aes26 International Evaluation Conference

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

11:00am ACST

Beyond Silos: A Technology–Evaluation Partnership Building a Digital Data Pipeline

Wednesday September 16, 2026 11:00am - 11:30am ACST

Authors: Kristine Tuban, Save the Children, Martin Holmstrand, Save the Children
This presentation showcases MEAL Uplift, a regional initiative by Save the Children Australia that strengthens digital monitoring, evaluation, accountability, and learning (MEAL) across Pacific Country Offices through a close partnership between programme teams, MEAL, and the Technology team. The presentation focuses on how this collaboration produced a practical, co‑created digital solution while building long‑term organisational capability.

The objective of the presentation is to demonstrate why cross‑disciplinary partnership is critical to improving data quality, efficiency, and use in evaluation practice, and how evaluation can actively shape digital transformation, rather than simply adopting technological tools after they are introduced. This is important in contexts where teams face increasing reporting demands but limited capacity to manage fragmented or manual data systems.

The core argument is that sustainable digital MEAL is achieved when three elements are intentionally integrated:
(1) Digital systems and infrastructure, illustrated through a custom‑built data collection app and automated data pipeline co‑designed with the Technology team to address efficiency and quality challenges;
(2) Skills and behaviours, supported through targeted training, coaching, and practical use of real data; and
(3) Scaling and institutional support, through shared standards, governance, and regional scaffolding that embeds digital MEAL into everyday practice.

The presentation will follow this three‑part structure, using concrete examples and lessons from MEAL Uplift to show what worked, what changed, and why.

Participant engagement will be promoted through short reflection prompts on participants’ own digital MEAL challenges, followed by shared discussion and an open Q&A focused on transferable ideas and co‑created solutions across different organisational contexts.

Speakers

Kristine Tuban

Regional Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability, And Learning Technical Adviser, Save the Children

Martin Holmstrand

Technical Data Lead, Save the Children

Wednesday September 16, 2026 11:00am - 11:30am ACST
Waterfront 2 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Boundaries and bridges

Format Short paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Education and training, International development, Information media and telecommunications
ID 289

12:00pm ACST

The ethics of independence – what does ‘independent evaluation’ mean in 2026?

Wednesday September 16, 2026 12:00pm - 12:30pm ACST

Author: Jo van Twest Farmer (Rooftop Social)

Independence is often posited as a primary means of ensuring evaluation is rigorous, trustworthy and fair. Independence is Norm 4 of the United Nation’s Evaluation Group Norms and Standards for Evaluation (2016), which states it is “necessary for credibility”. Built into this standard are two concepts – behavioural independence (evaluating without undue influence) and organisational independence (structures that support independent practice). For many in the evaluation landscape, the best means of ensuring independence has been for ‘independent evaluators’ to conduct ‘independent evaluations’.
Discussions around what constitutes independence have long been a feature of evaluation literature, but arguably there have never been so many pressures on maintaining independence in evaluation. There is growing interest in evaluation approaches where the relationships between program delivery and evaluation is less clear-cut, such as developmental, participatory and lived experience-led evaluations. As evaluation capability grows, evaluation functions are more widespread across teams and embedded in business-as-usual learning practice, rather than contracted out. Less positively, changing fiscal conditions place more pressure on organisations to undertake evaluation with less capacity for external expertise and support. The need to demonstrate impact to access funding in tightening funding environments means evaluations are higher stakes than ever, and there are often vested interests in demonstrating programs are effective.
This short paper will discuss what independence means in 2026, arguing that evaluation has moved beyond ‘organisational independence’ and must instead focus on how to support ‘behavioural independence’. Contemporary evaluation practice requires understandings of independence grounded in ethics and integrity. This approach directly challenges traditional role boundaries in evaluation, such as external versus internal or participant versus evaluator. In responding to the challenges of maintaining independence in 2026 and beyond, the presentation will suggest criteria to support evaluators to guide the ethics of their own practice, and a framework for upholding independent practice.

Speakers

Jo van Twest Farmer

Rooftop Social

Wednesday September 16, 2026 12:00pm - 12:30pm ACST
Hall 2

Boundaries and bridges

Format Short paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Community and social services, Education and training, Health and disability, Not for profit Philanthropy, Public administration and safety
ID 214

2:30pm ACST

Evaluation as a Bridge: The Multiple Hats of MEL in Scaling Government-led Graduation Programmes

Wednesday September 16, 2026 2:30pm - 3:00pm ACST

Authors: Kristian Paolo Torres, BRAC Ultra-Poor Graduation Initiative, Tania Dora Warokka, BRAC Ultra-Poor Graduation Initiative, Arnaldo Pellini, BRAC Ultra-Poor Graduation Initiative
Programmes aiming to influence governance systems and policy reforms—particularly those using experimental approaches—require MEL functions that are able to move across design, strategy, context analysis, and sensemaking.

Traditional M&E often prioritizes linear accountability, struggling to measure influence on policies and behaviors (as noted by the ODI RAPID programme, 2006–2020).

This presentation shares the experience of the BRAC Ultra-Poor Graduation Initiative, which partners with governments across six countries to scale the ‘Graduation’ approach through national social development systems (e.g. social protection, livelihood, labour and employment, etc.). Because UPGI’s success is measured by policy influence and system change rather than direct delivery, the MEL function must act as a strategic bridge rather than a neutral observer.

Drawing on our experience in Indonesia and the Philippines, we share how MEL supports country teams as adaptive units navigating two primary challenges: calibrating the interplay between political commitment, administrative feasibility, and technical quality; and designing for scale from the outset to ensure government ownership rather than isolated pilot results.

We argue that a team learning culture—rather than a "neutral" M&E function—is the essential infrastructure for this work. By establishing specific habits to capture field experience and inform strategic decisions, MEL acts as the "many-hatted" bridge required to navigate these dynamic systemic boundaries and prevent programmes from remaining stagnant.

We will share three core insights from our MEL experience:

1. How the evaluator’s role shifts to an active learning partner, framing field evidence to navigate political and administrative boundaries.
2. How practical tools—such as Capacity and Commitment Rubrics and Diaries—support teams in documenting for learning rather than reporting for compliance.
3. Real-world examples where structured reflection informed specific shifts in government engagement strategies.

The session will also engage the audience in a "Reflection Micro-Workshop" where participants will share insights from their own work and experiences.

Speakers

Kristian Paolo Torres

Research, Evaluation, and Knowledge Management Specialist, BRAC Ultra-Poor Graduation Initiative

Tania Dora Warokka

Senior MEL and Research Analyst, BRAC Ultra-Poor Graduation Initiative

Wednesday September 16, 2026 2:30pm - 3:00pm ACST
Waterfront 3 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Boundaries and bridges

Format Short paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Community and social services, Not for profit Philanthropy, International development
ID 234

2:30pm ACST

Epistemic Justice: victim survivors of child sexual abuse as co-evaluators

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

Authors: Nic Vogelpoel (Day Four Projects), Malika Reese (Lived Experience Advisor), Sandra Collins (Lived Experience Advisor)
What happens when evaluation is not just informed by lived experience, but led by it?

This presentation offers a rare, practice-based account of a lived experience-led evaluation undertaken with the National Centre for Action on Child Sexual Abuse, where victim survivors worked as co-evaluators across all stages of the process. Established to centre victim survivors in awareness-raising, help-seeking, advocacy and best-practice responses, the Centre provided a powerful context to rethink how evaluation knowledge is produced, and by whom.

The session argues that lived experience-led evaluation is not an ethical “add-on”, but a fundamental shift in values, power and epistemology. Drawing on the evaluation findings, presenters will explore three core propositions.

First, nothing about us without us: moving from evaluation on people to evaluation led by people with lived experience reshapes evaluation questions, evidence, outcomes and definitions of rigour. Second, epistemic justice: lived experience leadership challenges entrenched assumptions about who gets to ask questions, whose knowledge counts, and how institutions respond to new forms of evidence. Third, beyond advice to synthesis: lived experience cannot simply “advise” evaluation, it must be integrated as a distinct way of knowing that transforms the whole evaluation.

Co-presented by lived experience evaluators and Day Four Projects evaluators, the session will combine reflective storytelling, concrete practice examples and facilitated dialogue. Participants will be invited to critically examine their own evaluative assumptions, engage in small-group reflection, and explore practical strategies for making space for multiple knowledge systems while maintaining evaluative integrity and meeting institutional requirements.This session will be particularly valuable for evaluators, commissioners, researchers and practitioners seeking more just, credible and impactful approaches to lived-experience evaluation in complex and sensitive contexts.

Speakers

Nic Vogelpoel

Director, Day Four Projects

We specialise in the theory and practice of good collaboration. We have a particular interest in learning and evaluation for partnerships, platforms and collaborative initiatives. We work with international and domestic partners from multilateral organisations, governments, NGOs... Read More →

Malika Reese

Lived Experience Advisor

Angela Obradovic

Wednesday September 16, 2026 2:30pm - 3:30pm ACST
Waterfront 1 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Boundaries and bridges

Format Long paper
Audience Level Advanced, Intermediate
Industry Not for profit Philanthropy, Health and disability, Community and social services, Public administration and safety, Education and training
ID 45

4:00pm ACST

Developmental Evaluation or a Learning Organisation?

Wednesday September 16, 2026 4:00pm - 4:30pm ACST

Author: Caroline Henwood, The Ian Potter Foundation
Increasingly organisations are leaning into the “L” in MEL. Learning is a critical component of evaluation it is the opportunity to turn findings and insights into something practical to inform adaptation. However, evaluators often reflect on the report on the desk, or of evaluations occurring after decisions are made. Shifting the focus to learning creates a different space and dynamic for conversations to occur – a key practice in Developmental Evaluation.

Speakers

Caroline Henwood

Research, Evaluation and Learning Manager, Ian Potter Foundation

Laura Bird

Paul Ramsay Foundation

Wednesday September 16, 2026 4:00pm - 4:30pm ACST
Waterfront 2 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Boundaries and bridges

Format Short paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Not for profit Philanthropy
ID 171

4:30pm ACST

Professional isolation in evaluation: AES members’ experiences, and ways to strengthen peer connection and community

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

Authors: Martina Donkers, Julie Elliott

Professional isolation is an experience that, ironically, many evaluators share. As evaluators, we often find ourselves in a team of one – the only evaluator in the room, the only evaluator at the organisation, one bringing an evaluative lens to the problem. This can be hard. It can feel like people are turning to us for more answers than we have, or expecting something unrealistic. Sometimes we find ourselves feeling isolated due to our culture, our methodological approach or our disciplinary background.
There are structural ways isolation shows up – evaluators who work remotely in regional areas, evaluators who are self-employed, evaluators who balance their role with kids and family responsibilities. These experiences can leave us feeling like an outsider, with no one to test ideas, no one to help when the going gets rough, and no one to help grow our capabilities.
This panel session will explore AES members’ experiences of professional isolation, and what has worked (and not worked!) to help them combat it. We’ll present anonymised experiences from AES members about professional isolation to show attendees they aren’t alone.
We’ll then hear from 3 panellists at different stages of their professional journey, and what they’ve done to address professional isolation they’ve felt as evaluators. Finally, we’ll open the floor to questions – how can we feel more connected in our work? – and explore a range of ways that we can combat professional isolation in our field. This panel is presented by the AES Peer Group Mentoring Program Working Group, and considers how the program helps strengthen connection to peers. It also extends thinking beyond AES initiatives, and considers other ways that evaluators can combat professional isolation in a disconnected world. If you’ve ever felt lonely as an evaluator, this session is for you.

Speakers

Martina Donkers

Wednesday September 16, 2026 4:30pm - 5:30pm ACST
Hall 2

Boundaries and bridges

Format Panel
Audience Level Intermediate
Industry Public administration and safety, Community and social services, Education and training, Not for profit Philanthropy, Health and disability
ID 311

10:30am ACST

What works for whom? Developmental evaluation of a domestic violence prevention pilot for young men

Thursday September 17, 2026 10:30am - 11:00am ACST

Authors: Simon Alaba, ARTD Consultants, Rachel Aston, ARTD, Brad Astbury, University of Melbourne
Primary prevention programs targeting boys and young men at risk of using violence operate in a space where the evidence base is still developing, and knowing what works, for whom, and in what circumstances, is far from settled.

This presentation draws on 3 years of developmental evaluation of a primary prevention pilot to share three interconnected findings at the intersection of evaluation practice and implementation science.

First, we present evidence that participant and program alignment is among the most influential contextual factors shaping outcomes – a finding with direct implications for how programs like this should be targeted and resourced.

Second, we discuss how a significant program design shift, from targeting harmful gender norms directly to exploring participants' own values as an entry point, improved engagement and created the conditions for more meaningful reflection on masculinity and behaviour.

Third, we explore the adaptation dilemma: when evaluation signals resistance from participants, how should program designers respond?

Drawing on findings across multiple pilot phases, we discuss the tension between adapting to improve engagement and holding firm on program fidelity when discomfort is itself part of the change process. We close by examining what these findings mean for how evaluators interpret and communicate success in primary prevention settings, where uniform outcomes are neither expected nor realistic, and where the most meaningful impacts may be concentrated among a subset of participants.

Attendees will leave with practical insights applicable to developmental evaluation, pilot program design, and the evaluation of complex social programs more broadly. The session will close with audience discussion that invites participants to reflect on how these findings apply to their own evaluation contexts.

Speakers

Simon Alaba

Senior Consultant, ARTD

Thursday September 17, 2026 10:30am - 11:00am ACST
Waterfront 2 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Boundaries and bridges

Format Short paper
Audience Level Intermediate, Advanced
Industry Community and social services

10:30am ACST

Philanthropy and Evaluation – What Gives?

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

Author: Rick Cummings
It is estimated that about $2.4 billion was given in philanthropic and charitable causes in Australian in 2021(Philanthropy Australia, 2021, A Blueprint to Grow Structured Giving). This is a very significant amount and yet there is little if any research on how these funds and programs are evaluated.

We are proposing a panel discussion moderated by a Fellow using a café layout to discuss issues related to philanthropy and evaluation. The idea would be to look both at the role of evaluation in philanthropy and the role of philanthropy in evaluation. The objective is to identify issues in this field, to generate discussion between attendees and philanthropic organisations, and to build some bridges between evaluators and philanthropists for future research and evaluation activities.

The panel will consist of representatives from Australian philanthropic agencies, organisations which rely on philanthropic donations, and Fellows who have conducted evaluations of programs funded by philanthropy. Each of these panel members will be asked to give a 5-minute presentation on the issues they have found in philanthropy and evaluation. These presenters will form a panel, with a Fellow as moderator.

Based on these talks and relevant research, tables will be provided a set of questions to for discussion and for them to provide feedback/questions for discussion with the panel members. Each table will be facilitated by a Fellow or experienced evaluator.

Speakers

Rick Cummings

Emeritus Professor, Murdoch University

Rick Cummings is an Emeritus Professor in Public Policy at Murdoch University. He has 40 years of experience conducting evaluation studies in education, training, health, and crime prevention primarily for the state and commonwealth government agencies and the World Bank. He currently... Read More →

Thursday September 17, 2026 10:30am - 11:30am ACST
Waterfront 3 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Boundaries and bridges

Format Panel
Audience Level Intermediate, Foundational
Industry Not for profit Philanthropy
ID 1010

1:30pm ACST

Walking alongside each other at the pace of trust: how evaluation is only the destination

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

Authors: Skye Gooch, Djirra, Rebecca Steunenberg, Djirra, Lesly Zambrano, Djirra ,Taylor Rawson, Djirra
Djirra is proposing short paper presentation about our experience of designing a self-determined program and Monitoring and Evaluation Framework using an Aboriginal-led participatory approach for our specialist Alcohol and Other Drugs service. We aim to demonstrate the value of Aboriginal-led participatory program design approaches.

In our short paper, we will cover the three following core learnings:

•The power of relationships
At Djirra, our Design, Monitoring and Evaluation Officers are embedded in each program area, and our Program Development Lead is also an internal role. The roles' positioning fosters strong, trusting relationships with the teams. This relational approach allows for the design of a rich and empowered program design, for Aboriginal people, by Aboriginal people.
•Walking at the pace of trust
We had the opportunity to take our time with this process, allowing the space for trusting and dynamic dialogue to be fostered. We saw many benefits to this approach, such as the Program Development staff guiding the team while still being led by their expertise, allowing everyone to be able to deeply consider their practice and the evolution of the project, and time to centre rich data and narratives, making the vision and impact about more than just numbers.
•The design journey becomes an outcome in itself
In doing the program design in this approach, the overall process achieved outcomes in being completed itself. By the end of the project, we saw mutual benefits for everyone. Our Program Development staff grew deeper knowledge of the team’s deep and complex context, and the team itself grew their skills and knowledge of systems work.

We aim to deliver this in a slide show format, focusing on engaging visuals and simplicity. We will be opening the presentation up to the audience at the end for a yarn with the presenters.

Speakers

Skye Gooch

Manager of Individual Support Services, Djirra

Rebecca Steunenberg

Team Leader of Alcohol and Other Drugs, Djirra

Thursday September 17, 2026 1:30pm - 2:00pm ACST
Waterfront 3 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Boundaries and bridges

Format Short paper
Audience Level Intermediate
Industry Community and social services
ID 320

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

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

2:30pm ACST

Monitoring on a shoestring: How reproducible reporting can help make better use of data.

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

Authors: Stephanie Quail (ARTD), Sophie Henness (ARTD)

Non-government organisations (NGOs) and small organisations often face a range of barriers, such as limited funding and staffing, to collecting, analysing, and utilising client and program data to support continuous improvement and decision making. For these organisations, taking an empowerment evaluation approach, which enables them to assess and improve their own programs while building capacity and ownership, has the potential to provide sustainable and ongoing value. Empowerment evaluation strengthens organisational capacity and equips organisations with tools to collect, analyse, and interpret data for ongoing program improvement.

This presentation explores low-cost and high-impact opportunities for embedding monitoring, as demonstrated by our recent work with Bonnie’s Support Service to develop internal capability to administer and analyse a new client satisfaction survey. We will highlight common challenges for small NGOs, and our approaches for setting up monitoring on a shoestring, including:

How data is collected, including an overview of free or low-cost survey platforms, and their advantages and disadvantages
How data is analysed, including how the free, open-source software R can be used to set up reproducible analysis that once established can be re-used without needing internal quantitative expertise
How reports and other outputs are created, including how polished reports incorporating text, figures and tables can be generated using R.

Audience members will leave this presentation with an understanding of common challenges to setting up and analysing client satisfaction survey data, the advantages and disadvantages of available open-source platforms, and practical approaches for setting up reproducible analysis and reports. Attendees will receive a free online toolkit we have developed which organisations can use to guide the development of their own low-cost monitoring and reproducible reporting.

Speakers

Stephanie Quail

Senior Manager, ARTD

Sophie Henness

ARTD Consultants

Thursday September 17, 2026 2:30pm - 3:00pm ACST
Rooms 3+4 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Boundaries and bridges

Format Short paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Community and social services, Not for profit Philanthropy
ID 276
about <br>

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

Annette Waters

NSW Department Of Education

Zina Baghi

NSW Department Of Education

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

Boundaries and bridges

Format Short paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Education and training
ID 291

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

R

Rob Sale

Nous

Carina Calzoni

AES

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

Boundaries and bridges

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

4:00pm ACST

Strengthening community mental wellbeing through culturally grounded and practical evaluation tools in Vanuatu.

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

Author: Michael Taiki, Lokol Solutions

This Skill Building session introduces three practical, culturally grounded evaluation tools developed through Churches of Christ Vanuatu’s (CCCV) mental wellbeing work: the Faith + Data Model, the Youth Risk‑Mapping Tool and Trauma‑Informed Storian Circles. These tools emerged from a multi‑year program involving a 1,110‑household Urban Study, youth behavioural data, earthquake trauma responses and community‑driven interventions. The session addresses a core challenge in evaluation: how to design methods that are rigorous, culturally resonant and effective in low‑resource, cross‑cultural settings.
The objective of the presentation is to equip evaluators with adaptable tools that integrate community evidence, kastom practices and faith‑based strengths to strengthen mental wellbeing systems. This topic is important because evaluators increasingly work in culturally diverse contexts where Western evaluation methods alone are insufficient for capturing lived experience, trauma, and relational dynamics.
The presentation advances three key messages:
1.Evaluation must integrate cultural and spiritual knowledge with data to produce meaningful insights.
2.Youth wellbeing requires rapid, context‑specific assessment tools that identify patterns of risk and guide targeted interventions.
3.Trauma‑aware, culturally grounded qualitative methods can generate rich data while supporting community healing and resilience.
Each tool is introduced through a short demonstration using real CCCV examples, followed by a structured group activity where participants apply the tool to a scenario. This design ensures that participants not only understand the concepts but also practice using them in a supportive environment.
The session will be interactive through small‑group exercises, reflective discussions and scenario‑based problem‑solving. Participants will map youth risks, design a Storian Circle prompt and apply the Faith + Data Model to a community case study. These activities encourage peer learning, cultural reflection and practical skill development.
By the end of the session, participants will leave with three adaptable tools they can apply immediately in their own evaluation contexts.

Speakers

Michael Taiki

Thursday September 17, 2026 4:00pm - 5:00pm ACST
Rooms 1+2 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Boundaries and bridges

Format Skill building
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Community and social services
ID 136

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

Boundaries and bridges

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

10:30am ACST

How to evaluate a company

Friday September 18, 2026 10:30am - 11:00am ACST

Author: Gerard Atkinson, Iris Ethics
Evaluation is typically applied to discrete policies and programs, yet organisations themselves require systematic assessment of whether they achieve their goals and align with their values. This presentation examines how evaluation practice can be adapted to assess an entire company, drawing on a case study from Iris Ethics where we designed and implemented an integrated company-level evaluation plan.

The objective is to demonstrate how evaluative thinking can bridge the fragmented approaches currently dominating corporate contexts. Here strategy evaluation focuses on financial/operational objectives, ESG operates as carved-out compliance, and program evaluation remains siloed. This matters because organisations exist within interconnected systems: programs, profitability, and stakeholder value cannot genuinely be disentangled, yet corporate evaluation practice rarely addresses them holistically.

The presentation makes three core arguments. First, whole-of-company evaluation requires integrated thinking across traditionally separate domains: financial performance, operational delivery, social impact, and stakeholder value, grounded in evaluation's systematic logic whilst incorporating corporate strategy, ESG frameworks, market research methodologies, and economic value-for-investment thinking. Second, evaluability must be embedded from the start: mission and vision statements developed with explicit monitoring and evaluation capability, avoiding vague aspirations that cannot be assessed. Third, evaluation must be integrated into operational platforms rather than existing as separate reporting exercises, making assessment continuous rather than episodic.

The presentation follows a case study structure using a start-up example: establishing why whole-of-company evaluation matters, presenting the step-by-step framework (including whole-of-company logic models), demonstrating how evaluation integrates with strategy, governance, financial management, and competitive positioning, and identifying transferable lessons. Building on methodologies developed for NFP and government sectors but adapted to incorporate profitability and commercial risk, it demonstrates evaluation's applicability beyond traditional boundaries.

It will comprise a structured Q&A and discussion on barriers to integrated company evaluation, and invites participants to identify how the profession can engage with this frontier of practice.

Speakers

Gerard Atkinson

Managing Director, Iris Ethics

Gerard Atkinson is Managing Director and founder of Iris Ethics, Australia's first on-demand Human Research Ethics Committee serving the social research, market research, and evaluation sectors. He started his international career in market research and evaluation in 2001, learning... Read More →

Friday September 18, 2026 10:30am - 11:00am ACST
Waterfront 2 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Boundaries and bridges

Format Short paper
Audience Level Intermediate, Advanced
Industry Public administration and safety, Community and social services, Economic development tourism and infrastructure
ID 24

10:30am ACST

From framework to practice: What does it take to implement shared impact in place-based work?

Friday September 18, 2026 10:30am - 11:30am ACST

Authors: Nicholas Hill Place Australia, Eve Millar, Place Australia
The use of place-based initiatives (PBIs) to address complex and entrenched disadvantage is expanding across Australia. These initiatives typically go beyond the delivery of single programs and involve cross-sector partnerships that place communities at the centre of efforts to address local problems. While a growing number of initiatives are demonstrating impact, the diversity of approaches, frameworks, and indicators used contributes to a fragmented evidence base. Inconsistencies in how impact is conceptualised and reported limit opportunities for shared learning and present a barrier to the growth and sustainability of the place-based ecosystem.

PLACE Australia is working collaboratively with stakeholders across the ecosystem—including government, philanthropy, not-for-profits, and community organisations—to develop a shared impact framework with a set of flexible indicators that more consistently demonstrate the impact of PBIs, support ongoing learning, and strengthen the sector. As the framework moves from development to implementation, a number of practical challenges arise. These include how shared indicators can be applied flexibly across diverse initiatives, how to balance consistency with local adaptation, how frameworks can support learning rather than compliance, and how Indigenous knowledge and community voice can be embedded in practice.

This roundtable brings together evaluators and practitioners to explore these challenges and identify practical pathways for implementation. Through facilitated discussion, participants will share their practice insights on implementation opportunities, risk and design considerations. The discussion will inform the next phase of testing and implementation of the shared impact framework.

Participants will be invited to reflect on the following questions:

1.How can shared indicators be consistently applied across diverse place-based initiatives while remaining meaningful to local contexts?

2.How can shared impact approaches support learning and improvement without becoming compliance-driven reporting requirements?

3.What risks and opportunities should be considered when implementing shared impact approaches across the place-based ecosystem?

4.What is needed to support the implementation and uptake of the shared impact framework across the sector?

Speakers

Nicholas Hill

Strengthening Place-based Impact Lead, PLACE Australia

Eve Millar

Director (Data, Evidence and Practice), Place

Friday September 18, 2026 10:30am - 11:30am ACST
Rooms 1+2 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Boundaries and bridges

Format Round table
Audience Level Intermediate, Advanced
Industry Not for profit Philanthropy, Community and social services, Health and disability, Education and training, Environment and climate change
ID 281

11:30am ACST

What’s your problem? Navigating the impact of problematisation on evaluation

Friday September 18, 2026 11:30am - 12:30pm ACST

Author: Liesl Harrold, Australian Taxation Office
Problematisation is a deliberate process of dismantling a problem to understand the different ways of thinking that lead to the classification of phenomena as a problem. It goes beyond the construction of problem statements to focus on the effort required to understand historical and theoretical assumptions underpinning its framing. Problematisation is a way to test assumptions, generate new ideas, and make new connections to theoretical understandings. In evaluation, it has the potential to provide rigour to practices associated with judging through structuring evaluative thinking.

Using a skill building format, this paper will help participants understand the role of problems in evaluation. The format will follow an explain-model-apply in a group teaching format including practical application of selected trans-disciplinary theories and approaches. It will include a brief overview of:

•Problem logics and how they can be constructed
•Problem representation and the genealogy of problems
•Key theories that can support evaluators to think differently e.g. social identity and psychological safety theoretical frameworks.

Problematisation provides a systematic approach that offers evaluators support to think differently, rather than using existing knowledge to validate existing thoughts. Evaluators’ worldviews and skills influence their competence which may manifest in generalisations of the problem.

Problem-solving is a role in evaluation, as it supports the purpose of interventions in directing social change. They are primarily considered in the needs analysis phase of an evaluation to anchor program logics. However, this foundation has implications for intervention design, defining outcomes and establishing criteria of merit. Monitoring frameworks, particularly when using sentinel indicators, are also influenced by problem framing and assumptions.
Indigenous and transformative approaches, where the rectification of historical power imbalances is essential, would find this particularly relevant. Problematisation can prepare participants for truth-telling, a step in reconciling intergenerational trauma and stopping systemic violence (Payne & Norman, 2025).

Speakers

Liesl Harrold

Assistant Director, Small Business Evaluation Hub, Australian Taxation Office

Liesl works in the Australian Taxation Office (ATO), helping business areas deliver quality evaluations and to build their evaluation culture, capacity and practice. With over 25 years of evaluation experience, Liesl has also worked for Queensland Treasury and Trade where she assisted... Read More →

Friday September 18, 2026 11:30am - 12:30pm ACST
Rooms 3+4 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Boundaries and bridges

Format Skill building
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Economic development tourism and infrastructure, Education and training, Public administration and safety, Community and social services, Not for profit Philanthropy
ID 128

12:00pm ACST

Creating impact culture empowered by evaluation: building bridges and blurring boundaries during a merger

Friday September 18, 2026 12:00pm - 12:30pm ACST

Authors: Virgina Thomas, Bioeconomy Science Institute Maiangi Taiao, Stewart Graham, Bioeconomy Science Institute Maiangi Taiao, Helen Percy, Bioeconomy Science Institute Maiangi Taiao
A culture of impact, empowered by evaluation, encourages accountability and learning, supporting projects to focus on outcomes, demonstrate efficacy and make improvements. Fostering such an environment promotes success, yet can be challenging to achieve, requiring leadership, communication, adaptability, capacity and capability building, and resources.

Our paper discusses the (co)creation of impact culture, and evaluation systems and tools, in the Bioeconomy Science Institute Maiangi Taiao, a new public research organisation created by merging four of Aotearoa New Zealand’s Crown Research Institutes (CRIs). Establishing an impact culture in this new organisation requires building bridges and blurring boundaries between the organisations and systems that have been merged.

While the four CRIs all had systems and tools to plan for and evaluate impact, the approaches were unique to each organisation, as were their impact cultures. Since the merger, colleagues have collaborated to bring the previously separate systems and tools together into a new evaluation ecosystem.

In our paper we focus on creating a cohesive impact culture, empowered by evaluation, through i. inter-organisational dialogue, ii. building an enabling environment for evaluation that is adaptable to different needs and functions, and iii. disseminating evaluation tools and resources and promoting evaluative thinking across organisations through collegial networks.

Using our experience as a case study, we will inspire our audience to reconsider the impact and evaluation culture, systems and tools in their own organisations using real time polling (e.g., Mentimeter) to encourage reflection and participation.

We draw on the work of Blundo and Canto (2019) and Ferre (2025) on building an evaluative culture including: creating a system that is adaptable to the different needs and functions of the legacy organisations, fostering dialogue across and beyond the evaluation sector to include fields such as economics and social science, and building capacity, capability and resources for evaluation.

Friday September 18, 2026 12:00pm - 12:30pm ACST
Waterfront 3 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Boundaries and bridges

Format Short paper
Audience Level Intermediate, Advanced
Industry Natural resources and energy, Environment and climate change
ID 124

1:30pm ACST

Making Space for Economics: Lessons from Comparative Advantage in CGIAR

Friday September 18, 2026 1:30pm - 2:00pm ACST

Author: Matthew Armstrong, CGIAR
This presentation provides practical insights on how and when to use economics in evaluation. Economic ideas shape public policy, funding, and program design. Economics promises efficiency, cost effectiveness, value for money and optimisation. Many evaluation theories, for example Stufflebeam’s CIPP model (2007), Scriven’s (2007) consumer orientated model, and Patton’s (2003) utilisation-focused model are biased towards the social concerns of evaluation.

Yet, evaluators are often tasked with incorporating economic concepts, methods and language into evaluations. But how do we make them fit-for-purpose, credible and culturally appropriate? This case study examines when and how economic concepts should be integrated into evaluation.

CGIAR, a global agricultural research network, is introducing tools to apply comparative advantage in portfolio design and evaluation. Comparative advantage suggests organisations should specialise in areas where they are relatively strongest and partner elsewhere to maximise impact. The theory is compelling: comparative advantage offers reduced duplication and deliberate partnerships at lower costs.

However, how do we credibly measure and make evaluative judgements about comparative advantage? This study found considerable variation in how comparative advantage was applied across the organisation and consternation in response to the roll-out that hindered its usefulness. This presentation describes an interdisciplinary negotiation undertaken to develop guidance for rigorous process and performance evaluations of comparative advantage within CGIAR. It involves a structured process to identify synergies and tensions between existing evaluation and economic practice relating to comparative advantage, a step-by-step approach to undertaking evaluations with comparative advantage criteria, and recommendations for developing an organisation-wide approach to comparative advantage to support consistent, high-quality. Furthermore, this case study illustrates a crucial requirement to reflect upon how economics is integrated into evaluation, including when it should be adapted or challenged.

In the interactive component, participants will reflect on how economics shapes evaluation in their organisations.

Speakers

Matthew Armstrong

Evaluation Analyst, CGIAR

Friday September 18, 2026 1:30pm - 2:00pm ACST
Waterfront 2 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

Boundaries and bridges

Format Short paper
Audience Level Foundational, Intermediate
Industry Natural resources and energy, International development, Environment and climate change
ID 319

1:30pm ACST

The 2026 (Mostly-Serious) Crowd-Sourced Debate: Evaluation’s pluralism and its external influence

Friday September 18, 2026 1:30pm - 2:30pm ACST

Authors: Bethany Hanson, Tafe NSW, Emily Gates, Boston University, Martina Donkers
Strap in for a provocative, contentious, and fun session. We’re putting a spin on the classic debate where two teams will go head-to-head to argue the topic: “Evaluation’s pluralism strengthens its external influence.”

On the affirmative side, a spirited case for why pluralism is evaluation’s superpower. Surely leaning into our intersections with disciplines like policy, research and economics expands our reach, relevance, and impact. Embracing pluralism helps evaluators speak multiple “languages,” build trust with diverse stakeholders, and positions evaluation as a boundary‑spanning connector capable of influencing decisions in complex systems. Think: more collaboration, more innovation, and more doors opening because evaluators can flex and adapt.

The negative team will challenge! Doesn’t boundless pluralism stretch evaluation too far, making our unique identity fuzzy and our professional standards harder to uphold? Aren’t we risking dilution of expertise and inconsistencies in practice? Won’t trying to be “everything to everyone” only confuse commissioners and undermine the credibility we’ve spent decades building? Without firmer boundaries, evaluation risks becoming a methodological buffet with no clear value proposition at all.

And then there’s you- our third speaker. A debate without rebuttal is like an evaluation report without findings—unthinkable! So, you’ll choose a side and with a team of fellow audience-members and debaters, craft a knockout final argument for our third speakers.

Will it be chaotic? Quite possibly. Could things get messy? Almost definitely. Will you have FOMO if you miss it? Without a doubt.

Featuring thought leaders Amy Gullickson, Martina Donkers, Matt Healey, George Argyrous, Kate McKegg and AES Fellow, Rick Cummings, this session promises to be the highlight of the conference. Who will be victorious? Let the 2026 (Mostly-Serious) Crowd-Sourced Debate begin!

Speakers

Kate Mckegg

Director, The Kinnect Group

Kate has specialist skills in supporting evaluative thinking and practice in complex settings where people are innovating to create systems change. She has been applying these skills for over 25 years in government, non-government, philanthropic and community contexts, including many... Read More →

Matt Healey

Principal Consultant | Co-Founder, First Person Consulting

I'm Matt, Co-Founder of First Person Consulting. I work at the intersection of systems thinking, evaluation and design — helping people make sense of messy, complex problems with a healthy dose of humour and humility. I also co-host the It Depends Podcast, where the honest answer... Read More →

Rick Cummings

Emeritus Professor, Murdoch University

Rick Cummings is an Emeritus Professor in Public Policy at Murdoch University. He has 40 years of experience conducting evaluation studies in education, training, health, and crime prevention primarily for the state and commonwealth government agencies and the World Bank. He currently... Read More →

Bethany Hanson

Manager Review and Evaluation, Tafe NSW

Emily Gates

Associate Professor of Evaluation, Boston College

Emily Gates is a tenured associate professor at Boston College whose research explores how evaluation can support meaningful, values-driven change in complex systems. Her work bridges theory and practice, spanning more than 30 publications and two coauthored books: Evaluative Inquiry... Read More →

Martina Donkers

George Argyrous

Rooftop Social

Friday September 18, 2026 1:30pm - 2:30pm ACST
Hall 2

Boundaries and bridges

Format Big room
Audience Level Intermediate, Advanced
Industry Natural resources and energy, Economic development tourism and infrastructure, Education and training, Community and social services, Not for profit Philanthropy
ID 272