Evaluating Indigenous programs: a toolkit for change

Sara Hudson
04 June 2017 | RR28
Evaluating Indigenous programs: a toolkit for change

The federal government recently announced it will allocate $10 million a year over four years to strengthen the evaluation of Indigenous programs. However, given that the average cost of an evaluation is $382,000, the extra $10 million a year for Indigenous program evaluations will not go far. To make the most of this additional funding the government must change the way it evaluates and monitors programs. Although formal evaluations for large government programs are important, evaluation need not involve outside contractors. Government must adopt a learning and developmental approach that embeds evaluation into a program’s design as part of a continuous quality improvement process.

It is not enough just to evaluate, government must actually use the findings from evaluations to improve service delivery. Unfortunately, many government agencies ignore evaluations when making funding decisions or implementing new programs.

Analysis of 49 Indigenous program evaluation reports, found only three used rigorous methodology. Overall, the evaluations were characterised by a lack of data and the absence of a control group, as well as an overreliance on anecdotal evidence.

Adopting a co-accountability approach to evaluation will ensure that both the government agency funding the program and the program provider delivering the program are held accountable for results. An overarching evaluation framework could assist with the different levels of outcomes expected over the life of the program and the various indicators needed to measure whether the program is meeting its objectives. Feedback loops and a process to escalate any concerns will help to ensure government and program providers keep each other honest and lessons are learnt.

Buy Hardcopy
Latest Publications

Dying with Their Rights On: The myths and realities of ending homelessness in Australia
Carlos d'Abrera
12 December 2018 | RR38

The orthodox understanding of the causes of homelessness promoted by the ‘homelessness industry’ over emphasises the role of economic and social structures. Solutions based on structuralist explanations – such as increasing the supply of affordable social housing – are insufficient to reduce rough sleeping. Such approaches minimise the need to address assertively, the individual characteristics, choices, and behaviours of rough…

READ MORE
Why childcare is not affordable
Eugenie Joseph
29 August 2018 | RR37

Childcare fees and out-of-pocket costs in Australia have been growing above inflation in recent years, at the same time that more parents are using formalised childcare to support their participation in the workforce. Childcare has been subject to growing and evolving regulation for many years, culminating in the introduction of the National Quality Framework in 2012. However, the quality regulations…

READ MORE
Why We Need NAPLAN
Blaise Joseph
13 May 2018 | RR36

The National Assessment Plan – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) is a crucial national assessment, but is coming under increasing criticism. There are three major benefits of NAPLAN: Tool to improve schools and teaching. NAPLAN results enable the identification of problems in the school system over time, and are a means for evaluating potential solutions, from the national level all the…

READ MORE
Risky business: the problems of Indigenous business policy
Charles Jacobs
29 November 2017 | RR35

The Commonwealth’s Indigenous Procurement Policy (IPP) has put Aboriginal owned small businesses at the heart of a renewed approach to Indigenous economic development. The IPP has irrevocably changed the space, and the Indigenous business sector has grown exponentially since its introduction in 2015. While the policy has achieved its targets, there are some issues with its structure – namely, the…

READ MORE
Life Before Death: Improving Palliative Care for Older Australians
Jessica Borbasi
19 November 2017 | RR34

The notion that the problems associated with modern death and dying can be solved simply by allowing more Australians to die at home is an oversimplification. Moreover, the myth that most people want to die at home, but don’t, has also unhelpfully reinforced the popular fear that grim, distressing, painful and undignified “natural death” in hospital should be avoided at…

READ MORE