Facilitating Evidence Utilization Across Multiple Cultural Contexts

Abstract Information: Evidence utilization is often a challenge, especially with multiple stakeholder groups and different cultural contexts. The aim of this session is to help evidence generators be more effective in their delivery and help evidence users set expectations with generators within such complex contexts. We will explore five key credos that we have adopted in Social Impact’s research and evaluation work across USAID’s technical sectors and provide examples that demonstrate how to apply them. The five credos we adhere to and will share in the session with examples from different countries, cultural contexts, and marginal populations include: 1. If evidence users are learning about something for the first time from the final report, we have failed. 2. During scoping, exhaust the question of “why are we doing this?” until there are no reasons left to give. 3. Identify influencers and collaborate with them as knowledge brokers for your evidence. 4. Build relationships before and after protocols. 5. Master the art of facilitating sensemaking and decision making. By the end of the session, those interested in promoting evidence use will have tactics they can directly apply in their work to encourage evidence utilization in complex cultural contexts. Examples we will discuss include: Vietnam: At USAID Learns, we created a Young Professionals Program for fresh graduates to learn research and evaluation skills in the international development sector. We invest in and value the participation of young evaluators. With their energy and creativity, these young evaluators bring innovative techniques to help visualize data and facilitate the co-creation process. They shadow more seasoned researchers and evaluators, learning the credos that we instill in our evidence use process. Jordan: The USAID/Jordan Retrospective Study of Youth Development Activities explored the outcomes experienced by youth who took part in USAID/Jordan-supported programming. The study was carried out in accordance with two key priorities: 1) putting youth voices at the center of the assessment; and 2) ensuring that results would be used by key decision-makers. To that end, the study employed a youth-led approach, engaging a team of 12 youth researchers to collect data. Tanzania: In the USAID Tanzania Monitoring, Evaluation, Learning, and Adaptation (T-MELA) project, we instituted co-creation workshops for evaluation recommendations. After presenting the findings and conclusions from each evaluation, we facilitate a workshop with stakeholders to discuss the feasibility and relative importance of the evaluation team’s provisional recommendations, then conduct action planning. Mali: For the USAID Mali Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) Platform, we designed and implemented a systematic approach to analyzing primary and secondary data to inform context monitoring. To facilitate ownership and utilization, we conducted a validation workshop to involve USAID staff in selecting survey questions, and we have plans to conduct regular learning sessions and data parties to discuss the quarterly results and inform decision making. What all our experiences have in common is an emphasis on making sure that the evidence we generate does not end up gathering dust on a shelf.