Brewer

Director, Nous Group
TO

Trina O'Donnell

Director Of Strategic Projects, Bellberry
SN

Satib Nisha Khan Khan

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

2:00pm ACST

Is there room in the C-suite for evaluators?
Thursday September 17, 2026 2:00pm - 3:00pm ACST
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.
Speakers
avatar for Dana Cross

Dana Cross

Associate Director, Grosvenor Public Sector Advisory
Dana is a public sector expert, possessing over 17 years of deep experience advising government organisations on program evaluation, organisational review, service optimisation and performance management. She is a member of Grosvenor’s Executive Leadership Team as Head of Strategy... Read More →
LA

Lyn Alderman

The Evaluators' Collective
Thursday September 17, 2026 2:00pm - 3:00pm ACST
Rooms 1+2 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

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

4:00pm ACST

Quality evaluation that makes a difference: continuing the conversation
Thursday September 17, 2026 4:00pm - 5:00pm ACST
Author: Carina Calzoni, AES Rob Sale, nous

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

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

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

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

Designed for intermediate to advanced evaluators, this roundtable creates space for collective reflection and future-oriented dialogue. By centring plurality and participation, it supports the AES vision by keeping the conversation alive—recognising that what constitutes “quality evaluation that makes a difference” must continue to evolve with the field.
Speakers
Thursday September 17, 2026 4:00pm - 5:00pm ACST
Rooms 3+4 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

4:00pm ACST

A social worker, an astrophysicist and an economist walk into a bar...
Thursday September 17, 2026 4:00pm - 5:00pm ACST
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.


Speakers
KC

Kate Cherry

Principal Advisor, Impact and Evaluation, CSIRO
avatar for Jake Clark

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 →
DM

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

4:00pm ACST

Meeting new challenges with better theories of change
Thursday September 17, 2026 4:00pm - 5:00pm ACST
Authors: Patricia Rogers, Footprint Evaluation Initiative, Emil Laurberg Morgensen, University of Southern Denmark
Theories of change are now commonly used to design initiatives, including projects, programs and policies, and to shape monitoring and evaluation.  But 40 years after first being showcased at an AES conference, these are often developed and used in ways that don’t fit what is needed, especially to support adaptation across different settings and in changing contexts.  This session will present common mistakes, what they are, why they matter, and examples of better strategies.  Participants will engage with exercises to identify issues, try out strategies and explore possible applications in their own work and in shaping organisational requirements and procedures.
Speakers
avatar for Patricia Rogers

Patricia Rogers

Co-founder, Footprint Evaluation Initiative
Founder of BetterEvaluation and former Professor of Public Sector Evaluation at RMIT University. Now working as consultant and advisor. My work has focused on supporting appropriate choice and use of evaluation methods and approaches to suit purposes and context. I am currently working... Read More →
avatar for Emil Laurberg Mogensen

Emil Laurberg Mogensen

Odense University Hospital, Department Of Clinical Research, University Of Southern Denmark
Thursday September 17, 2026 4:00pm - 5:00pm ACST
Hall 2

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 -