An Evaluation Capacity-Building Process for Sustainable Community IT Initiatives

Abstract

IntroductionParticipatory forms of evaluation aim to produce a range of empowering outcomes and impacts, including increased community capacities in planning and conducting evaluations and broader stakeholder participation in decision-making. Other outcomes include improved communication and trust among stakeholders, and constant improvement of initiatives in ways that meet community or client needs. In her extremely positive assessment of participatory evaluation, Diez (2001: 907) suggests that this methodology can be a useful tool to 'mobilise communities for regional action, empower local agents and enhance learning capacity'.Many researchers argue that building community capacities and fostering empowerment are more effective ways of achieving sustainable community development than programs and success indicators imposed by outside experts (Harrison, 1998;Mobbs, 1998). They point out that outside experts usually have limited knowledge and understanding of the particular context, needs and issues of a community. Local solutions to achieving sustainable community and economic development are therefore seen as important outcomes of a capacity building approach to evaluation. Nevertheless, evaluation methodologies which explicitly aim to be participatory raise many complex theoretical, methodological and ethical issues, as Gregory (2000), McKie (2003), Rebien (1996) and others point out. They include issues related to stakeholder representativeness, the greater level of time, energy and resources required to conduct evaluations and develop trust, the potential for dependence on the facilitator/professional evaluation consultant, and for conflicting agendas and perspectives of various stakeholder groups to hinder success (Gregory, 2000;Papineau and Kiely, 1996;Rebien, 1996). Rebien (1996) also notes the conceptual weakness of the concept of participation, while the contested 2 concept of 'empowerment' is often used in uncritical ways. Indeed those advocating participatory approaches to research and evaluation often make idealistic or naïve assumptions that community participation will automatically lead to empowerment.Thus, while power is a central issue in participatory forms of evaluation, it is often ignored (Gregory, 2000). Vanderplaat (1995: 85) suggests that even the more critical models of evaluation have failed 'to deal, in any meaningful way, with the concept of relative power, or more specifically the unequal distribution of discursive power, a central construct in empowerment-based social programming'. As McKie highlights in her recent paper on the concept of 'rhetorical spaces' (McKie, 2003), there is a need to focus on the communicative and relational dimensions of participatory evaluations which can affect their outcomes in unintended ways. This requires rigorous analysis of both the intended and potentially unintended or negative impacts and effects of participatory evaluations.This paper presents outcomes of a detailed analysis of the empowering and, at times, disempowering impacts of the imple...

Empoderamiento en la comunidad. El diseño de un sistema abierto de indicadores a partir de procesos de Evaluación Participativa

“…A partir de esta contrastación biblio- (Fetterman & Wandersman, 2007), mejora o adquisición de capacidades y conocimientos (Fetterman & Wandersman, 2007), progreso en la satisfacción con uno mismo (Holte-Mc Kenzie, Fordes & Theobald, 2006), capacidad de evaluación (Miller & Campbell, 2006), capacidad de actuar comunitariamente (Miller & Campbell, 2006), capacidad de la comunidad para organizarse (Miller & Campbell, 2006), capacidad de trabajar en alianzas (Newman, 2008). La propuesta incluye los llamados "mediadores psicológicos" según Maton (2008): sentimiento de pertenencia y conciencia; aspectos como la autoestima y los sentimientos subjetivos de empoderamiento, ya evidenciados por CDX (2008) como cruciales para el empoderamiento, tanto individual como comunitario; y se consideran todos aquellos atributos que pueden relacionarse con la capacidad organizativa de la comunidad (social capacity building) puesto que se trata de una dimensión estrechamente relacionada con el empoderamiento y con un significativo recorrido (Lennie, 2005). Junto con esta dimensión se incluyen indicadores vinculados con la fluidez en la información o la capacidad de trabajar en alianzas, negociar, consensuar y construir sinergias entre diversos actores de la comunidad.…”

“…Entendemos, pues, que estos indicadores no pueden aplicarse a cual- Fordes & Theobald, 2006), to assume tasks and compromises voluntarily and realistically (Fetterman & Wandersman, 2007), capacities and knowledge improvement or acquisition (Fetterman & Wandersman, 2007), self-satisfaction process (Holte-Mc Kenzie, Fordes & Theobald, 2006), evaluation capacity (Miller & Campbell, 2006), community action capacity (Miller & Campbell, 2006), community organization capacity (Miller & Campbell, 2006), alliance working capacity (Newman, 2008). The proposal includes Maton's (2008) "psychological mediators", a feeling of pertinence and coincidence; aspects such as self-esteem and subjective empowerment feelings, were already evidenced as crucial for empowerment (individual and community) by CDX (2008); and all attributes that can be related to the community organizational capacity (social capacity building) are considered due to its close relation to empowerment and a significant itinerary (Lennie, 2005). Along with this dimension, indicators linked to information fluidity or alliance working capacity, negotiation and building synergies among the community actors are included.…”

A Participatory Framework for Researching and Evaluating Communication for Development and Social Change

“…Many contemporary participatory evaluation approaches openly acknowledge and take into account the political nature of research and evaluation practices and differences between participants, particularly those related to gender, power and knowledge (Burns 2007;Hearn et al 2009;Lennie 2005). Nevertheless, gender is in danger of slipping from the international development agenda (Newton 2011), suggesting the need for more effective evaluation approaches that focus on gender.…”

“…Rihani (2002) argues that development and its underlying political, social and economic processes behave as complex, adaptive systems. This can be illustrated by an example from a project called LEARNERS iii , conducted in rural Queensland, Australia, from (Lennie et al 2004Lennie 2005). Tara Shire was experiencing significant communication problems in the early 2000s, including poor telephone services, and no local newspaper or radio services.…”

Involving Older Gay Men in Research: The Lure of Group Experience

“…This provided a challenge to both researchers and to the older volunteers, as they needed to recognize 'otherness' and value the contributions of others within the research process. Group processes can lead to 'political disempowerment' (Lennie, 2005), a situation in which certain participants take control of a project thereby excluding 'other' voices and ideas. This can result in some people being silenced by a project that sets out to empower them.…”