I’m Jack Tebes, a professor at Yale School of Medicine and a faculty at YaleEVAL, an evaluation group of The Consultation Center at Yale, where I am Executive Director. This week my YaleEVAL colleagues and I have continued a dialogue on how participatory evaluation approaches can be used to promote equity.
In this week-long blog series, we center equity as a process: how we do our evaluations and how we engage evaluation stakeholders. Whether that process involves conducting community-based participatory evaluations, evaluation capacity building, doing needs assessments, or making evaluation challenges explicit, we have sought to show how participatory approaches can foster equity. Centering equity requires a continuous choice and sustained commitment by the evaluator to that participatory process.
Stakeholders engaged in participatory evaluation – program and community partners, funders, and evaluators – all bring their lived experiences, which include differences in power and culture (e.g., gender, race, ethnicity, age, social class, sexual orientation, gender identity, ability, and other differences). Systemic biases and oppression, such as racism, sexism, ableism, heterosexism, and classism, are rooted in those lived experiences. Incorporating power and cultural differences into an evaluation is thus critical. In this series, we have tried to illustrate this by discussing the choices we make during an evaluation, the methods we use, the evaluation capacity we seek to enhance, how we assess needs and strengths of an underrepresented group, and the collaborative stance we adopt to address evaluation challenges. These are just a few of the ways this can be done.
When we center equity as a process in evaluation, we also center equity as an outcome. That is, by using a participatory evaluation process that incorporates differences in power and culture among evaluation stakeholders, we incorporate differences in systemic biases and oppression into our design and how we implement it through all phases of an evaluation. Doing so makes it more likely that those lived experiences will inform why we achieved the desired outcomes for particular population groups or subgroups, and why we did not. At the very least, we will understand better what must be done to improve outcomes for all.
Lessons learned: By centering equity as a process in participatory evaluation, we also center equity as an outcome.
Rad resource: There are several resources that illustrate how centering equity as a process can lead to more equitable outcomes.
- Chicago Beyond, an impact investor for youth equity, has published a guidebook for community organizations, researchers, and funders, “Why Am I Being Researched?” that identifies seven power inequities in community-based research and evaluation.
- Also, even though evaluation and science differ in critical ways, in the 21st century each increasingly seeks to develop authentic collaborations with public stakeholders. In two other readings, I and a colleague describe how such collaborations are more valid and useful, and promote equity and justice.
The American Evaluation Association is hosting Promoting Equity Through Participatory Evaluation Approaches Week. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to email@example.com . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators. The views and opinions expressed on the AEA365 blog are solely those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of the American Evaluation Association, and/or any/all contributors to this site.