aes26 International Evaluation Conference: Full Schedule

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

arrow_back View All Dates

11:30am ACST

Case studies – an overlooked technique in evaluation?

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

Waterfront 2

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

Speakers

Alan Woodward

Principal, Alan Woodward Consulting

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

Leanne Kelly

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

Traditional and new ways

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

11:30am ACST

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

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

Waterfront 1

Author: Gerald Onsando, Ubuntu Impact Consulting

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

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

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

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

Speakers

Gerald Onsando

Principal Consultant, Ubuntu Impact Consulting

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

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

Traditional and new ways

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

11:30am ACST

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

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

Rooms 3+4

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

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

Speakers

Stephanie Carter

Healthconsult

Megan Anderson

Healthconsult

Felicity Miles

Healthconsult

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

Ethics and integrity

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

11:30am ACST

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

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

Hall 2

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

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

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

Speakers

Anna Rasalingam

Daniel Maher

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

Traditional and new ways

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

12:00pm ACST

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

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

Waterfront 3

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

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

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

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

Speakers

Danielle Thornton

Senior Research Consultant, The Social Research Centre

Stephen Cuttriss

Research Director, The Social Research Centre

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

Roots and routes

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

1:30pm ACST

From Panic to Practice: Putting AI to Work in Evaluation

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

Rooms 1+2

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

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

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

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

Speakers

Dorothea Huber

Amsa

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

Roots and routes

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

3:30pm ACST

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

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

Waterfront 3

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

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

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

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

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

Speakers

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

Boundaries and bridges

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

3:30pm ACST

Is the value of evaluation hiding in the shadows?

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

Rooms 3+4

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

Megan Lugg

Director, Evaluation and Performance Measurement, Australian Taxation Office

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

Boundaries and bridges

Format Short paper
Audience Level Intermediate
Industry Public administration and safety
ID 161

3:30pm ACST

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

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

Hall 2

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

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

The framework is grounded in three interconnected principles:

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

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

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

Speakers

Sarah Jane Springer

Springer Health Consultants

Catherine Boekel

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

Ethics and integrity

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

3:30pm ACST

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

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

Waterfront 1

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

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

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

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

Speakers

Dimitria Gavalyugova

Senior Research and Evaluation Officer, NSW Department of Education

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

Traditional and new ways

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

3:30pm ACST

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

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

Waterfront 2

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

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

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

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

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

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

Speakers

Kim Grey

President, Australian Evaluation Society

Ruth Nicholls

Director - Evaluation Leadership, Policy and Capability, Australian Centre for Evaluation

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

Samantha Mayes

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

Social policy evaluation

John Stoney

Assistant Director, DSS

I’m an Assistant Director in the Evaluation Hub in the Department of Social Services. With my team mates I provide technical advice and support on evaluation to policy and program colleagues across the department. I also help deliver the Evaluation Readiness Service (ERS) which... Read More →

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

Boundaries and bridges

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

11:30am ACST

11:30am ACST

11:30am ACST

11:30am ACST

12:00pm ACST

1:30pm ACST

3:30pm ACST

3:30pm ACST

3:30pm ACST

3:30pm ACST

3:30pm ACST

Get help with the event