.png)
Reading list
This topic introduces potential phases of evaluation and explains how they can support effective monitoring and evaluation processes. It explores what may be involved at each phase and provides examples of how other Indigenous groups approach evaluation in ways that reflect their priorities and values.
While reading this topic, think about the following questions and how they relate to your organisation, community or nation:
There are no fixed phases or stages for evaluation, as approaches will vary depending on a group’s needs, capacity, context and priorities. For Indigenous organisations, evaluation is often not a linear process but an ongoing cycle of learning and reflection. Different evaluation types will also have different structures.
However, many evaluations will follow a series of common phases that can provide a useful guide, while allowing flexibility to adapt to local contexts and designs.
Evaluation processes begin with careful planning. This involves defining the purpose of the evaluation, identifying key stakeholders (including Elders and community members), working out what resources you have available, and agreeing on key questions the evaluation should answer. The purpose of the evaluation should be clearly linked to the organisation’s strategic or business plan, so that it supports priority areas and decision-making.
Planning also includes considering what success looks like from a community perspective, what knowledge and evidence will be valued, the approaches or methods to be used (including culturally appropriate methods), the types of information to be gathered and the timeline.
A well-designed plan ensures that the evaluation remains focused and relevant.
Key questions to consider:
Once the approach has been agreed, information is gathered in ways that are respectful, culturally appropriate and guided by community. Data collection should be done in partnership with community members wherever possible.
This might include methods such as yarning circles, conversations, surveys, interviews, observations or reviewing existing documents. Approaches like yarning can create space for people to share their experiences and knowledge in ways that feel natural and culturally safe.
The choice of methods should align with the purpose of the evaluation and be culturally appropriate. Here are some methods your group might use:
| Method | Advantages | Considerations |
|---|---|---|
| Yarning |
|
|
| Interviews |
|
|
| Surveys or questionnaires |
|
|
| Storytelling |
|
|
| Observations |
|
|
| Document review |
|
|
| Informal 1-1 conversations |
|
|
Key questions to consider:
In this phase, the information that has been gathered is brought together, organised and carefully considered to understand what it is telling us. For Indigenous groups, analysis often goes beyond identifying patterns and trends by making sense of information in a way that reflects community knowledge and lived experience.
Both quantitative (numerical) and qualitative (stories, experiences, observations) approaches may be used. Importantly, stories, voices and relationships are valued as key sources of knowledge (not just as supporting information).
Analysis is strongest when it is done with community and not just for community. Depending on your group, this might look like involving community members, Elders and other stakeholders in considering the information.
The goal is to turn the gathered information into insights that respond to the evaluation questions and support informed, community-led decision-making.
Key questions to consider:
After the data is brought together and analysed, the findings can be understood in relation to the original aims, community priorities and definitions of success. For Indigenous groups, interpretation includes understanding what the findings mean in the context of community, culture and Country.
Interpretation involves making sense of the findings by identifying key themes, patterns and insights, and considering how these align with community perspectives and lived experience. It also includes recognising strengths and acknowledging the contributions, knowledge and context of community in shaping what the findings mean.
Again, interpretation should be guided by community voices. This might mean creating space for community members, Elders and other key stakeholders to be involved. This process supports shared understanding and reinforces accountability to community.
Key questions to consider:
Once findings have been interpreted, the next phase is to decide how they will be used. This usually means turning the insights your group has gathered into clear actions, priorities (for example, for a strategic plan) or changes that reflect community needs and aspirations. Actions might include adapting programs, strengthening what is working well, addressing gaps or informing future planning and resource allocation.
For Indigenous groups, this step is also an important part of governance and accountability because this is where you can ensure any decisions are guided by evidence and community perspectives.
Decisions about next steps should be made in partnership with community and communicated clearly, so that people can see how their input has shaped outcomes. This process can also create opportunities for collective reflection about whether the work continues to align with community priorities, values and aspirations.
Key questions to consider:
The next phase involves sharing the findings in ways that are accessible, respectful and meaningful to community and other stakeholders.
Findings can be shared in different ways depending on what works best for the different audiences. This might include community meetings, yarning sessions, visual summaries, stories, presentations, videos or written reports. Using clear, culturally appropriate and locally relevant ways of sharing information helps ensure that findings are understood and can be used.
It is important that findings are returned to community in a timely and respectful way, and that people can see how their knowledge and contributions have been valued. This phase also provides an opportunity for community to reflect on the findings, ask questions and help shape next steps.
Sharing findings should lead to action. This may include improving programs and services, strengthening what is working well and continuing conversations with community about future priorities.
Key questions to consider:
Evaluation is not a one-time activity but a continuous process. The final phase of evaluation often involves reflecting on the process and using what has been learned to inform improvements, strengthen programs or activities and guide future work.
Indigenous evaluation is often described as being nonlinear. Rather than following a strict sequence, evaluation is cyclical and adaptive. What this means is that insights gained at any point can prompt revisiting earlier evaluation phases, adjusting methods or redefining priorities in response to emerging needs or feedback.
This phase encourages community members, Elders, stakeholders and staff to come together to discuss what has worked well, what challenges emerged and what could be done differently. Reflection should be built into regular activities and not reserved only for the end of the evaluation.
Key questions to consider:
This tool is designed to support groups in working through some of the key steps in monitoring and evaluation work. It provides high-level guidance to support your group with planning, reflection and action across the entire evaluation process.
(5MB)
The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Suicide Prevention Project’s (ATSISPEP) was active from 2015 to 2017.7The University of Western Australia, “ATSISPEP,” accessed March 2026, [link]. ATSISPEP’s Indigenous Suicide Prevention Evaluation Framework was designed to guide communities and stakeholders in developing evaluation plans alongside activity planning for suicide prevention initiatives. The framework outlines five key stages:
The foundation for effective evaluations: community partnerships
Effective Indigenous suicide prevention requires strong community ownership, partnership and engagement. Both activity and evaluation planning should be supported by:
Setting the parameters for evaluation planning
At this stage, key actions include:
Developing an evaluation plan using program logic
The evaluation plan is developed using the same program logic model that informs the activity design. This ensures alignment between implementation and evaluation.
This program logic follows a four-step cause-and-effect sequence:
Implementing an evaluation plan
ATSISPEP outlines several key questions to guide implementation:
A key output of this stage is the development of an evaluation report, which analyses and documents the findings.11 The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Suicide Prevention Project (ATSISPEP), Indigenous Suicide Prevention Activity Evaluation Framework, accessed March 2026, [link], 11.
Disseminating the lessons learned
The final stage focuses on sharing evaluation findings to strengthen the broader evidence base for Indigenous suicide prevention. ATSISPEP highlights several dissemination strategies, including:
The American Indian Higher Education Consortium’s Indigenous Evaluation Framework (AIHEC) presents a flexible, culturally grounded process that integrates Indigenous ways of knowing with adapted non-Indigenous evaluation practices.7American Indian Higher Education Consortium, Joan LaFrance and Richard Nichols, Telling Our Story in Our Place and Time: Indigenous Evaluation Framework, Alexandria, VA, 2009.
It provides a useful example of how evaluation can be designed to centre community. We recommended Toolkit users refer to the full AIHEC framework manual as it provides more comprehensive detail on the AIHEC process.
The AIHEC Framework manual is organised around eight sections:
While all sections are important, the following summary focuses on the final four sections as they are most directly relevant to practical evaluation design and implementation. The first three sections are also covered in other subtopics.
Key elements are highlighted below:
Engaging community
Community engagement is foundational and reflects respect for community knowledge and sovereignty. Evaluations are most effective when communities have a strong sense of ownership over the process.
AIHEC identify three dimensions of community engagement:
Community engagement can take many forms, depending on context and community preferences. In one example provided by AIHEC, an evaluator involved in a large-scale evaluation in Canada began the planning process by hosting a community feast. This gathering was open to all, with food provided, and created a welcoming space to share the purpose of the evaluation and invite input and guidance from community members. In another example, an evaluator working within their own tribal community ensured that groups of community members were actively involved in program implementation. These groups served as important forums for discussion, contributing to problem-solving and providing ongoing feedback on program delivery.9American Indian Higher Education Consortium, Joan LaFrance and Richard Nichols, Telling Our Story in Our Place and Time: Indigenous Evaluation Framework, Alexandria, VA, 2009, 43-45.
Creating the story
In their focus groups, AIHEC noted a recurring message from participants was that “our evaluations need to tell our story”.10American Indian Higher Education Consortium, Joan LaFrance and Richard Nichols, Telling Our Story in Our Place and Time: Indigenous Evaluation Framework, Alexandria, VA, 2009, 47.
Storytelling is used to capture meaning, context and impact in ways that go beyond standard metrics.
This stage might involve describing:
Building the Scaffolding
The evaluation design, referred to as “building the scaffolding”, outlines how the story will be examined.
This includes:
Responsive Information Gathering
The AIHEC framework encourages more appropriate and culturally-grounded methods of gathering data. Data collection is seen as a relational and flexible process. It requires:
Evaluators are encouraged to adapt methods (like interviews, surveys, focus groups) to align with community norms, including allowing participants to guide conversations and share what they see as important.12American Indian Higher Education Consortium, Joan LaFrance and Richard Nichols, Telling Our Story in Our Place and Time: Indigenous Evaluation Framework, Alexandria, VA, 2009, 81-87.
Planning, Implementing and Celebrating
At this stage, the evaluation plan is put into action. This includes:
