what happens when a community-owned evaluation ends?

It’s standard practice to ask participants if they have any questions after an interview is done. I pride myself on using candor to build trust. So I was happy when someone started their question with, “I’ve always wondered this, but I’ve never felt comfortable asking anyone else…” My encouraging smile faded as she continued, “You all come here, ask all these questions, and then nothing ever happens. How is this time going to be different?” 

As I said, I pride myself on candor. The real answer: it very likely won’t be. First, because the data were being collected to inform a proposal there was no guarantee the organization would win, and if another organization won, there was a near-zero chance this knowledge would be shared with that organization or anyone else.

I spent 10 minutes doing what I do best, telling people what they need to hear, not what they want to hear. I ended with a directive: "If you don’t hear back in 3 months, march down to the organization and get some answers. It’s your right."

The problem underpinning this exchange is much deeper than communication. It’s a structural problem of accountability, responsibility, and power. 

Who has each? Who has neither?

The post-evaluation problem is much deeper than we acknowledge

Currently, evaluation findings live primarily inside of reports, and all the knowledge they contain lives with the evaluator, the organization, and their funder. However, evaluators move on to other projects, staff turn over, leadership changes, donors shift priorities, programs end, and organizations close. 

When findings live primarily in a report held by the organization, those findings are only as durable as the organization itself. 

Currently, the most common approaches to evaluation (participatory, adaptive, theory-driven, equity-centered) lack a sustainable and replicable model for how knowledge will survive the inevitable rise and fall of organizations and funders. 

When they fall, knowledge from evaluations evaporates. Another initiative comes along and starts from scratch, often asking the same questions, making the same mistakes, learning the same lessons at the same cost. Power. Responsibility. Accountability. 

Who has each? Who has neither? 

What Sharing Power, Responsibility, and Accountability Looks Like

In a community-owned evaluation, these questions are answered at the start. The evaluator, the organization, and the Affected Community members who own the evaluation begin their work with a clear understanding of who will hold power to communicate and act on findings and how that power will be shared. In practice, this looks different for each party:

1 - Affected Community members who owned the evaluation share a responsibility to communicate findings, pass them down, act on them, and/or hold those in power accountable for action.

2 - Organizations communicate findings beyond reports, using formats that Affected Community members find accessible, familiar, and enjoyable. They also track and communicate their progress against findings and recommendations to those affected by the work.

3 - Evaluators continue to engage as advocates, linking organizations and Affected Community members to cultural connectors who help ensure the safe passage of knowledge from generation to generation. 

None of these can happen unless they are explicit goals from the start of an evaluation. 

What Gets Built In

Early in our approach to community-owned evaluation, we clearly lay out what can be decided by the Affected Community. We use Ownership Charters to codify how decision-making power will be shared during and after the evaluation. Meanwhile, Decision Logs create a living record of every decision made throughout the evaluation: the nature of the decision, why the decision was made, and what it means for the community, evaluator, and organization. 

Once the core evaluative work is over, organizations receive custom tools to track and communicate progress against recommendations. Ongoing support to the Affected Community ensures that progress doesn't falter the moment the evaluator's contract closes. 

The Affected Community members who held decision rights during the evaluation (deciding questions, making sense of data, and determining findings) don't stop holding knowledge when the evaluation ends. They and other cultural connectors carry findings forward, hold organizations accountable, and pass what they've learned to the people and initiatives that follow. 

A question for organizations and their funders

If you’re funding or commissioning an evaluation, the first question worth asking and answering is not “what do we want to know?” It's “where do we want the new knowledge to live, and who do we want to hold it?”

Now more than ever, we understand the risk of organizations and funders vanishing. If every evaluation is an investment in learning, then community ownership yields a return on that investment that compounds in a way that institution-held knowledge and power never can, and never will.

The End?

The moment an evaluation report is delivered should feel like a new beginning, not a conclusion.

Findings have onward journeys. Structures to keep knowledge alive and accountability mechanisms in place ensure their journey is long and meaningful.

If you're thinking about an upcoming evaluation and want to explore what building for longevity looks like in your context, we'd love to talk.