Scholarlink

Background <p>In Australia, billions of dollars are spent on Indigenous programs, services, and initiatives annually; however, more evidence is needed regarding which modes of commissioning program evaluations best benefit Indigenous communities. The Australian Productivity Commission called for ‘more and better’ evaluations of Indigenous programs, and commissioning processes that engage Indigenous communities, organisations, and leaders. So, too, have Indigenous representative organisations, Indigenous services, and stakeholders. To date, few studies have sought to characterise the commissioning practices of government and non-government organisations surrounding Indigenous health and wellbeing programs. Fewer still have investigated the role of Indigenous engagement and leadership before, during and after the commissioning process.</p> Methods <p>Using Indigenous Standpoint Theory and a qualitative approach, this study illuminates the perceptions of Australian Indigenous and non-Indigenous commissioners, evaluators, and providers on the commissioning of evaluated Indigenous health and wellbeing programs.</p> Results <p>Building on a published scoping review by undertaking 23 qualitative interviews with 35 Australian-based participants about commissioning practices, this study verifies and canvases the strengths of individual commissioning models, and the interplay between power, cultural safety, and reciprocity in the commissioning space. The paper also considers the relationship between these three factors along a continuum of practice and posits a sliding scale across the five commissioning models.</p> Conclusions <p>To improve the quality of evaluations further attention needs to be paid to the commissioner’s cultural capability. Additionally, Commissioners need to develop their understanding of the relationship between Commissioner and Indigenous people’s power and the utility of evaluations.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

‘Activating Indigenous ways’ – perceptions of how Australian Indigenous health and wellbeing program evaluations are commissioned and future recommendations

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月6日

查看全文
  • Summer May Finlay,
  • Amohia Boulton,
  • Jenni Judd,
  • Bronwyn Fredericks,
  • Janaya Pender,
  • James A. Smith,
  • Helen Simpson,
  • Yvette Roe,
  • Sophie Kerrigan,
  • Anna Temby,
  • Margaret Cargo

摘要

Background

In Australia, billions of dollars are spent on Indigenous programs, services, and initiatives annually; however, more evidence is needed regarding which modes of commissioning program evaluations best benefit Indigenous communities. The Australian Productivity Commission called for ‘more and better’ evaluations of Indigenous programs, and commissioning processes that engage Indigenous communities, organisations, and leaders. So, too, have Indigenous representative organisations, Indigenous services, and stakeholders. To date, few studies have sought to characterise the commissioning practices of government and non-government organisations surrounding Indigenous health and wellbeing programs. Fewer still have investigated the role of Indigenous engagement and leadership before, during and after the commissioning process.

Methods

Using Indigenous Standpoint Theory and a qualitative approach, this study illuminates the perceptions of Australian Indigenous and non-Indigenous commissioners, evaluators, and providers on the commissioning of evaluated Indigenous health and wellbeing programs.

Results

Building on a published scoping review by undertaking 23 qualitative interviews with 35 Australian-based participants about commissioning practices, this study verifies and canvases the strengths of individual commissioning models, and the interplay between power, cultural safety, and reciprocity in the commissioning space. The paper also considers the relationship between these three factors along a continuum of practice and posits a sliding scale across the five commissioning models.

Conclusions

To improve the quality of evaluations further attention needs to be paid to the commissioner’s cultural capability. Additionally, Commissioners need to develop their understanding of the relationship between Commissioner and Indigenous people’s power and the utility of evaluations.