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/

2:30pm ACST

Interrogating problem representations in evaluation: Are we solving the right problems?

Wednesday September 16, 2026 2:30pm - 3:30pm ACST

Rooms 3+4

Authors: Andrew Boyle
Development programs often focus on whether interventions achieve intended outcomes, yet comparatively little attention is given to how the problems those interventions seek to address are defined. The way a problem is represented shapes which interventions are considered possible, influencing theories of change, program design, and the evaluation questions that follow.

Speakers

Andrew Boyle

Andrew Boyle Consulting

Wednesday September 16, 2026 2:30pm - 3:30pm ACST
Rooms 3+4 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Traditional and new ways

Format Round table
Audience Level Intermediate, Advanced
Industry Education and training, Environment and climate change, Community and social services, International development, Economic development tourism and infrastructure
ID 135

4:30pm ACST

Centring Indigenous worldviews: Warlpiri and the Itaukei Trust Affairs Board case learning

Wednesday September 16, 2026 4:30pm - 5:30pm ACST

Rooms 1+2

Authors: Alexander Gyles (La Trobe University), Allan Mua Illingworth (Muaakia Consulting), Glenda Napaljarri Wayne (La Trobe University), Mildred Napaljarri Spencer (La Trobe University), Raelene Jigili (Central Land Council), Marilyn Vilsoni (Solve Pacific)

“How might we most appropriately track and describe change about impact and wellbeing in Indigenous Australian and Fijian communities?”

Led by Indigenous community researchers and MEL practitioners, the session draws on two grounded case examples: the YWPP (Warlpiri Education and Training Trust, Tanami NT) approach to tracking learning and wellbeing, and community-centred MEL work supported by the Itaukei Trust Affairs Board (TTFB).

The session will be highly interactive: participants will break into small, facilitated groups with community and TTFB representatives to interrogate practice, and the table will close with a plenary synthesis that surfaces cross-case lessons, tensions, and practical next steps for culturally respectful MEL.

Speakers

Alexander Gyles

Research Fellow - Monitoring and Evaluation, Institute for Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University

Alex Gyles is a Research Fellow working in Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) at the Institute for Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University. He works closely with Marlkirdi Rose Napaljarri on the YWPP project and finds fieldwork with the YWPP team an exciting learning... Read More →

Allan Mua Illingworth

Glenda Napaljarri Wayne

Glenda Wayne Napaljarri is a community researcher on the YWPP
project from Yuendumu. She has developed her practice working
as an adult literacy tutor in Yuendumu’s Community Learning
Centre. In addition to conducting research in her home community
of Yuendumu, Glenda has travelled... Read More →

Raelene Jigili

Mildred Napaljarri Spencer

Marilyn Vilisoni

Managing Director, Solve Pacific

Wednesday September 16, 2026 4:30pm - 5:30pm ACST
Rooms 1+2 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Traditional and new ways

Format Round table
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Community and social services, Economic development tourism and infrastructure, Education and training, International development
ID 232

10:30am ACST

Challenging power through MEL: What can Australian and international development evaluators learn from each other?

Thursday September 17, 2026 10:30am - 11:30am ACST

Rooms 1+2

Authors: Elisabeth Jackson (Centre For Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University), Thushara Dibley Centre For Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University, Shane D'Angelo Centre For Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University)

This roundtable explores MEL as a practice that can challenge existing power structures and strengthen community voices. It aims to promote sharing and learning between evaluators in domestic and international contexts and build new connections between evaluators who share similar approaches and principles.

Across diverse approaches such as culturally responsive and Indigenous evaluation, realist approaches, and place-based methods, practitioners are asking: whose worldview shapes what counts as evidence? While the language used in different sectors varies, there are strong common threads: centring marginalised voices, working collaboratively, reflecting on our own assumptions, and valuing local knowledge.

This session is designed for intermediate to advanced evaluators who are thinking critically about power, partnership, and the politics of evidence. Participants will explore what is common across approaches in domestic and international contexts and how these are creating space for different worldviews and supporting forms of evidence that are meaningful to communities.

After a short framing and brief examples, participants will move into structured small-group discussions to surface shared tensions and practical insights. Prompts will include: What is one way your current evaluation practice may reinforce existing power dynamics? Where have you seen MEL genuinely shift decision-making power? What institutional constraints limit these approaches? Groups will then report back in a facilitated plenary. Participants will be invited to identify one insight they will take back into their own practice and one structural barrier the evaluation field needs to address collectively. Key insights will be shared more broadly through a blog developed after the conference.

The roundtable aligns with the aes26 sub-themes Traditional and New Ways and Ethics and Integrity, inviting participants to reflect on their real-world experience of applying participatory and culturally grounded approaches in different contexts and exploring how these can help disrupt existing power relations.

Speakers

Elisabeth Jackson

Senior Research Fellow, La Trobe University - Centre For Human Security and Social Change

Dr Elisabeth Jackson is a Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Human Security and Social Change where she conducts research and evaluation in Southeast Asia and the Pacific. She is currently co-leading an impact evaluation of a program working with diverse marginalised groups... Read More →

Thushara Dibley

Centre For Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University

Shane D'Angelo

Centre For Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University

Thursday September 17, 2026 10:30am - 11:30am ACST
Rooms 1+2 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Traditional and new ways

Format Round table
Audience Level Intermediate, Advanced
Industry Community and social services, International development

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

1:30pm ACST

From commissioning to learning: how funders can help shape the conditions for meaningful evaluation

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

Hall 2

Authors: Ximena Avalos (Ian Potter Foundation), Caroline Henwood (Ian Potter Foundation), Sarah Neill (Paul Ramsay Foundation), Jen Lorains (Childrens Ground), Adriaan Wolvaardt (Minderoo) , David Stuart (Creative Australia)

Philanthropy and other funding organisations play a powerful but often under examined role in shaping how evaluation is designed, resourced, interpreted, and used. While there is much discussion on approaches, methods, tools and capability, there is less attention paid to how funding structures, commissioning practices, and organisational cultures in funding organisations enable – or constrain – meaningful learning.

This session offers a funding perspective on different ways organisations try to “make space” for evaluation to be useful, ethical, and context-responsive. Drawing on experience from grantmaking organisations working across sectors and geographies, the session explores funders who are trying to shift beyond compliance-driven evaluation toward approaches that value learning, adaptation, and multiple ways of knowing.

The panel discussion will examine common pressure points – such as timelines, misaligned reporting expectations, and one-way data practices – and reflect on how these are often unintentionally created by funders and what funders are doing to try and address this. Panellists will discuss practical shifts funders are considering or making, including rethinking evaluation questions, sharing power over evidence, and supporting evaluation as a relational and iterative practice rather than a transactional product.

Rather than prescribing a single “right” model, the session invites dialogue across roles in the evaluation ecosystem, asking: what does good evaluation look like when funders actively value place, context, and relationships—and what changes when philanthropy sees itself as a learner, not just a commissioner?

Speakers

Jen Lorains

Director Research & Evaluation, Childrens Ground

Jen Lorains is the Director of Research & Evaluation at Children’s Ground. She works with each community to evaluate and evidence the impact of Children’s Ground’s empowerment, systems reform and integrated service platform.

Jen has undergraduate and postgraduate qualifications in applied social research and over 15 years experience designing and undertaking research and evaluation with communities and services. Her interest lies in working with communities to implement and evaluate approaches (within... Read More →

Ximena Avalos

Ian Potter Foundation

Caroline Henwood

Research, Evaluation and Learning Manager, Ian Potter Foundation

Adriaan Wolvaardt

Minderoo

Sarah Neill

MERL Manager, Paul Ramsay Foundation

David Stuart

Director Evaluation And Impact Measurement, Creative Australia

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

Boundaries and bridges

Format Round table
Audience Level Intermediate, Advanced
Industry Not for profit Philanthropy

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.

Speakers

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 →

Lyn Alderman

The Evaluators' Collective

Piacarmel 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

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: 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

Rob Sale

Nous