Evaluation 2018: Speaking Truth to Power

View Printable Version

Applying a Culturally Responsive Evaluation Framework - Bridging Theory and Practice

Session Number: 1734
Track: Graduate Education Diversity Internship (GEDI)
Session Type: Panel
Tags: GEDI
Session Chair: Laura Pryor [Social Policy Research Associates]
Discussant: Kien S Lee [Principal Associate & Vice President - Community Science]
Presenter 1: Monique Liston [Chief Strategic Officer - Ubuntu Research and Evaluation]
Presenter 2: Laura Pryor [Social Policy Research Associates]
Presenter 4: Nnenia Campbell [Research Associate - Natural Hazards Center]
Presenter 5: Lisa Aponte-Soto [Associate Director of Community Engaged Research]
Time: Nov 02, 2018 (05:45 PM - 06:45 PM)
Room: CC - 14

Abstract 1 Title: Advocating for CRE when working with clients
Presentation Abstract 1:

Despite the growth of culturally responsive evaluation theories, methods and analyses, many organizations are not fully aware of how culturally responsive tools could enhance their practice. Evaluators need a set of strategies to bring CRE practices within evaluation work. The impact of these strategies can be increased when the client understands how culturally responsive evaluation answers their evaluation questions with greater fidelity. This presentation presents four specific strategies internal and external evaluators to advocate for culturally responsive evaluation practices when clients do not bring the idea to the table themselves.


Abstract 2 Title: Using mixed-methods under a CRE framework
Presentation Abstract 2:

Hood, Hopson, and Kirkhart (2015) note that mixed methods is now the recommended approach for a culturally responsive evaluation; however, in the past, qualitative approaches were preferred above quantitative. This prioritization was largely out of recognition that quantitative methods represented an objective and value-free approach that is fundamentally opposed to the purpose and underlying theory of CRE. Given this recommendation, how can evaluators use mixed methods under a CRE framework? This presentation addresses this questions through discussing the case of the UC Berkeley Athletic Study Center evaluation. Mixed methods were explicitly used in the evaluation design and analysis in a way that applied the CRE framework and met the needs of the evaluation client. This presentation will also discuss best practices and challenges with using a mixed-methods approach under a CRE framework.


Abstract 3 Title: Integrating CRE with budget and project constraints
Presentation Abstract 3:

For Culturally Responsive Evaluation to be widely adopted, practicing evaluators must understand how to bring it into the context of their work. Furthermore, CRE must be seen as a concrete set of practices and theories that can be operationalized in any environment, including ones with stringent time and budget constraints.  This presentation will discuss the importance of recognizing both institutional constraints and opportunities in which evaluators operate, and how CRE approaches can be successfully integrated in these environments. Specifically, it will tackle common challenges, such as applying a CRE frameworks in the face of budget and time constraints. Lastly, the presentation will highlight strategies for drawing on organizational strengths and values, and making CRE relevant to those underpinnings.


Presentation 3 Other Authors: Brandi Gilbert
Abstract 4 Title: Leveraging CRE to address hidden assumptions within diversity-related programming
Presentation Abstract 4:

The value of CRE, while seemingly self-evident due to its implications for the validity of findings, is often a case that must be justified—sometimes repeatedly—by the evaluator. The need to advocate for culturally responsive methods and analyses may be routinely anticipated in evaluations of projects that lack an explicit emphasis on historically marginalized populations or other aspects diversity. Yet this task may be even more complicated when such concepts are central to a program’s focus. Problematic assumptions and oversights embedded within such programming can in some ways be more difficult to address because they may be more easily interpreted as an existential threat to the evaluand. This presentation will discuss the ways in which a CRE framework can be used to uncover taken-for-granted beliefs, inconsistencies, and other challenges that can undermine diversity-oriented initiatives, as well as the challenges that may emerge when raising such issues as an evaluator.    .

 


Abstract 5 Title: Integrating a Culturally Responsive Lens for Conducting Quality Improvement Reviews
Presentation Abstract 5:

Integrating a culturally responsive lens in the quality improvement design and processes is essential to standard patient care quality assurance review practices, particularly when working with diverse patient populations. However, culturally responsive approaches are often overlooked in quality assurance paradigms. This presentation provides an overview of the establishment of a regulatory committee charged with reviewing standard patient care programs and practices, projects that utilize patient data, and interventions within a network of 13 federally qualified health centers providing health services to underserved and uninsured patients. This presentation also discusses how the committee promotes health equity through the incorporation of a culturally responsive monitoring review process.


Audience Level: All Audiences

Session Abstract (150 words): 

Culturally Responsive Evaluation (CRE) is both an evaluation theory and prescriptive framework. This relationship is both iterative and complementary in which CRE theory informs practice and CRE practice informs theory. This panel explores how CRE theory has informed real-world evaluation practice and vice versa, as well as the challenges and opportunities associated with applying a CRE framework. Specifically, this panel addresses the following topics: (1) Advocating for CRE when working with clients; (2) Using mixed-methods under a CRE framework; (3) Integrating CRE with budget and project constraints; (4) Leveraging CRE to address hidden assumptions with diversity-related programming; and (5) Integrating CRE with quality improvement project reviews. Panelists will discuss information that practitioners can apply to their own work, as well as continues to advance CRE theory.



For questions or concerns about your event registration, please contact registration@eval.org or 202-367-1173.

For questions about your account, membership status, or help logging in, please contact info@eval.org.



Cancellation Policy: Refunds less a $50 fee will be granted for requests received in writing prior to 11:59 PM EDT October 8, 2018. Email cancellation requests to registration@eval.org. All refunds are processed after the meeting. After October 8, 2018 all sales are final. For Evaluation 2018, international attendees and presenters who encounter complications due to the international travel environment will have up to 30 days after the event to request a refund and submit appropriate documentation. No administrative fee will apply for the international requests.