I’ve been increasingly more sceptical and frustrated with the results oriented, programmatic thinking that is the heart of conventional evaluation methods. They may tell one version of a story of a program, but they are missing the broader complex implications of the shifts the program may or may not be making in the community. This is particularly relevant in my role as the Executive Director of Canada Bridges, a small non-profit based in Southern Alberta focused on building the capacity of individuals to take care of themselves and their communities. We work in partnerships, respect the natural rule and authority in community dynamics, and strive for broad and lasting community impact. Yes, big, but I believe necessary; and by virtue of this I have been realizing the responsibility we have to measure and make sense of the real impact, changes, and shifts we are making, and the implications they have – both positive and consequential. This means looking hard at what is actually happening, not what we hope is happening, or what will please donors, board members, staff or partners.

It is with this orientation that I discovered the Evaluating Community Impact workshop that was being offered by the Tamarack Institute and registered with the desire to understand what is being done, and what is currently possible in the world of evaluation. 

Indeed, I was pleasantly surprised with the content, the delivery and the honesty of the facilitators in presenting the current boundaries of the evaluation tools and mechanisms available for evaluating the reality of community change. Liz Weaver and Mark Cabaj spoke about moving from the traditional mechanism, towards complexity-based techniques, many of which are on the frontier of development and needing our collective input to innovate and push further towards useful, and meaningful sense-making of the impact of our organizations, collaborations and initiatives on the community. 

While much of the content I’d been exposed to in some variety, what the workshop did most was affirm that what I’m exploring, making sense of, and hoping to design into the culture of the organization I run is in alignment with the thought-leaders in the evaluation sphere in Canada. It reminded me that “evaluation is reality seeking” so to build an integrity of reality truth seeking and the capacity to do so in my staff, partners, and volunteers is essential.  By presenting the tools and possibilities, and also the limitations it gave me permission to continue to test, and innovate with what exists and what makes most sense for the context and specifics of the work we are doing. And it reminded me of the need for a learning community that explores, shares and develops the new depth and rigour in making sense of the real impact we are having in communities. 

We must first want to truly know what we are doing, what is working, what isn’t, and not be afraid of the information that might show it’s face when we start digging beyond the program feedback we are all currently collecting. I look forward to continue to learn and develop alongside Tamarack and others in attendance.