As described by the Indigenous Food Systems Network, food sovereignty rests on four interconnected principles:
Why It Matters to Evaluators For evaluators, Indigenous food sovereignty offers a living model of systems change. It challenges us to measure success not by yield or income, but by reciprocity, collective wellbeing, and ecological renewal. Evaluating Indigenous food systems means valuing relational accountability—how communities sustain balance, respect, and interconnection. The International Federation of Social Workers highlights this in its call to recognise food sovereignty as a pathway to climate justice and Indigenous self-determination. Evaluators have a key role in documenting how these practices strengthen resilience, restore knowledge, and uphold rights. Walking Alongside, Not Ahead Indigenous food sovereignty invites evaluators to stand in solidarity with communities—not as inspectors, but as witnesses and learners. In doing so, we help ensure that evaluation contributes to life-affirming futures where food, culture, and land are inseparable, and where equity, dignity, and self-determination are the ultimate measures of success.  Also see the Indigenous Food Sovereignty section in our July-September 2025 newsletter. Other Reading Jernigan, V. B. B., Demientieff, L. X., & Maunakea, A. K. (2023). Food sovereignty as a path to health equity for Indigenous communities: Introduction to the focus issue. Health Promotion Practice, 24(6), 1066–1069. https://doi.org/10.1177/15248399231190355
0 Comments
Voices from the Land: Indigenous Evaluation and the Global Movement for Relational Accountability8/13/2025 At the recent International Janjatiya Gaurav (Tribal Pride) Seminar, Dr Fiona Cram, Director of Katoa Ltd. in Aotearoa New Zealand and Co-Chair of EvalIndigenous, shared a vision for Indigenous evaluation grounded in sovereignty, culture, and relationships. Speaking from a Kaupapa Māori inquiry paradigm—that is, research and evaluation by Māori, for Māori, and with Māori—Dr Cram described how Indigenous evaluation resists external definitions of success. Instead, it centres mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge), tikanga (cultural protocols), and self-determination, ensuring cultural vitality, sustainability, and even the return of land. She challenged dominant evaluation models that overlook or distort Indigenous perspectives, impose outside measures, and too often operate without accountability to communities. Introducing EvalIndigenous, a global network of Indigenous evaluators and allies, Dr Cram outlined its “seeding, germinating, growing, blossoming” theory of change. Across regions, from Aotearoa and the Pacific to Africa, Asia, Turtle Island and Latin America, EvalIndigenous supports Indigenous-led evaluation that is culturally grounded and community-driven. Central to this movement is the Wolastoq Declaration on Indigenous Evaluation, created in 2024 by Indigenous evaluation leaders and allies. The Declaration asserts the right of Indigenous Peoples to define, conduct, and benefit from evaluation, and calls for honouring Indigenous rights, protecting knowledge sovereignty, and mobilising traditional paradigms. Dr Cram emphasised relational accountability as the connecting thread — being answerable to people, lands, ancestors, and future generations; upholding reciprocity and respect; and sustaining connections across contexts. She highlighted Asia–Pacific projects in Fiji, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Mongolia, and the Philippines, including the APEA Toolkit for Indigenous Evaluation. Closing her talk, Dr Cram reminded participants that “evaluation is not just about measuring change — it is about creating it.” When Indigenous peoples define success, she said, “we define our own futures.” Her presentation with notes is available here. Health evaluation has long been framed by Western scientific methods and priorities. However, for Indigenous Peoples, evaluation is not new. It has always been part of how we live, make decisions, and sustain wellbeing. What’s needed now is not simply more evaluation, but better evaluation: work that reflects our knowledge systems, honours our protocols, and is done with, by, and for Indigenous communities. Indigenous evaluators are reclaiming the space of health evaluation and reasserting its rightful purpose: to support thriving Indigenous families, strengthen self-determination, and uphold collective wellbeing. This shift is grounded in protocols, bundles, and principles created by Indigenous communities, for Indigenous priorities.
The Indigenous Evaluation 101 Guidebook from Minnesota extends this further by offering practical strategies to funders and evaluators, from building good relations agreements and securing Tribal IRB approval, to adopting culturally grounded logic models and community-led methods such as talking circles. Crucially, it insists that Indigenous values shape the evaluation from start to finish, not just as a token add-on. These approaches are not merely aspirational, they are already being used successfully in Indigenous health initiative evaluations. For example, the Aloha Framework, developed in Hawaiʻi, integrates Indigenous values of aloha, kuleana, and pono to centre cultural integrity and community wellbeing in health evaluation design. Likewise, Indigenous wellness indicator projects with First Nations communities emphasize cultural identity, intergenerational strength, and land-based wellness over narrow metrics like hospital readmission rates What do these examples have in common? They are driven by Indigenous people. They reflect a commitment to sovereignty over data, stories, and outcomes. They challenge the field to move beyond cultural adaptation toward Indigenous self-determination in evaluation.
For funders and commissioners, this means rethinking what counts as credible evidence, resourcing Indigenous evaluators, and ceding control to Indigenous governance processes. It also means understanding that good evaluation is not just a technical task: it is a relational, ethical, and political act. If you’re funding an evaluation of an Indigenous health initiative, inquire about the outcomes but also ask “whose knowledge guides the evaluation and who does it serve?”
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. 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. 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.A post from Fiona Cram, Co-Chair, EvalIndigenousYou may have noticed that we here at EvalIndigenous have been assembling open access Indigenous Evaluation Resources. It's been a pleasantly surprising exercise to see the resources that are available. And of course there's room for many more resources about Indigenous evaluation principles, guidance, methods and practice examples - so keep writing. For now, here are seven inter-related principles of Indigenous evaluation that the resources we've gathered touch upon. Self-Determination Self-determination is a foundational principle that acknowledges the sovereignty of Indigenous peoples and upholds their rights to self-governance. This principle ensures that Indigenous peoples have the authority to shape every aspect of an evaluation, from design and implementation to the interpretation and use of findings. By maintaining control, Indigenous peoples can ensure that the evaluation aligns with their cultural values, priorities, and long-term visions for development. Evaluation should therefore provide Indigenous peoples with the tools and knowledge to make informed decisions and advocate for their wellbeing. Relational Accountability Relational accountability is a core principle in Indigenous evaluation, emphasizing the interconnected nature of relationships within and between Indigenous peoples, their environment and the cosmos. It underscores the responsibility of evaluators to uphold respectful and reciprocal relationships throughout the evaluation process. This principle is deeply rooted in the understanding that relationships are not merely transactional but sacred and enduring. Evaluators are expected to engage with Indigenous peoples in a manner that is respectful of their traditions, social structures, and values. This involves a long-term commitment, recognizing that the relationship does not end when the evaluation project concludes.
Ethical Responsibility and Data Sovereignty Ethical responsibility in Indigenous evaluation emphasizes protecting the rights and dignity of Indigenous peoples. Evaluators must adhere to culturally appropriate ethical standards, including obtaining Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC). Data sovereignty is a critical component, meaning that communities retain control over how their data is collected, used, and shared. This principle counters historical patterns of exploitation and ensures that data serves the interests of Indigenous peoples. It aligns with global movements advocating for Indigenous rights and recognizes the importance of self-determined research and evaluation practices. Reciprocity Reciprocity in Indigenous evaluation ensures that the process is mutually beneficial, going beyond data collection to provide tangible benefits to Indigenous peoples. This principle is about giving back in meaningful ways, recognizing the Indigenous peoples' contributions and ensuring that the evaluation process is not extractive. Evaluators are expected to share the knowledge generated from the evaluation in accessible formats, enabling Indigenous peoples to use the findings to inform their decisions and improve their practices. Furthermore, reciprocity involves mutual learning, where both evaluators and Indigenous peoples gain insights and skills.
Capacity Building Indigenous evaluations aim to enhance the skills and knowledge of Indigenous peoples so they can conduct their evaluations in the future. Capacity building includes training in data collection, analysis, and use. It is also about fostering a structural analysis of how the potential of Indigenous peoples is often stifled by societal barriers and racism. This principle supports the broader goal of enabling Indigenous peoples to take ownership of their development and governance. It ensures that the benefits of evaluation extend beyond the immediate project, contributing to long-term resilience and self-determination. Concluding Remark Together with the other guidance from the assembled indigenous evaluation resources, these principles create a framework that is respectful and ethical, as well as relevant to the unique contexts of Indigenous peoples. Adherence to the guidance offered and these principles will help ensure that evaluations contribute positively to Indigenous peoples' aspirations, rather than being extractive by only serving external interests. Also available in Spanish: Principios de Evaluación Indígena - Fiona Cram (Spanish version by Celeste).pdf
This third Kaupapa Māori evaluation blog post describes the methodology, methods and lessons learned from a Kaupapa Māori evaluation conducted in Aotearoa New Zealand in the late 1990s. BackgroundHe Oranga Poutama was part of a broader effort called Omangia Te Oma Roa (Run the Long Journey/Participate for Life), which aimed to facilitate Māori aspirations for health and wellbeing by coordinating policy developments and service delivery across various government agencies. The philosophy of Omangia Te Oma Roa was that physical leisure (sport and recreation) was an effective medium for reaching Māori and promoting health and wellness. He Oranga Poutama was initially developed by the Hillary Commission and subsequently established as a key strategy for promoting Māori health through physical activity. The initiative involved the recruitment and training of Māori health and wellbeing coordinators (kaiwhakahaere) who worked to increase awareness of the benefits of physical activity and injury prevention within Māori communities. The focus of the second-year evaluation of He Oranga Poutama was on changes in Māori community behaviours and attitudes towards sports and recreation as a result of the initiative. The evaluation covered events organized by kaiwhakahaere (coordinators) at four project sites: Tauranga, Whakatane, Auckland Central, and Rotorua. Kaupapa Māori MethodologyThe evaluation of He Oranga Poutama was conducted using a Kaupapa Māori (Māori approach) framework, which emphasizes Māori values, cultural practices, and community involvement. Kaupapa Māori research is concerned with methodology rather than method, focusing on culturally appropriate and community-centred approaches. This involved several key principles, including:
MethodsThe methods used in the evaluation of He Oranga Poutama were designed to be culturally responsive, respectful, and empowering. By aligning with the principles of Kaupapa Māori, the evaluation process honoured Māori values and perspectives, ensuring that the findings were meaningful and relevant to the community. The combination of survey questionnaires, in-depth interviews, focus groups, participant observation, and reflective journals provided a rich and comprehensive understanding of the events’ impact on Māori health and well-being. This approach exemplifies the potential of culturally grounded methodologies in conducting effective and meaningful evaluations within Indigenous communities. 1. Survey Questionnaires
Strengths: The use of survey questionnaires allowed for the collection of standardized data, making it possible to compare results across different sites and events. The involvement of local interviewers enhanced the cultural appropriateness of the method. Challenges: Ensuring high response rates and accurate data collection in a dynamic event environment can be challenging. Training and supporting interviewers was essential to address these challenges. 2. In-Depth InterviewsDescription: In-depth interviews were conducted with key stakeholders, including event organizers (kaiwhakahaere), community leaders, and participants. These interviews aimed to gather detailed qualitative data on their experiences, motivations, and perceptions of the events. Application: Interviewers used semi-structured interview guides to ensure that key topics were covered while allowing for flexibility and in-depth exploration of issues. Interviews were conducted in a respectful and culturally appropriate manner, often incorporating elements of tikanga Māori (Māori customs and traditions). Strengths: In-depth interviews provided rich, detailed insights into the experiences and perspectives of stakeholders. This method allowed for a deeper understanding of the cultural context and the impact of the events on the community. Challenges: Conducting in-depth interviews requires skilled interviewers who can build rapport with participants and navigate sensitive topics. Ensuring the confidentiality and comfort of participants was crucial. 3. Focus GroupsDescription: Focus groups were organized to facilitate discussions among participants and stakeholders. These group discussions provided an opportunity to explore collective views, experiences, and suggestions for improvement. Application: Focus groups were conducted in a relaxed and supportive environment, encouraging open and honest discussion. Facilitators guided the conversations, ensuring that all participants had an opportunity to contribute. The focus groups often started with a whakawhanaungatanga (relationship-building) activity to establish trust and connection. Strengths: Focus groups allowed for the exploration of shared experiences and collective insights. This method facilitated the identification of common themes and issues, enriching the overall understanding of the events’ impact. Challenges: Managing group dynamics and ensuring that all voices were heard required skilled facilitation. Creating a safe and respectful environment was essential for meaningful discussion. 4. Participant ObservationDescription: Participant observation involved evaluators immersing themselves in the events, observing interactions, activities, and the overall atmosphere. This method aimed to provide a holistic understanding of the events and their impact on the community. Application: Evaluators participated in the events as observers, taking detailed field notes on their observations. They focused on aspects such as participant engagement, interactions between whānau (extended family) members, and the integration of health promotion messages. Strengths: Participant observation provided context and depth to the evaluation findings. It allowed evaluators to capture the nuances of the events and the cultural dynamics at play. Challenges: Maintaining an objective perspective while being immersed in the event can be challenging. Balancing participation and observation required careful consideration and reflexivity. 5. Reflective Journals
Strengths: Reflective journals supported evaluators in maintaining a reflexive approach, allowing them to critically examine their own biases, assumptions, and positionality. This method contributed to the integrity and authenticity of the evaluation. Challenges: Maintaining consistent and detailed journal entries required discipline and commitment. Ensuring that reflections were honest and constructive was essential for the effectiveness of this method. Key Evaluation FindingsDemographics: The majority of participants were Māori, with a significant portion aged between 16 and 40 years. There was a relatively even gender distribution. Attendance and Motivation: Participants primarily attended to support whānau, play sports, or enjoy the event. Whānau networks were a crucial factor in recruiting participants and spectators. Health Behaviours: Many participants reported reducing smoking and alcohol consumption during the events. A significant number set personal goals related to increasing fitness and participating in more sports. Event Success: Most participants and stakeholders felt the events were successful, highlighting the importance of whanaungatanga (kinship) and community involvement. Key Learnings from the Use of Kaupapa Māori Evaluation MethodologyThese key points highlight the valuable lessons learned from employing a Kaupapa Māori evaluation methodology in the He Oranga Poutama initiative. The culturally responsive and community-centred approach not only enhanced the evaluation process but also contributed to the empowerment and well-being of the Māori communities involved. Cultural relevance enhances engagement
Building trust through local interviewers
Community ownership and empowerment
Holistic understanding through mixed methods
Importance of reflexivity
Continuous improvement through feedback
Cultural integrity in evaluation
ConclusionHe Oranga Poutama successfully promoted sports and healthy lifestyles among Māori communities. The events fostered a sense of whanaungatanga (relationships) and provided platforms for participants to set and achieve personal health goals. The initiative's culturally relevant approach and strong community engagement were key to its success. Ongoing support, innovative health promotion strategies, and continuous improvement based on community feedback will further enhance the program's impact. The initiative stands as a model for culturally grounded health promotion, demonstrating the power of Indigenous knowledge and practices in fostering well-being. The use of Kaupapa Māori evaluation methodology in the evaluation of He Oranga Poutama was instrumental in creating a culturally responsive, respectful, and empowering evaluation process. This methodology not only enhanced the engagement and participation of Māori communities but also ensured that the evaluation findings were meaningful, relevant and useable. By honouring Māori values and perspectives, this Kaupapa Māori evaluation provided a robust framework for understanding and promoting health and well-being within Māori communities. Glossary
Other blog posts in this series: |
 | Posted by Fiona Cram, PhDNgāti Pāhauwera, Aotearoa New Zealand Acknowledgement I would like to extend my gratitude to ChatGPT for its invaluable assistance in summarizing this report. |
RSS Feed
