Loading…
This is the draft aes26 program, subject to change. To register for workshops and the conference, go to: https://www.aes26.aes.asn.au/
Venue: Rooms 3+4 clear filter
Wednesday, September 16
 

11:00am ACST

Application of Social Network Analysis (SNA) in evaluation within the social services context
Wednesday September 16, 2026 11:00am - 11:30am ACST
Authors: Catherine Wade (Parenting Research Centre), Matt Healy (First Person Consulting), Fiona May (Parenting Research Centre)
Social Network Analysis (SNA) is a systems methodology that maps and measures the relationships between actors in a system - revealing how information flows, where influence sits, and where collaboration can be strengthened. While widely used in research and policy contexts internationally, SNA remains underutilised in Australian evaluation practice, particularly in the social services sector where understanding partnership networks is critical to achieving outcomes.

This paper presents SNA as both a practical evaluation tool and a method for surfacing the relational dynamics that traditional approaches often miss. Drawing on applied examples from recent social services projects, we demonstrate how SNA can be used to assess whether programs are building the collaborative networks they intend to, identify structural gaps in service systems, and track network change over time. One example used to showcase the method will be a project exploring the social networks that mothers from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds rely on when making decisions about infant sleep practices.

The project aims to map these networks, identify the types of information shared, and examine how they influence mothers’ engagement with safe-sleep education.

Three key messages will be explored in the paper: how SNA complements existing evaluation methods rather than replacing them; what it takes to design and implement SNA in complex service environments; and how findings can be communicated to diverse stakeholders in ways that are actionable and meaningful.

The presentation combines a conceptual introduction with worked examples, and will include structured discussion inviting participants to consider how SNA might apply to their own evaluation contexts.
Speakers
avatar for Matt Healey

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 →
CW

Catherine Wade

Principal Research Specialist, Parenting Research Centre
Dr Catherine Wade is Principal Research Specialist at the Parenting Research Centre and a Research Affiliate with the Faculty of Health Sciences at the University of Sydney. Catherine is leading a programme of research at the Parenting Research Centre investigating aspects of the... Read More →
Wednesday September 16, 2026 11:00am - 11:30am ACST
Rooms 3+4 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

11:30am ACST

Building your first AI evaluation assistant: From setup to first analysis
Wednesday September 16, 2026 11:30am - 12:30pm ACST
Authors: Ethel Karskens (Clear Horizon), Maree Dibella (Clear Horizon)
What participants will learn: This hands-on session teaches evaluators how to configure and use AI assistants for real evaluation tasks. Participants will leave with a working AI tool customised for their own work, whether that's coding interview transcripts, analysing open-ended survey responses, or synthesising progress reports.

Why this skill matters: Most evaluators have experimented with ChatGPT or similar tools, but few have moved beyond ad-hoc prompting to building reusable, reliable AI workflows. The gap between "asking ChatGPT a question" and "using AI as a systematic evaluation tool" is significant. This session bridges that gap by teaching the practical setup skills that turn general-purpose AI into specialized evaluation assistants that produce consistent, auditable outputs.

As AI becomes standard in evaluation practice, knowing how to configure these tools properly - with the right instructions, quality controls, and workflow integration - is becoming a core professional capability. This session responds directly to evaluators' need for practical AI implementation skills, not just conceptual understanding.

How we'll teach the skill:
Minutes 0-5: Quick orientation - what makes an AI "assistant" different from a chatbot
Minutes 5-15: Live demonstration - the facilitator builds an assistant for interview coding from scratch, narrating decisions
Minutes 15-40: Guided hands-on practice -participants configure their own assistant for a task they choose (interview coding, survey analysis, or report summarisation), using either sample data provided or their own files
Minutes 40-50: Group debrief -participants share one success and one challenge; facilitator troubleshoots common issues

How participants will engage: Participants will work on their own laptops throughout the session, following a structured build process with real-time facilitator support. They'll leave with a configured tool, a workflow template, and practical troubleshooting strategies they can apply immediately in their work.
Speakers
avatar for Ethel Karskens

Ethel Karskens

Head Of Digital, Clear Horizon
I lead the data and insights strategy of Clear Horizon. This includes dashboard development and other data solutions to create insights for our clients.
I am interested in innovation, data for good, and creating a data-driven culture in organisations.
MD

Maree Dibella

Senior Digital Consultant, Clear Horizon
Wednesday September 16, 2026 11:30am - 12:30pm ACST
Rooms 3+4 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

2:30pm ACST

Interrogating problem representations in evaluation: Are we solving the right problems?
Wednesday September 16, 2026 2:30pm - 3:30pm ACST
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
AB

Andrew Boyle

Andrew Boyle Consulting

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

4:00pm ACST

Strategy evaluation. Does it have to be this hard?
Wednesday September 16, 2026 4:00pm - 4:30pm ACST
Authors: David Stuart (Creative Australia)
Strategies are everywhere involving all sorts of topics and all kinds of goals, actions and stakeholders.  Strategy defines important goals and outlines how an organisation's activities will meet those goals. You would think that strategy and evaluation were great friends. But why is strategy evaluation so low profile in evaluation literature, and so hard to pull off? This paper reflects on several attempts at strategy-based evaluation and the lessons for fruitful strategy evaluation including the role for evaluators and evaluation in supporting strong strategy design and success.​​​​
Speakers
DS

David Stuart

Director Evaluation And Impact Measurement, Creative Australia
Wednesday September 16, 2026 4:00pm - 4:30pm ACST
Rooms 3+4 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

4:30pm ACST

Managing the eight main enemies of evaluative thinking
Wednesday September 16, 2026 4:30pm - 5:30pm ACST
Authors: Samantha Abbato
Learning objective: Participants will be able to identify and practise managing the eight major enemies of evaluative thinking in evaluation contexts.

Why this skill matters: Even experienced evaluators fall prey to thinking traps. Individual biases (including emotional reasoning, fast thinking, confirmation bias and overconfidence) undermine rigour. Group biases such as in-group favouritism and cascading effects distort collective judgement. Noise, both between evaluators and within a single evaluator at different times, creates inconsistency in decisions and recommendations. Together, these eight enemies threaten the quality of evaluations at every stage: from scoping and data synthesis to communicating findings.

This session equips participants with practical strategies to recognise and manage these threats for clearer, more defensible evaluative thinking.

How the skill will be taught: Using the Thinking-Bee Obstacles board game, participants work in small groups through evaluation-based scenarios that activate each of the eight thinking enemies. The game provides ego-safe, attention-directing play. Participants think through bee personas rather than as themselves, making it easier to surface and examine real thinking traps. A brief facilitator-led debrief anchors the game experience to participants’ own evaluation practice.

How participants will engage: Participants will play the Thinking-Bee Obstacles game in small groups of four to six, applying the eight enemies of thinking to realistic evaluation decisions.

The session closes with a structured reflection linking game insights to participants’ own work contexts.
Speakers
avatar for Samantha Abbato

Samantha Abbato

Director, Visual Insights People
My twenty-plus years of evaluation experience are built on academic training in qualitative and quantitative disciplines, including mathematics, health science, epidemiology, biostatistics, and medical anthropology. I am passionate about effective communication and evaluation capacity-building... Read More →
Wednesday September 16, 2026 4:30pm - 5:30pm ACST
Rooms 3+4 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia
 
Thursday, September 17
 

10:30am ACST

Scalability and scaling in and across place: A practical framework for complexity-informed evaluation practice
Thursday September 17, 2026 10:30am - 11:30am ACST
Author: Matt Healey (First Person Consulting)

Scaling is often treated as a straightforward ambition: test an intervention in one place, then replicate it in others. In complex systems, and particularly in place-based settings where challenges are systemically entrenched in local history, relationships and power, this logic breaks down. What works is frequently inseparable from where and with whom it works. Scaling across places is not replication. It is a fundamentally different process, and evaluators need tools adequate to that complexity.
This workshop equips evaluators, program designers and commissioners to challenge lock-step and linear models of scaling and apply a complexity-informed, place-sensitive approach in their own practice. Despite the proliferation of place-based initiatives across Australia and the Asia Pacific, most evaluators lack a coherent framework for assessing scalability or monitoring fidelity in contextually sensitive ways.
Three connected arguments run through the session. First, scalability is a question before it is a plan: interventions need to be tested for readiness and direction before any scaling begins. Second, scaling in complex systems requires holding the tension between fidelity and adaptation, not resolving it prematurely. Third, scaling across places demands attention to what is systemically entrenched in each context: the relationships, trust and power dynamics that cannot be lifted and shifted.
These arguments are anchored in three practical tools: a reworked scalability assessment; the Scaling in Place Framework, a new conceptual tool mapping fidelity, adaptation, mechanism and context; and the Scaling Canvas and Fidelity Checker for planning and monitoring.
The session is structured around a short conceptual input, a worked case example, and a facilitated small group activity in which participants apply the tools to a program or context from their own practice. Structured reflection closes the session. It is targeted at intermediate-level evaluators, program designers and commissioners working in place-based, health, community or government settings.
Speakers
avatar for Matt Healey

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 →
Thursday September 17, 2026 10:30am - 11:30am ACST
Rooms 3+4 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

11:30am ACST

When the story turns against the evidence: Navigating media scrutiny as evaluators
Thursday September 17, 2026 11:30am - 12:30pm ACST
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
SC

Stephanie Carter

Healthconsult
MA

Megan Anderson

Healthconsult
FM

Felicity Miles

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

1:30pm ACST

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

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

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

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

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

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

Kizzy Gandy

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

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
avatar for Stephanie Quail

Stephanie Quail

Senior Manager, ARTD
SH

Sophie Henness

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

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
ML

Megan Lugg

Director, Evaluation and Performance Measurement, Australian Taxation Office
avatar for Robert Grimshaw

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

4:00pm ACST

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

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

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

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

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

Designed for intermediate to advanced evaluators, this roundtable creates space for collective reflection and future-oriented dialogue. By centring plurality and participation, it supports the AES vision by keeping the conversation alive—recognising that what constitutes “quality evaluation that makes a difference” must continue to evolve with the field.
Speakers
Thursday September 17, 2026 4:00pm - 5:00pm ACST
Rooms 3+4 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia
 
Friday, September 18
 

10:30am ACST

Evaluation reporting using infographics
Friday September 18, 2026 10:30am - 11:30am ACST
Authors: Arun Jyothi Callapilli (Policy Performance) Charlie Tulloch (Policy Performance) 

The session focuses on building skills in designing infographics and making effective data visualisation choices to enhance evaluation reporting. The session objective is to equip new and experienced evaluators with practical skills to transform traditional evaluation reports into clear, engaging and actionable visual based outputs.

This is important because evaluation reports are often text heavy and dense with evidence and associate findings. However, without effective visualisation, critical insights may be overlooked or misunderstood. Infographics can help bridge this gap by transforming evaluation evidence and findings into clear, engaging visual reports that enhance reader understanding and engagement and are more likely to be used.

The session is grounded in utilisation-focused evaluation principles (developed by Michael Quinn Patton), emphasising the importance of designing reports that facilitate use and effectively communicate significant findings to intended audiences.

The session’s main aims are to share and build knowledge and skills in:
•    visual data story telling techniques
•    applying effective design principles
•    understanding the strengths and limitations of different visual choices
•    accessibility considerations
•    avoiding common data visualisation pitfalls
•    tips and techniques on creating infographics
•    promoting consistency and accessibility in data presentations

This is a skill-building session using real-life case studies. Attendees will explore a range of tools, tips and visualisation choices, making live design decisions. They will work in small groups round tables to discuss options and apply principles of good design to create their own visuals, creating a collaborative and participatory learning environment.


Speakers
avatar for Charlie Tulloch

Charlie Tulloch

Director, Policy Performance
Policy Performance is a proud conference sponsor! Charlie delivers evaluation projects, capability building support and drives public sector improvement. Charlie loves to help those who are new to evaluation or transitioning from related disciplines. He is a past AES Board member... Read More →
Friday September 18, 2026 10:30am - 11:30am ACST
Rooms 3+4 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

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
avatar for Liesl Harrold

Liesl Harrold

Assistant Director, Small Business Evaluation Hub, Australian Taxation Office
Liesl works in the Australian Taxation Office (ATO), helping business areas build their evaluation culture, capacity and practice. With over 20 years of evaluation experience, Liesl has also worked for Queensland Treasury and Trade where she assisted government agencies, community... Read More →
Friday September 18, 2026 11:30am - 12:30pm ACST
Rooms 3+4 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia

1:30pm ACST

Learnings from the field: why prisoner voice matters in the evaluation of criminogenic programs
Friday September 18, 2026 1:30pm - 2:30pm ACST
Authors: Paula Shaw, ARTD, Syl Johns, ARTD
This session, targeted at intermediate evaluators, explores the ethics of evaluation in the corrections context and the importance of including prisoners’ voices.

Incarcerated people are (almost by definition) excluded from public discourse. Our criminal justice system offers imprisonment; a deprivation of liberty, which includes severe restrictions on a person’s ability to communicate with the outside world, as its most common consequence for committing a crime.

Since the mid-20th century, when prisons were re-imagined as places of rehabilitation over places of punishment, criminogenic programs that aim to address the underlying causes of crime have been part of prisons’ remit. Prisoners themselves are arguably the key stakeholders in these kinds of programs, and yet, their voices are often absent in evaluation and other research and program development activities.

Prisons, as a context for program delivery and evaluation, are highly regulated and complex environments. Across Australia, prisons are chronically overcrowded and hold populations with very high levels of complex needs, disadvantage and trauma. First Nations Australians are also overrepresented.

Over the last five years, the presenters, (ARTD Associate Uncle Syl Johns, and Senior Manager, Paula Shaw) have worked on several evaluations of criminogenic programs, and between them, have interviewed well over 100 prisoners across Qld, and in SA, NSW, Victoria, WA and the NT. This session will be delivered as brief presentations and facilitated group discussions on each of the topics below:

•The ethics of inclusion of prisoners in evaluation projects – why it matters, what are the power dynamics at play, what are the risks for prisoners, and what do they get out of it?
•The formal ethics processes involved – what are the key considerations?
•Learnings from our work about practical approaches to engaging prisoners in evaluation interviews. – What has worked well? What hasn’t – and why?


Speakers
PS

Paula Shaw

Senior Manager, ARTD
SJ

Syl Johns

Associate, ARTD
Friday September 18, 2026 1:30pm - 2:30pm ACST
Rooms 3+4 Stokes Hill Rd, Darwin City NT, Australia
 
  • Filter By Date
  • Filter By Room
  • Filter By Type
  • Format
  • Audience Level
  • Industry
  • ID
  • Timezone

Share Modal

Share this link via

Or copy link

Filter sessions
Apply filters to sessions.