In the GLI’s “Feasibility in Community-Engaged Evaluation,” Module Director Jessica Sperling (Duke University) and the 2023 Cohort explore the ethical design of evaluations.
The issue of responsibility is a paramount theme in these sessions, including —
💡How to gather insights into an intended beneficiary community without overpromising solutions.
💡How to evaluate shortcomings within our organizations without compromising jobs.
Sperling’s proposed evaluation methodology focuses on communicating “informed consent opportunities.” Informed consent opportunities entail telling survey respondents from the start the intentions of the evaluation. Transparency enables participants to act freely and make deliberate, conscientious choices.
The first evaluation dilemma explores how an external evaluator can best engage a community, anticipating challenges of identifying community problems that are deeply representative of it. The idea here is to gain insights that may fuel solutions in the future. These solutions, however, are not immediate and are subject to refinement.
The second dilemma treats the ethical principle of “nonmaleficence.” Nonmaleficence means not harming people that participate in evaluations. When performing an internal evaluation of our organizations, appealing to existing human relationships is key to addressing sensitive topics. Evaluators must minimize stress and discomfort through a collective and participatory approach to the data-gathering process.
