I am Claudia Olavarria, an evaluator and consultant working on Evaluation Capacity Development in Latin America, the Caribbean, and globally, working for the Global Evaluation Initiative. I am passionate about feminist approaches to evaluation and advocate for the inclusion of youth in evaluation. I am part of the council of the International Evaluation Academy, (IEAC), promoting evaluation for transformation.
In times of multiple coexisting crises, evidence-based decision-making is more critical than ever, especially for countries of the global south facing tough development challenges.
However, not all types of evidence are useful for transformative processes. Evaluation must be relevant to the communities and territories affected by interventions. This relevance should be understood within their system of beliefs and knowledge. Therefore evaluations need to be context and culture-responsive, in attention to power dynamics, gender systems, relations with natural systems, as well as institutional, normative, and cultural aspects. A paradigm shift is required.
To design and implement evaluations that contribute to transformational change, competent and sensitized evaluators are needed, not only at an international level but also in national and local contexts, not only for experienced senior evaluators but also for those starting their careers.
The international M&E community actors, as well as universities are implementing many academic programs, trainings and knowledge sharing initiatives[1] that greatly contribute to individual capacity development. But, is this offer enough for training transformative evaluators worldwide?
Lessons Learned
In my work with young and emerging evaluators over the last decade, I’ve learned that there is great demand for learning how to become transformative evaluators. Many young and emerging evaluators are eager to contribute to social and justice and human rights causes within their professional practice. Their commitment to these causes is inseparable from their professional performance.
I’ve also learned that there is a gap in accessibility to capacity development initiatives for those starting their careers. This is mainly based on the prices of the training, the limited delivery of programs in certain regions—the delivery mostly in countries with stronger M&E systems—and primarily in capital cities. Even if online training has contributed to fill these gaps, further efforts are still needed.
The training offered often lacks a comprehensive view of evaluation, focusing mostly on the methodological component, putting effort and resources in installing tools and approaches in “evaluators toolkit”. However, evaluation for transformational change is disputing a space in hegemonic knowledge spheres, at epistemological and ontological level and transformative evaluators must be well equipped to defend assumptions on these levels.
I have learned that to integrate young and emerging evaluators into the debate about evaluation for transformation, the transformative paradigm, developed by Professor Mertens, is key. It greatly helps understand the role of evaluation and evaluators in relation to a set of assumptions that increase coherence and the overall quality of the training proposals.
Developing the capacities of young professionals aspiring to be transformative evaluators is a significant challenge. However, it’s crucial to begin by addressing the transformative paradigm. This serves as the base to sustain the development of their evaluation toolbox and navigate the practice.
[1] gLOCAL evaluation week is a great example of the 1 knowledge sharing
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 aea365@eval.org . 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.