Six Conditions that Increase the Likelihood and Effectiveness of Evaluators Speaking Truth to Power by Barbara Klugman

1 Comment / Advocacy and Policy Change / By / September 5, 2018
Hi, I’m Barbara Klugman. I offer strategy support and conduct evaluations with social justice funders and NGOs in South Africa and internationally. I practice utilization-focused evaluation, frequently using mixed methods including outcomes harvesting and social network analysis (SNA). My own history spans social activism, directing NGOs and both working for and being on boards of foundation.
AEA’s Conference theme is Speaking Truth to Power, something that is particularly challenging because of inequitable power relations between nonprofits and their funders, and even between boards and staff.  Evaluators can play a useful intermediary role by providing both the evidence and the facilitation to open space for honest communication.
Hot Tip: I have found the following six factors influenced the effectiveness of my communication across power divides:
  1. Timing of the evaluation and a formative or developmental approach may enhance both grantee and funder interest in the outcomes.
  2. Making learning rather than compliance the evaluation objective creates an environment that welcomes insights to strengthen effectiveness and removes much of the fear and risk from evaluation.
  3. The evaluator needs a substantial capacity for evaluation practice that enhances trust-buildingto undercut anxiety and establish rules of engagement that allow those with least power the ability to engage, influence and use findings.
  4. The production of high quality evidence while self-evident will be more effective in speaking truth to power if all parties have agreed on the questions, mix of methods and evaluation rubrics
  5. A commitment to and comfortableness with the role of evaluator as social justice advocateassumes that the evaluator can navigate when it is appropriate for her to speak, and when to empower the evaluand to do so.
  6. Terms of reference give the evaluator the independent right and resources to communicatefindings to audiences beyond the intended users or those to whom they disseminate findings. While recognising the concomitant ethical responsibility to do no harm, the right and resources to publish findings is critical to the ability of an evaluator to speak truth to power and for the resources that go into evaluation to contribute to broader learning in the field.
Rad Resources: As an illustrative example, see the public communications from the evaluation team of the Ford Foundation’s $54m Strengthening Human Rights Worldwide global initiative. The ToR included funds for the team to publicize findings in Spanish and English which included the summary report, a series of blogs and videos, an article for the international human rights journal SUR and a reflection in Alliance magazine.
Blogs:
Videos: