aes26 International Evaluation Conference

Authors: Lorraine Heywood, Treasury, Suzanne Butler, Treasury, Jessica Smart, AIFS

This panel discussion and Q&A will provide a lively and thought-provoking discussion about the differences between traditional program evaluation and place-based evaluation, with panel members sharing their experience and examples from different organisational perspectives across the field.

Evaluation in a place-based context must be fit-for-purpose – this requires deep consideration of the relational aspects that underpin place-based work, knowledge and understanding about the places and communities involved, and different leadership and governance structures to support decision-making.

This panel discussion will focus on exploring place-based evaluation from multiple perspectives, including hearing views from:
•    whole-of-government
•    commissioned evaluator
•    community representatives leading place-based work in Australia.

The three presenters will discuss the unique opportunities and challenges involved in evaluating place-based work, drawing on the experience of monitoring, evaluation and learning processes in different place-based projects.

Key points will include:
•    Different purposes for evaluation: balancing the need for learning with the need to demonstrate impact and discussing how the focus of evaluation can change over the life cycle of a place-based initiative.
•    Skills and understanding needed for place-based work and the implications for government, community and organisations leading place-based evaluations: the importance of self-awareness, place awareness and cultural awareness to effectively partner in place-based evaluation. The multi-dimensional role of government and continued efforts to build evaluation skills, capabilities and leading practice across the Australian Public Service will also be covered.
•    Key factors that make place-based evaluation different: including the diversity of place-based work, the need for iterative and emergent evaluation processes, variation across communities and places, and challenges understanding effectiveness and impact.

Three presenters will have up to 10 minutes each to convey critical ideas and reflections from their perspective. Twenty minutes will be available for audience participation, questions and answers.