By Dr. Fiona Cram | CREA VIII Conference Keynote Reflection | April 2025In April 2025, I had the honour of delivering a keynote at the CREA VIII Conference in Chicago, themed Relational Responsibilities in Culturally Responsive Evaluation and Assessment. I stood before an audience of global evaluators, researchers, and community advocates to speak not only about Indigenous evaluation—but from it. My keynote, “Standing Firm to Move Forward,” was a weaving together of our histories, our grief, our resilience, and our responsibilities. At its heart, Indigenous evaluation is about relationships. It begins not with methods or indicators, but with identity and place—where we stand, who we stand with, and why we do this work. For Māori, this is our whakapapa (genealogy), our whenua (Land), and our kaupapa (agenda). Across Turtle Island, Latin America, Africa, the Pacific and beyond, Indigenous evaluators hold similar truths: that evaluation must emerge from our values, our languages, and our collective aspirations.  Grounding in Place and HistoryI opened by inviting everyone to introduce themselves to a neighbour and share where they felt most at home on the land. This was an act of whanaungatanga—establishing relationships, grounding ourselves in our own stories of place and belonging. Evaluation, when rooted in Indigenous worldviews, is inseparable from our connections to land, history, and people. Place is not simply geography. It is kin. The land carries scars of colonisation and resistance, just as we do. In his work Towards Scarring, Cash Ahenakew reminds us that the land remembers, that scars are not just signs of pain but of survival. In this way, land teaches us how to stand firm, how to heal, and how to move forward with dignity and purpose.
Navigating the Currents of Global GriefThis brings us to our first key evaluation question: Why is this initiative needed? Not just from a funder's perspective, but from the perspectives of those most affected. Whose pain are we addressing? Whose healing are we honouring? We are living in a time of deep, visible global grief. From Gaza to West Papua, from the Sahel to Standing Rock, Indigenous and oppressed communities are experiencing the compounding forces of colonisation, war, ecological collapse, and displacement. These are not isolated crises. They are braided together—roots sunk deep into the violence of empire. As evaluators, we cannot look away. Ibrahim Kamara’s short film “How philanthropists are destroying African farms” (The Guardian, 2024) reminds us: We are not drowning. We are being flooded. Flooded by histories that have been dammed and diverted. As Ahenakew puts it, sacred pain is our refusal to look away. Evaluation must also refuse detachment. It must bear witness, recognise grief, and seek justice—not just outcomes.
Indigenous Evaluation as an Act of CareThe second key question--How is this initiative being implemented?—often sounds procedural. But in Indigenous evaluation, it is profoundly relational. Implementation does not begin with a contract. It begins with whakapapa, with history, with place, and with aroha—love for our people. Evaluation, in our hands, is not extractive. It is not just observation. It is ceremony. It is care. When I reflect on Māori concepts like manaakitanga (hospitality), whanaungatanga (kinship), and tikanga (cultural protocols), I see a different pathway forward—one in which evaluation becomes an extension of our responsibilities to one another, not a technical imposition. One powerful example of this was Te Oho Ake, a youth wānanga at Ruataniwha Marae in Wairoa. Over five days, rangatahi became evaluators—not of a programme, but of their own transformation. They climbed their ancestral mountain, shared stories, built trust. Evaluation was not a separate task. It was lived. It was relational. It was whānau (family)-held. This is what evaluation can be when it is led by those it seeks to serve.
Whose Outcomes? Whose Impact?The third evaluation question--What are the outcomes and impacts?—requires us to go deeper. Whose wellbeing are we measuring? What version of a “good life” are we using? As the late Manuka Henare taught, true wellbeing is grounded in mana, whakapapa, and collective flourishing—not material wealth. Inspired by his work and Amartya Sen’s capabilities approach, we ask: Did this initiative uplift mana (prestige)? Did it strengthen our relationships with Land, spirit, and each other? This is what I call ontological justice—not just equity in services or access, but the right to define and pursue wellbeing on our own terms. In this way, evaluation becomes a tool of self-determination, not surveillance. It affirms who we are, not just what we do.  He Awa Whiria – Braided Rivers, Braided WorldsTo walk between Indigenous and Western paradigms, I turn to He Awa Whiria—the braided rivers model. Just like the alluvial rivers of Aotearoa New Zealand, knowledge systems can run side by side: distinct, but interconnected. Our HPV self-testing project with Māori women demonstrated how relational, community-led research can inform large-scale scientific innovation. Our braided river began with elders, researchers, whānau, and community experts. Together, we designed a study, analysed findings, and translated them into action—culminating in a nationwide health policy shift. The river metaphor reminds us that evaluation is a journey. It requires trust. It requires pausing. It requires humility. From whanaungatanga (relationships), to kaupapa (planning), to mahi (doing)—we evaluate as we live: together, on purpose.
The Wolastoq Declaration and the Future of Indigenous EvaluationIn 2024, EvalIndigenous helped convene a global gathering in Fredericton, on the Lands of the Wolastoqiyik people. What emerged was not just a declaration—it was a collective affirmation of our sacred responsibilities as Indigenous evaluators. The Wolastoq Declaration asserts three principles:
Conclusion: Stand Firm, Paddle ForwardI closed my talk with a waiata (song):
Mā wai rā e taurima / Te marae i waho nei? / Mā te tika, mā te pono / Me te aroha e. Who will tend to the marae here? / Truth, honesty, and love will. In these times of turbulence, evaluation can be an anchor—or it can be a rudder. When grounded in truth, in love, and in our obligations to place and people, it becomes both. To my fellow evaluators: stand firm in your place. Paddle together. And always, always let the land show you how to move forward.
1 Comment
 Photo 1: The EvalIndigenous Representatives and the Ogiek Council of Elders addressing the Press in Mariashoni On 23 May 2025, the EvalIndigenous Global Network, hosted an advocacy workshop with the Ogiek Council of Elders, community elders and representatives in the wake of the new Government of Kenya intention to redraw the Mau Forest cutline. A court ruling on September 30, 2024, upheld the legality of the 2001 cutline. And now the government has started implementing the long-awaited process of redrawing and beaconing the boundaries to separate forests and settlements of the six schemes created following the 2001 decision. The right to Indigenous territoryA major issue raised is the lack of consultation with the Ogiek community in ongoing government plans, particularly the fencing of the Mau Forest. The fear of the Ogiek community is that this is a political process supervised by political leaders from other communities, while they don’t have a voice. This has raised concerns that they are likely to be evicted once again, given that there is no one to talk on their behalf. It is in this context that the EvalIndigenous Global Network has come in to stand in solidarity with not only the Ogiek community, but as a voice for all the other Indigenous Communities in Kenya facing similar challenges. Read the Advocacy Letter addressed to The Principal Secretary, Ministry of Interior and National Administration, Government of Kenya. Emilly Kirui, one of the Ogiek Elders, highlighted the broader context which reflects ongoing challenges faced by indigenous communities in Kenya, including slow implementation of court rulings affirming their land rights and continued evictions under the guise of conservation efforts. Despite legal victories, such as the African Court’s recognition of Ogiek rights over the Mau Forest, government inaction and bureaucratic hurdles have left many families in uncertainty. The Ogiek and other Indigenous groups continue to call for the enforcement of legal protections, full implementation of court decisions, and the establishment of co-management frameworks for resource sharing and land governance. A key demand from the Ogiek is the urgent implementation of court rulings affirming their rights to ancestral lands, particularly following a 2022 African Court decision in their favour. Despite this legal victory, the community reports that enforcement remains stalled, leaving them vulnerable to forced evictions and continued encroachment. They are also advocating for the issuance of land titles to secure their homes and heritage, and for the integration of traditional governance systems into formal structures. The right to free, prior and informed consent
One of the Ogiek Human Rights Defenders, Alexander Kisioi Koech, highlights findings from a recent 2024–2025 study by EvalIndigenous Global Network, which demonstrate the critical necessity for policy reforms that align with both Kenya’s constitutional commitments and its international obligations. The current frameworks are seen as insufficient in protecting the rights and interests of indigenous peoples, underscoring the importance of immediate government action to address these gaps.
This absence of representation has left them marginalised in critical national conversations and policy decisions. EvalIndigenous and Ogiek Council of Elders representatives also urged the government to provide Indigenous communities with direct representation at the county and national levels, including the nomination of senators from these groups. Past experiences have shown that having nominated leaders enables Indigenous communities to effectively channel their issues to government authorities and advocate for their rights. The speakers implored the government to fill vacant nominated positions with qualified Indigenous representatives to ensure their concerns are addressed at the highest levels.
Reframing Global Health through Indigenous Eyes: Three Cornerstone Resources from the UNPFII5/22/2025
Together, the three studies form a dynamic, interconnected roadmap for advancing Indigenous health globally—not as a subset of minority or diversity policy, but as a self-determined, rights-based, and cosmologically distinct approach to collective wellbeing. For governments, NGOs, UN agencies, funders, and Indigenous leaders, this trilogy offers a new standard: one that prioritizes healing over harm, relational accountability over extractive metrics, and sovereignty over simplification. 1. A Foundational Framework: The 2023 Study on Indigenous Determinants of Health
This report also emphasizes that Indigenous Peoples are rights holders, not stakeholders, and that their representation must be central and enduring across the entire policy cycle.
Each item is grounded in specific determinants, with criteria for assessing policy implementation, cultural safety, data practices, Indigenous representation, and the protection of land and identity2025 IDHEvaluation Inst…. The tool offers not only a way to track institutional progress but also a process for community-led adaptation, piloting, and refinement. Implications for Indigenous EvaluationTogether, these three resources challenge the foundations of mainstream evaluation practice. They call for a paradigm shift away from deficit-based, Western-centric metrics toward an Indigenous-led evaluation movement that centres Indigenous values, worldviews, and priorities. These reports:
Shared Lessons for Evaluators and Evaluation CommissionersMr Njovu and Dr Ponge and his team, in different but complementary ways, offer a set of urgent and important lessons for those who commission or undertake evaluations of initiatives in Indigenous communities in Africa:
Global ImplicationsThough situated in Africa, these reports resonate globally. They offer pathways for evaluators to re-centre Indigenous ways of knowing, being and evaluating. More than that, they show how Africa can lead: not as a recipient of development knowledge, but as a generator of evaluation futures rooted in relationality, interdependence, and cultural continuity. As EvalIndigenous continues to nurture these blossoms, the work of Mr Njovu and Dr Ponge and his team reminds us of the fire we carry: that evaluation, when reclaimed by Indigenous communities, can be a force for renewal, healing, and sovereignty.
Growing Seeds of Indigenous Evaluation in Asia-Pacific: Lessons from Three Germination Grants4/25/2025 The Asia Pacific Evaluation Association (APEA) and EvalIndigenous launched their Germination Grant Programme to spark new Indigenous-led initiatives across the region. The three projects supported in 2024–25 — in Nepal and the Philippines — have now been completed. Together, they offer important lessons for the future of Indigenous evaluation. Lessons for Indigenous EvaluationAcross the three projects, some powerful common lessons emerged:
Strengthening Indigenous Evaluation Practices in Nepal
Empowering Indigenous Journalists in Nepal
Laying Foundations for the Future: IKAYO in the Philippines
As these seeds continue to grow, they offer hope for an Indigenous evaluation movement across Asia and the Pacific that is bold, sovereign, and transformative.  0 – Author (right) at the end of a presentation in one of the Sessions, with fellow presenters: Emmanuel Anobir Mensah (left) from the Mississippi State University; Dr. Gabriel Keney (second left) and Eunice Oduro (second right) from the University of North Carolina, Greensboro, USA Day 1 - Wednesday, 9 April 2025I credit my participation to the CREA VIII Conference in Chicago, Illinois to two main sponsors. KATOA Limited, New Zealand through Dr. Fiona Cram, the Co-Chair of the EvalIndigenous Global Network, paid for my ticket; and the Center for Culturally Responsive Evaluation and Assessment (CREA) at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign for the Conference registration. Without your support, I couldn’t have made it to Chicago, Illinois. Special thanks to Prof. Denice Ward Hood, the Director of the Center for Culturally Responsive Evaluation and Assessment (CREA) at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign; the Administrator of the CREA program, Timothy A. Leyhe and Dr. Anthony B. Sullers Jr., a Post-doctoral Research Fellow at CREA. Thank you so much! I wish to state that this was my first ever CREA Conference. So far, seven similar Conferences have been conducted and this was the 8th. The Conference ran from 8 – 11 April 2025, with the first day and half of the second day, set aside for pre-Conference Capacity-building Workshops. The official Opening Session for the Conference was on Wednesday, 9 April 2025 and ran from 12.30pm to 2.00pm, characterised by Indigenous entertainment and Welcome Remarks by Prof. Denice Ward Hood, the Director of the Center for Culturally Responsive Evaluation and Assessment (CREA) at the University of Illinoisat Urbana Champaign.  1 – Author (Right) with the incoming President of the International Evaluation Academy (IEA) and Former President of the Canadian Evaluation Society (CES), Andrealisa Belzer (left) and Co-Chair of EvalIndigenous Global Network, Dr. Fiona Cram (Centre) After the official opening, my next session was: a multi-paper presentation session dubbed: 1.2: Paper Session – Indigenous Evaluation. The Session Chair was Nicole R. Bowman-Farrell, of Bowman Performance Consulting, LLC. The first paper presentation in this session was titled: “Cultural Compass: Navigating assessment data through Indigenous wayfinding.” This presentation was made by Chiara Logli, an Assistant Professor and Institutional Assessment Specialist at the Honolulu Community College and Ululani Kahikina, the Kūkalahale Title III Grant Manager and lead facilitator of the E Hoʻi Nā Wai Indigenous Education Professional Learning Program located at Honolulu Community College, United States of America. The presenters explored how Hawaiian paradigms can enhance higher education assessments by integrating culturally responsive strategies that prioritise diversity, equity, and inclusion while addressing the limitations of standardized indicators. Using Grounded Theory methodology, they analysed faculty reflections from 2000 to 2024 to identify supports and barriers to student learning, emphasizing the need to contextualize both instruction and assessment practices. Their study advocates for learning environments rooted in Hawaiian cultural perspectives, aiming to inform institutional decision-making and professional development through contextualised data analysis.
This next presentation was titled: “Ho'okahi ka 'Ilau Like Ana (Wield the Paddles Together): A collaborative approach to indigenous assessment, cultural validity and outcomes in early childhood”and was made by Landry Leimalami Fukunaga, on behalf of the other authors: Shelli Aiona Kim, Nicole Mokihana Souza, all of the Kamehameha Schools, United States of America. The presenter highlighted a three-year initiative to develop and implement culturally valid, standards-based assessments for Hawaiian culture-based early childhood education, emphasising culturally defined outcomes over traditional Western frameworks. Through engaging multiple stakeholders and cultural experts, their study demonstrates the reliability and impact of these assessments in fostering Native Hawaiian identity, cultural learning, and social-emotional well-being, offering insights for broader applications in indigenous education. This last presentation in this session was made by Jackie Ng-Osori but the other authors who did not make it for the Conference included: Noilyn Mendoza, Patti Dayleg, 'Alisi Tulua, Alyshia Macaysa, Jason Lacsamana, and Amy Huang. In her presentation titled: “Pilina and Waialeale: Building Relationships and Connections Through the Rippling Waters”, Jackie Ng-Osori highlighted about The Healing Tides initiative, funded by the St. Joseph Fund, and how it unites nine Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander organizations in Southern California to address inequities through culturally responsive, community-driven strategies rooted in trust, traditional knowledge, and resilience. She emphasised that through relational responsibilities and co-creating culturally relevant metrics, the initiative creates an environment of mutual learning, accountability, and systemic change while respecting the unique identities of each participating organization. This approach demonstrates how culturally responsive evaluation can balance individuality and collective action to amplify community strengths and promote equity and well-being.  3 - Co-Chair of EvalIndigenous Global Network, Dr. Fiona Cram delivering her Keynote address I then headed to the Atlantic Ballroom for the Opening Keynote address by Dr. Fiona Cram of Katoa Limited, who also happens to be the Co-Chair of the EvalIndigenous Global Network. Dr. Fiona Cram’s keynote address titled: "Standing Firm to Move Forward: Place, History, and the Future of Indigenous Evaluation", emphasised that Indigenous evaluation must be rooted in place, history, and relationships to foster transformation and justice. She highlighted the importance of ancestral knowledge, cultural sovereignty, and relational accountability in evaluation practices. Dr. Cram advocated for methodologies like Kaupapa Māori, which centre Indigenous values such as self-determination (tino rangatiratanga), collective well-being (whānau), and respect for land (whenua). She addressed global grief stemming from colonization and environmental crises, urging evaluators to use evaluation as a tool for healing rather than oppression. Relational evaluation, grounded in trust and care, was presented as a pathway to empower communities and uphold Indigenous worldviews. Ultimately, Dr. Cram called for evaluations that honor Indigenous rights, strengthen relationships with land and people, and ensure outcomes reflect cultural aspirations—charting a transformative path forward for Indigenous evaluation practices. Dr. Cram urged evaluators to:
The address that earned Dr. Fiona Cram a well-deserved standing ovation from the participants, advocated for evaluations that are culturally responsive, transformative, and rooted in Indigenous values – ensuring they serve as instruments of justice and empowerment for present and future generations. Day 2 - Thursday, 10 April 2025On the second day of the Conference, I started my day by attending the morning plenary session which involved a powerful Panel made up of CREA Partners in the Atlantic Ballroom. The session was Chaired by Dr. Anthony B. Sullers Jr., from the Center for Culturally Responsive Evaluation and Assessment (CREA) at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. The Panelists included: Dr. Dominica McBride, a Community Psychologist and Founder at BECOME; Prof. Joe O’Hara, a Full Professor of Education at Dublin City University, Director – Centre for Evaluation, Quality and Inspection (EQI); Dr. Palama Lee (CREA Hawai’i, Liliuokalani Trust) (LUH-LE + UH WOKE + KUH LAA NEE), and Dr. Rick Alan Sperling, Associate Professor of Psychology and Director of Community-based Research at the St. Mary’s University. The key messages delivered by the Panelists were an emphasis on the transformative potential of culturally responsive evaluation and assessment (CREA) in fostering liberatory relationships and advancing social justice globally, particularly in the face of challenges like the erosion of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. They shared insights on relational responsibility, positionality, and strategies for leveraging CRE to protect, uplift, and empower communities through affirmation, resistance, and hope. After the plenary session, I attended my next session which was a multi-paper session on the sub-theme of: “Relational Validity”. The Chair of the Session was Karen E. Kirkhart, of Syracuse University, while the Discussant was Melissa Goodnight of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. In this session, Karen E. Kirkhart made the first presentation which was on: “Relational Responsibilities and Validity.” Karen emphasised that validity in evaluation is a relational responsibility, deeply rooted in culturally responsive practices that honour local knowledge, history, and land; while requiring evaluators to critically reflect on their positionality and privilege. She argued that relationships must be held accountable for their impact on equity and justice, as relational dynamics can either enhance validity or perpetuate marginalisation and complicity.
Ketan Mathavan, a Doctoral Candidate at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, United States of America and Melissa Rae Goodnight, an assistant professor in the Department of Educational Psychology as well as Educational Policy, Organization, and Leadership at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, made their presentation on: “Large-scale Assessment Alchemy: Lessons from India on Blending Culture and Citizen-engagement for Stronger Validity.” The presenters highlighted the urgent need for culturally responsive assessments that account for students' unique identities and cultural perspectives, proposing an expanded framework to address the entire assessment process, including stakeholder involvement and culturally relevant design decisions. Using India's Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) as a case study, Ketan demonstrated how citizen-led assessments can effectively monitor foundational learning in diverse contexts, emphasising grassroots engagement and cultural sensitivity. Kerry S. Englert of Seneca Consulting, USA and Pōhai Kūkea Shultz of University of Hawaii, Mānoa College of Education made a presentation on: “Using a Cultural Lens to Examine Validity Based on Relationships to External Variables”. The presenters emphasised on the importance of using a cultural lens to examine the validity of educational assessments, particularly in contexts like Hawaiian language immersion programs. They highlighted the Kaiapuni Assessment of Educational Outcomes (KĀʻEO) as an example of prioritising equity, community engagement, and cultural relevance over traditional comparisons to external assessments that lack social justice aims. Their study underscored the value of incorporating teachers' perceptions and community partnerships to build evidence for validity while advancing culturally sustaining and innovative assessment practices. The last presentation in this session was by Prof. Robert Stake, a Professor Emeritus, Educational Psychology , University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA, who made a powerful presentation titled: “Judgmental Validity”. Prof. Stake emphasised that the concept of "judgmental validity" in evaluation pertains to the quality and representativeness of a report synthesising an evaluand, beyond traditional psychometric validity measures. He argued that evaluators ensure this validity through collaborative, iterative reviews of language, calculations, and interpretations to faithfully represent cultural contexts and meet practical utility. The key messages coming from his presentation were:
During the lunch break, we had the Edmund W. Gordon Distinguished Lecture and Luncheon which was delivered by Prof. Nelson Flores. Prof. Nelson Flores is a professor in educational linguistics at the Graduate School of Education, University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia; and affiliated faculty with the Center for Latin American and Latinx Studies. The compelling keynote address focused on the intersection of language, race, and colonialism in shaping U.S. educational policies and practices. He highlighted how raciolinguistic ideologies have historically framed the language practices of racialized communities as deficient, perpetuating systemic inequities. Prof. Flores emphasised the need to challenge these colonial logics embedded in bilingual education and educational linguistics, advocating for decolonial approaches that empower racialized bilingual students to redefine their identities beyond deficit narratives. Prof. Flores also discussed how foundational concepts in educational linguistics contribute to harmful policies and practices by reinforcing colonial frameworks. He called for reimagining bilingual education as part of a broader political project aimed at fostering inclusive ways of being and knowing, challenging the white supremacist status quo. After lunch on Day 2, I attended a multi-paper session, in which I was also a presenter. The session was: 3.3: Paper Session – International Evaluation II and run from 2:15pm - 3:45pm. The Session was Chaired by Prof. Joe O’Hara, a Full Professor of Education at Dublin City University, Director – Centre for Evaluation, Quality and Inspection (EQI), President, EASSH and President Elect, World Educational Research Association; while the Discussant was: Martin Brown, also a Professor of Education at Dublin City University in Ireland. Prof. Joe O’Hara led a team made up of Sarah Gardezi, Martin Brown, Gerry McNamara, and Aideen Cassidyfrom the EQI/CREA Dublin City University, Ireland, in making the presentation titled: “‘Who you are can shape what you do’ – Exploring the reality of early school leaving and underachievement in Europe through a culturally responsive lens.” In their presentation, they emphasised the critical role of cultural responsiveness in addressing early school leaving (ESL) and underachievement in Europe, highlighting how systemic cultural dissonance, socioeconomic factors, and teacher expectations disproportionately affect marginalized and culturally diverse students. They advocated for integrative, culturally informed policies and practices—centered on family involvement, inclusive curricula, and professional development for educators—to transform educational systems into equitable spaces that leverage cultural diversity as an asset rather than a deficit.
Using a Case Study of a project funded by the Ford Foundation through EvalIndigenous Global Network, a study titled: “Traditional Decision-Making as Evaluation: Developing Indigenous Evaluation Methodologies with Kenyan Communities – Comparative Study among the Ogiek and the Mijikenda Communities”, I made the following key conclusions from the study:
The Team of Aideen Cassidy, Prof. Joe O’Hara, Anne Rowan from the Centre for Evaluation, Quality and Inspection / CREA / Dublin City University, Ireland, made a presentation on: “Exploring the role played by culture in a University community outreach programme - lessons from the evaluation of an Irish Higher Education initiative.” The presenters evaluated the Community Outreach Programme at the Technical University (TU) of Dublin, emphasising its focus on community-engaged research (CER) to address inequalities in university participation among minority groups through collaboration, mutual respect, and actionable knowledge. They highlighted their key recommendations which include fostering genuine partnerships with community stakeholders, addressing cultural barriers, and empowering underserved communities to ensure sustainable and inclusive engagement in higher education. My next session was 4.3: Paper Session – International Evaluation III. This Session was Chaired by Dr. Gabriel Keney, a recent Doctoral Graduate from the University of North Carolina, Greensboro. In the first presentation in this session, Emmanuel Anobir Mensah and Prof. Nesma Osman from the Mississippi State University, United States of America, made a presentation on: “Rethinking Evidence of Effectiveness: A Culturally Responsive Framework for Evaluating Interventions in African Communities.” The presentation was made by Emmanuel, who highlighted the inadequacy of traditional Western evaluation frameworks in capturing the cultural complexities and lived realities of African communities, advocating for culturally responsive approaches that integrate local knowledge, Indigenous practices, and community participation. He proposed practical strategies and highlights case studies to guide practitioners and policymakers in developing inclusive evaluation models that respect African-centered frameworks and foster equity and justice. He anticipates coming up with an all-inclusive framework that not only complements the exisiting ones, but a possibility of harmonising the indigenous evaluation frameworks.
Eunice Oduro and Dr. Gabriel Keney from the University of North Carolina, Greensboro, USA, made a presentation on the title: “Exploring Relational Responsibilities of Village Savings and Loans Associations (VSLAs) in Enhancing Women's Livelihoods in Rural Communities in Ghana.” Drawing on real-life experience from a project implemented in Ghana by CARE International, the presenters highlighted the critical role of Village Savings and Loans Associations (VSLAs) in improving women's livelihoods in rural Ghana by fostering financial inclusion, economic empowerment, and social benefits such as stronger networks and decision-making power. However, they also emphasised the need for supportive interventions, including financial literacy training and capacity building, to address persistent challenges and maximize the impact of VSLAs on women's economic and social well-being. Day 3 - Friday, 11 April 2025On the third day of the Conference, Friday, 11 April 2025, the first session I attended was: 5.2: Paper Session – Radical Resistance and Transformation in Evaluation. This session was chaired by dr. monique liston, the Executive Director of UBUNTU Research and Evaluation, United States of America. In the first presetation in this Session, Deja Taylor and Koren Dennison, MA both of UBUNTU Research & Evaluation, United States of America, made a presentation on: “Urban Assessments Rooted in Resistance: Reclaiming Our Responsibility of Belonging Through the Built Environment”. The presenters highlighted the need for urban planning to shed historical biases and embrace Black, Brown, and Indigenous perspectives, proposing a paradigm shift rooted in community resilience, creativity, and cultural connection to place. They advocated for decolonizing urban planning practices by amplifying marginalized voices, engaging deeply with community histories, and co-creating spaces that honour past legacies while fostering equitable futures. Kimolee Cowell and Lael-Marie Saez of Artists of Color Unite;and Kimberly Harris of Educa Consulting, USA, made their presentation titled: “The Art of Transformation and Reclamation”. In their presentation, they highlighted the importance of culturally responsive evaluation in addressing systemic inequities in Hartford's arts sector, particularly for artists of color, emphasising relational responsibilities to ensure underrepresented voices are central to the process. They examined the transformative impact of radical inclusion through Community Evaluation methodology, drawing lessons from a partnership between Educa Consulting, Hartford Foundation for Public Giving, and Artists of Color Unite! to build equitable ecosystems. Koren Dennison, MA of UBUNTU Research and Evaluation; Aurealia Johnson of YWCA Madison, and Prof. Carolina S. Sarmiento of University of Wisconsin, made a presentation on: “Evaluation as a Tool for Liberation”. They highlighted how evaluation can be leveraged as a tool for liberation by utilising inclusive methodologies like photovoice and journey mapping to amplify community voices and lived experiences. Using a Case Study involving UBUNTU and YWCA they demonstrated the impact of participatory evaluation in fostering deeper connections, generating valuable insights, and driving equitable programmatic decisions that align with evolving community needs. dr. monique liston, the Executive Director of UBUNTU Research and Evaluation, in her presentation on: “Radical Relationship Building through Evaluation: A Framework for Practice” fired up the participants by emphasising on the transformative potential of integrating a dignity framework into program evaluations, particularly for equity-focused initiatives. She highlighted how centering humanity, lived experiences, and systemic inequities, this approach fosters inclusive, culturally responsive evaluations that amplify marginalized voices, challenge traditional norms, and drive more equitable and effective outcomes. The audience was all fired up at the end of her presentation, earning her a standing ovation.
The second last session that I attended was 6.3: Paper Session – Relational Positionality in Evaluation.This was on Friday, 11 April 2025 from 10:45am - 12:15pm. The Session was Chaired by Cecilia Vaughn-Guy, from CREA, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign; while the Discussant was dr. monique liston, the Executive Director of UBUNTU Research and Evaluation. During this session, a Team from CREA University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, made up of Cecilia Vaughn-Guy, Dr. Anthony B. Sullers Jr., and Cherie Aventorganised a short Panel discussion on: “What do you see when you see me?: Explorations of physical positionality and the impact on evaluation relationships” The Panelists discussed how evaluators’ physical and social positionalities, including visible traits like race, age, and appearance, shape their relationships with evaluation clients, particularly in culturally responsive evaluation (CRE) contexts. Drawing on their experiences and case studies as Black evaluators in predominantly white academic spaces, they highlighted how these positionalities serve as both resources and barriers to building rapport, navigating power dynamics, and advancing social justice in marginalised communities. In the same session, Min Ma from Data+Soul Research, USA presented on a topic titled: ”How do we begin? Practices and Tools for Examining Evaluator Positionality, Assumptions, and Bias”. On her part, she discussed the critical need for evaluators to examine their own positionality, assumptions, and biases, emphasising that unchecked assumptions can lead to blind spots and flawed decision-making, particularly when influenced by underlying stereotypes. She highlighted practical tools and approaches for fostering introspection and dialogue within evaluation teams, aiming to honour diverse expertise and create conditions for more equitable and contextually informed evaluation practices. The third presentation in the session came from dr. monique liston from UBUNTU Research and Evaluation, USA titled: “To Pimp a Butterfly: Afrofuturist Relationship Building to use Evaluation for Liberation”. Firing up the participants with music and dance, she highlighted how Kendrick Lamar’s music, particularly “To Pimp a Butterfly” and “DAMN”, serves as a model for an Afrofuturist evaluation framework that centers Black resilience, trauma, healing, and transcendence, urging evaluators to prioritise lived experiences, cultural identity, and speculative re-imagination over traditional quantitative measures. She argued that integrating Afrofuturist principles into evaluation practices – such as dignity, relational responsibility, and artistic expression – can transform evaluations into tools for liberation, justice, and the envisioning of empowered Black futures. The fourth presentation in the session was by Deja Taylor and Koren Dennison from UBUNTU Research & Evaluation, USA; Radaya Ellis from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee; and Ryeshia Farmer from African American Roundtable (AART), jointly presenting on: “Decolonizing Needs Assessments Through Asset Based Community Development: A Culturally Responsive Approach to Community Power Building”. In this presentation, they discussed a 14-month participatory asset mapping project in Milwaukee’s Northwest side that used a culturally responsive, strengths-based approach, centered on Afrofuturist Evaluation, to elevate Black residents’ voices and cultural perspectives in community assessment. Key strategies highlighted included engaging local elders as “Knowledge Keepers,” training community members as co-investigators, and using interactive mapping tools to visualize community assets, ultimately offering practical guidance for equity-focused, culturally grounded evaluation and power building. The final session was the Closing luncheon, during which time, Dr. Warren Chapman delivered his closing Keynote, titled: “Movements and Rivers”. Dr. Chapman has served as the Chief Advancement Officer at the Chicago Lighthouse; Senior Vice President and Interim Vice President for Institutional Development at Columbia College Chicago; Vice Chancellor for External Affairs at the University of Illinois at Chicago; Vice President and National Philanthropic Advisor at JP Morgan Chase; President of the Bank One Foundation; and Lead Program Officer at the Joyce Foundation. As a visiting Assistant Professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Education, he taught graduate courses in sociology of education and educational leadership. In his closing remarks, Dr. Chapman emphasised that Culturally Responsive Evaluation (CRE) is a dynamic, ever-evolving force that shapes and is shaped by the diverse cultural landscapes it encounters, much like a river carving new paths and nourishing all it touches. He called on evaluators to embrace this fluidity and relational responsibility, urging them to actively challenge inequities and translate evidence into meaningful action that uplifts and transforms communities  10 – Shining Home and Away – African participants shining at the CREA Conference My key take-aways and message from my participation at the CREA VIII Conference can be summed as follows:
Dawn Hill Adams told me the story below in an email and I got permission from her to share it in this blog. When Dawn talks in the opening sentence about 'these contexts' she's alluding to the difficult times being experienced by many Indigenous peoples around the world - Fiona
In the video they showed this very famous set of huge rocks that used to stick out into the river like cliffs, and the men used to stand on them and spear the leaping salmon that were working up the rapids. These salmon were almost as big as a man. The people went to this place every year during the salmon spawn time and they got all the fish for their whole year, and dried them there. It was a big festival and ceremony time, their major one. At the end of the movie, they showed old photos from when a dam was built across the river to flood that area. The people were real unhappy about this, obviously, and they gathered near the stones as the water got higher and was going to cover them and flood them under the lake. There was an older woman Frank interviewed, who had been there that day as a child. She said that the dam people did not trust the Indians to leave the dam alone if there was a chance to reclaim that place. So she said that before the water swallowed the stones, the men from the dam place laid dynamite and blew them up so they were destroyed and could never be saved even if the dam was gone. As she told abou this, she started crying. This was at the very end of the film, so it ended within moments. By that time, every Indian woman in the room was crying in a bad way. And the Indian men had gotten very red in the face and had stood up, shoving their chairs from the table with their bodies rigid with anger. They began to yell things, and the women began to almost wail. It felt HORRIBLE, what had been done, and all the past feelings of badness were like the flood of that river. And suddenly, in that crazy grief, there was a loud shout and a slam on the table. It was Albert, yelling, "STOP THIS!" Albert was a gentle man. That is the only time I heard his voice raised. He was not angry with us and yelling that way. He was yelling to be heard and also to be firm. He said, "This is how they destroy us! Sit down and stop this!" Then he said that they can do many things to us that are bad, but those things do not destroy us. Even blowing up those stones does not destroy us, however much it hurts. But our own actions, our own responses, DO destroy us. They cause us to drink alcohol and to be violent to one another. They cause us to have diabetes and heart disease and cancer. Then, Albert said, we do the work the white people want done. We finish what they only started. We do their work for them. Albert said that of course these bad things hurt. But our focus must be the future, and our future people, and the future of All Our Relations. Not how sad or angry we feel about what those bad people do. Because if that is our focus, we give them control over us. And so we allow them to destroy us, which is why they do that stuff to begin with. They know this. It is their intention.  Dawn Hill Adams, PhDDawn is based at the Tapestry Institute, which she founded in 1998. As the Tapestry Institute's website says, "We are about the Land, and about the Knowledge that comes from the Land." Reports from the Tapestry Institute are linked below.
Prabin Chitraker, Chairperson, Community of Evaluators - Nepal
Our EvalIndigenous session, titled 'Integrating indigenous evaluation and culturally responsive evaluation practices into the M&E curriculum',' took place on Wednesday, 04th December 2024 during the ACADEMIC SYMPOSIUM on M&E EDUCATION, 2-4 December 2024, Colombo, Sri Lanka. Session Moderator - Dr. Fiona Cram, Co-Chair of EvalIndigenous The session was moderated by Dr. Fiona Cram the Co-Chair of EvalIndigenous from Aotearoa, New Zealand. Dr. Fiona warmly welcomed all the participants to the session. In her opening remarks she emphasized the importance of entering communities as respectful visitors, good listeners, and valuing cultural norms in the communities. Dr. Fiona introduced the keynote speaker and the panelists of the session, highlighting their diverse expertise and contributions to Indigenous evaluation practices in their respective countries. While introducing Ms. Naomi Lee Be-ilan who is the Indigenous Member of the Ikalahan tribe from Philippines, Dr. Fiona emphasised the importance of including voices and perspectives of the community in such forums and discussions. Lead PresenterDr Almas Fortunatus Mazigo, Dar es Salaam University College of Education (DUCE), TanzaniaDr Almas Fortunatus Mazigo delivered a keynote address titled “Integrating Indigenous Evaluations and Culturally Responsive Evaluation Practices into the Monitoring and Evaluation Curriculum: Lessons from the Master of Arts in Development Evaluation (MADE) Program.” In his keynote address, Dr Mazigo presented a comprehensive overview of the historical context that paved the way for the creation of the Master of Arts in Development Evaluation (MADE) program at DUCE, Tanzania. He elaborated on the significant events and developments that influenced this initiative, emphasizing its importance within the educational landscape. Additionally, he discussed the key findings and insights from the mid-review of the program conducted in 2023, shedding light on its evolution to embrace Indigenous and African-rooted evaluation insights and approaches.
The MADE program is a 24-month accredited program offered at the Dar es Salaam University College of Education (DUCE) in Tanzania. Its goals are twofold: (i) to advance the field of development evaluation within the country, and (ii) to train skilled scholars and professionals in development evaluation. Since 2021, the program has attracted 48 students who are eager to acquire the knowledge and skills needed to conduct high-quality and credible development evaluations. In 2023, a thorough mid-review of the MADE curriculum was carried out to ensure its alignment with the 2021 African Evaluation Principles and incorporate content focused on Indigenous Evaluations. As a result of this review, valuable insights from Indigenous People’s evaluation thoughts and practices have been thoughtfully woven into various courses, enhancing the learning experience and broadening perspectives on development evaluation practices. Some specific changes and updates to the curriculum are detailed below.
Dr Mazigo enriched his keynote presentation with compelling real-world examples that highlighted the active role students could play in community-led evaluation practices. He shared a particularly impactful instance where students collaborated closely with a rural Tanzanian community. Together, they engaged in a multifaceted approach to gathering evidence for their evaluation assignment, utilizing creative methods such as storytelling, digital voices, and community mapping. This hands-on experience not only deepened the students' understanding of evaluation but also fostered a genuine connection with the community. As he concluded his presentation, Dr Mazigo left us with a powerful message, emphasizing the urgent need for academic institutions worldwide to embrace and prioritize ethical and culturally responsive evaluation in the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) education curriculum. His call to action resonated with the audience, motivating us all to commit to these principles and enhance the impact of our educational programs. Panel Discussion
He expressed the benefits of engaging students and parliamentarians through different initiatives which would provide students with real-world experience, networking opportunities, and enhanced practical understanding, complementing their theoretical education. For parliamentarians, these interactions offer access to fresh perspectives and expertise, which can enhance their capacity for informed decision-making. Dr. Bajracharya proposed several collaborative activities, including internships, fellowships, workshops, joint research projects, advisory roles, public hearings, and mentoring exercises. He concluded by emphasizing the mutual benefits of such partnerships, where students gain valuable exposure and skills, while parliamentarians build capacity and develop a deeper understanding of evidence-based policymaking.
Mr. Chitrakar, in relation to the opportunities in Nepal for integrating M&E into the curriculum, stated that Nepal does not offer a dedicated program on M&E as a standalone program, and courses on indigenous evaluation. However, universities like Kathmandu University (KU), Tribhuvan University (TU), Pokhara University, and Purbanchal University incorporate M&E as a components in their courses such as Rural Development, Social Work, and Indigenous Education. KU’s Master in Indigenous Education and Development (MIED) focuses on cultural preservation and sustainable resource management, providing an opportunity to integrate culturally responsive evaluation. Similarly, TU’s Anthropology and Rural Development programs include broader rural development curriculum that includes Social and Cultural Dimensions. He further stated that the demand for skilled evaluation professionals, Nepal’s rich cultural diversity, constitutional commitment to inclusivity, Nepal's M&E Act 2024 which emphasizes accountability and evidence-based decision-making reflects the significant potential to advance M&E education by integrating Indigenous Evaluation into existing curricula and also in developing standalone M&E programs. Mr. Chitrakar expressed the need for a multi-stakeholder approach involving universities, VOPEs, government agencies, NGOs, and international partners which can ensure these opportunities into reality, and shared the following possible roles of stakeholders.
Mr. Eroni Wavu, Co-Leader, EvalYouth Pacific, Fiji
He further shared success stories from Fiji, where community-led evaluations have empowered local populations to influence development initiatives. He shared about a recent evaluation where involved village elders and youth groups, who contributed valuable insights based on their experiences. This collaborative approach not only contributed the evaluation outcomes but also strengthened community. Mr. Eroni emphasized that demystifying M&E and making it accessible to grassroots communities is essential for ensuring that evaluations reflect the needs and aspirations of the people they serve. He further expressed the necessity of continued collaboration and attention to contextual dynamics to ensure meaningful and inclusive evaluation practices across the Pacific.
Ms. Erika shared that the participatory practices enriched the outcomes of a project aimed at preserving cultural heritage. Local youth were trained as interviewers and facilitators, enabling them to bridge the gap between traditional elders and external evaluators. Erika emphasized that such initiatives not only strengthen evaluation processes but also equip communities with the skills to conduct future evaluations independently. Mr. Erika emphasized the importance of mentorship programs that empower Indigenous communities to take control of their narratives. She stressed that evaluators must approach their work with humility and a genuine willingness to learn from the communities they serve. Ms. Naomi Lee Be-ilan, Indigenous Member of the Ikalahan tribe, Philippines
Mr. John Njovu, Africa Representative, Evallndigenous, Zambia
He argued for curricula that prioritize real-world challenges and integrate Indigenous knowledge systems with examples from Zambia. He attributed the failure of development aid in Africa to not having positive outcomes and impacts, and lifting the standard of living of the majority of citizens in developing nations during the past five decades, to focus on meeting donors’ conditionalities and insignificant participation and lack of ownership of the evaluation process by locals. He argued that the seven military coups in West Africa that were supported by ordinary citizens were a testimony of the failure of governance including evaluation supported by international development aid to deliver good public policy initiatives and reliable and effective supply of public services and goods. He cited the limitations of conventional evaluation frameworks that do not include aspects of an indigenous evaluation paradigm to not often address local realities. He also described the challenges of evaluations involving transient evaluators working in indigenous communities without local knowledge and not using culturally sensitive and indigenous evaluation approaches. e.g. dealing with power influences in his village. Citing that transient evaluators concentrate on dealing with males. Visibility at participatory evaluation meetings organised by transient evaluators is maybe mainly of males. However, it is the females through their sisterhood league, mbumba, that make final decisions on major communal issues. He decried the lack of presence of elected Members of Parliament in their constituencies in Zambia despite efforts to build their capacity in evaluation. He argued that it leads to bad governance as national policy making lacks adequate public consultation. Arguing for APNODE, the evaluation global VOPE of MPs to take note. On emerging evaluators possibilities of influencing evaluations in their communities: He was of the opinion that the youths in evaluation had the energies and skills to represent other young people and vulnerable people. He urged them to ask the right questions to their local and national leaders on behalf of the people. E.g. addressing unemployment in rural areas. He further stated that involving young people in every stage of the evaluation not only benefited the process but also empowered participants to advocate for policy changes. He emphasized that such initiatives are essential for building the next generation of indigenous evaluators. He argued that evaluation's main aim is to make the world a better place than we found it. The emerging evaluators could make this world better for everyone. Audience Engagement Highlighted innovative and participatory approaches for engaging vulnerable communities.
Key Takeaways
Conclusion Dr. Fiona Cram concluded the session by emphasizing the importance of fostering inclusive academic environments that empower Indigenous people and communities. Panelists and participants expressed a collective commitment to advancing indigenous evaluation practices through dialogue, collaboration, and education.  L-R: John Njovu, Dr. Almas Fortunatus Mazigo, Prabin Chitraker, Dr. Bhuban Bajracharya, Dr. Fiona Cram, Naomi Lee Be-ilan, Ana Erika Lareza, Eroni Wavu
PhotographersWe are most grateful for the photos and short clips in this blog. These were taken by Vishwa Gemunu Priyankara and Vinuja Sri Sankalpa.
A Historic Gathering by the Wolastoq River On May 8, 2024, as the waters of the Wolastoq River flowed gently past Ekpahak (Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada), a significant milestone in Indigenous evaluation was achieved. In conjunction with the Canadian Evaluation Society (CES) Conference 2024, a diverse group of global Indigenous evaluators and allies gathered to craft the Wolastoq Declaration on Indigenous Evaluation. This living document is a collective commitment to honouring Indigenous rights, protecting knowledge sovereignty, and mobilizing traditional paradigms in evaluation. The Declaration was developed through dialogue, ceremony, and reflection, deeply rooted in the cultural significance of place and the relationships formed during the Indigenous Evaluation Gathering. Honouring the Land and the River The Wolastoq River—meaning “the beautiful and bountiful river” in the Maliseet language—has sustained the Wolastoqiyik (People of the Beautiful River) for generations. This sacred waterway, central to their identity and survival, served as the spiritual and physical grounding for the gathering. Participants honoured the river and the land and their stewards, acknowledging the Wabanaki Confederacy and the deep histories embedded in the territory. The Indigenous Evaluation Gathering before the CES Conference was more than an academic event—it was an embodied experience of Indigenous ways of knowing and being. Participants engaged in discussions about self-determination in evaluation, the need to decolonize methodologies, and the importance of ethical and culturally responsive approaches. Following these immersive experiences, a final debriefing session was held after the CES Conference. Here, reflections were gathered, and the seeds of the Wolastoq Declaration were planted. The Wolastoq Declaration: A Commitment to Indigenous EvaluationThe Wolastoq Declaration on Indigenous Evaluation is not just a statement of principles—it is a call to action. It affirms that evaluation should serve Indigenous Peoples on their own terms, grounded in their knowledge systems, worldviews, and values. The Declaration is a powerful tool for:
The Wolastoq Declaration is a living document, designed to evolve through continued collaboration among Indigenous peoples and allies. It invites all those committed to ethical, meaningful, and culturally responsive Indigenous evaluation to join in its implementation. As we move forward, the question remains: How can we, as evaluators, policymakers, and community members, ensure that Indigenous voices are not just included, but centred in evaluation? The journey does not end here. It continues on the land, by the rivers, in the ceremonies, and through the relationships we nurture. Let us honour. Let us protect. Let us mobilize.Bhuban B Bajracharya, Chairman, Nepal Evaluation SocietyMeeting with Uru Warige Wannila Aththo, Community Leader, Dambana Indigenous Community Each of the EvalIndigenous Team members was welcomed in turn. Holding hands together with the community leader in their traditional style, each of the EvalIndigenous team member self-introduced to him. While talking to the Nepal members, he told that he met people from Tamang community while visiting Nepal. Randhika and Chamathkara explained to him about the EvalIndigenous Team, Academic Symposium on M&E Education, APEA and its activities, and about the importance of EvalIndigenous world-wide. Along with Fiona, they presented him a copy of the APEA Toolkit on Indigenous evaluation..
Uru Warige Wannila Aththo briefly introduced his community having hunting and harvesting jungle products as their main livelihood activities. He highlighted some of the challenges the community is facing at the moment - major ones related to the restriction rules of the Ministry of Environment and Wildlife affecting their livelihood activities. They do not have land rights also. Non-compliance to these rules can often take them for some legal actions also. He asked if EvalIndigenous and APEA could do anything in these matters. Thanking him for his welcome remarks, Fiona, Co-Chair of EvalIndigenous, responded to him on what the EvalIndigenous and APEA could do. She explained that negotiation with the Government is quite important and key to solve the problems. For the negotiation process, consulting also with the UNESCO, EvalIndigenous and APEA can help in producing required documents based on various UN resolutions. Such a negotiation process with well thought out documents, the community can reach to the agreement with the Government. He was not so hopeful about the talks with the Government. They have taken this issue to the Geneva Convention which in turn corresponded with the Sri Lankan Government to address to their issues and helping them continue with the age-old traditional practices. The Government has not responded to it so far.  The meeting has been very much helpful in understanding the difficulties that the indigenous communities are facing and are likely to face even more in future due to the conflict between their traditional practices / lifestyles and the government policies. Who need to change or who would have to change is the question, and in the process, the risk of eroding of the cultural identity would be looming large. After the meeting, some of the community members demonstrated some of their routine and cultural practices. Some of them are:
Members of the EvalIndigenous Team
Related posts: Part 1. About the Community John T. Njovu's post about the Academic Symposium and visiting the Dambana Village AuthorBhuban B Bajracharya, Chairman, Nepal Evaluation Society |
RSS Feed
