Toxic Coloniality: Why Top-Down Evaluations of Aboriginal Programs Fail
The recent wave of announcements regarding government evaluations of Aboriginal programs is cause for serious concern [1-5]. While accountability is essential, this approach is far from positive. It perpetuates a damaging cycle that undermines Aboriginal self-determination and reinforces harmful power imbalances [6-15].
These top-down evaluations, often conducted by non-Aboriginal "experts", position government, funders and non-community peoples as the authority on Aboriginal lives [16-18]. This means that executive powers of critical thinking and judgement, which often drive and inform decision-making, do not reside where they should. This not only perpetuates inaccuracies but is also profoundly disrespectful. It ignores the wealth of knowledge and expertise held within Aboriginal families, Communities and within Country [19-25].
As highlighted by Kowa Collaboration in our submission to the Productivity Commission, this approach is a form of "toxic coloniality” [16-18]. It reinforces the narrative that, as Aboriginal people, our voices are irrelevant in determining and managing our own affairs [26-30]. As we saw in the ‘No Vote’, this narrative perpetuates the status quo and has devastating consequences, further eroding trust, disempowering communities, and ultimately hindering progress toward self-determination and reconciliation [31-35].
At Kowa Collaboration, we believe that:
Aboriginal Communities must drive evaluation. Aboriginal people are the experts on our own needs and aspirations [36-40].
Evaluations should be strengths-based. Instead of focusing on deficits, they should identify successes and scale existing strengths.
Cultural safety and ethical practices are paramount. This includes ensuring free, prior, and informed consent and recognising the importance of Aboriginal data sovereignty.
By centring the voices, stories, and lived experiences of Aboriginal Communities in the evaluation process, which includes design and early and ongoing decision-making, we can achieve far more effective and sustainable outcomes [36-40]. This approach fosters self-determination and leads to cost savings by ensuring that programs are genuinely relevant and responsive to Community needs.
Shifting the Paradigm
Instead of imposing external evaluations, the government and other funders must invest in supporting Aboriginal Communities to develop and lead the evaluation process. This could involve:
Providing resources and training for Community-based and led evaluation practices.
Supporting the development of Culturally appropriate evaluation frameworks.
Investing in and valuing technological solutions that ensure locally-led collection, interpretation and stewardship of data for evaluation.
Establishing long-term, Community-authorised partnerships with Aboriginal-led research and evaluation organisations.
This shift in approach is crucial to breaking free from colonialism's toxic legacy and genuinely giving Aboriginal Communities agency to take control of the resources, data, and processes that determine our future. By embracing a Community-centred approach to evaluation, we can move towards a future where Aboriginal programs are truly effective, sustainable, and driven by the aspirations of Aboriginal people.
Investing in Aboriginal Expertise
Beyond the critical arguments for self-determination and Cultural respect, there's a robust economic case for centring Aboriginal communities in program evaluations [6-10, 21-25]. When the true experts – the people living these programs – have the power to determine what's working and where resources should be allocated, we see significant cost benefits and a return on investment that extends far beyond current, mainstream measures [31-21].
External evaluations often miss the mark. They may lack the nuanced understanding needed to assess whether a program truly aligns with Community needs and priorities [43-48]. This can result in wasted funding on programs that are ineffective or even harmful [19-20]. As we continue to emphasise at Kowa, Aboriginal Communities are best positioned to identify what works and what doesn't [16]. Empowering Community to lead evaluations ensures that resources are directed towards programs with proven impact [33-34].
Communities possess a wealth of knowledge that can streamline the evaluation process. Community understand the historical context, the Cultural nuances, and the specific challenges faced on a daily basis [27]. By drawing on this expertise, evaluations become more efficient, targeted, and cost-effective [35-36].
When communities are in the driver's seat, you are more likely to see the development and implementation of solutions that are sustainable in the long term [17]. This reduces the need for ongoing external support and minimises the costs associated with program revisions and adjustments [37-38].
Creating Economic Assets through MEL Data
The data gathered through Community-led monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL) practice has the potential to become a powerful economic asset [18]. As Kowa highlights, "Communities should not be passive recipients of data; they must become architects of their destiny, forging their unassailable evidence bases as economic assets for Community” [17]. This data can be used to:
Advocate for increased funding and support [18].
Attract investment and partnerships.
Develop, deliver and adapt Culturally appropriate services.
Create new economic opportunities.
A Place-based Example: Far West Community Partners in Ceduna
The work of Far West Community Partners in Ceduna, South Australia, provides a compelling example of how community-led data collection can drive positive change. By gathering and analysing their own data, they have been able to:
Identify local priorities and needs.
Develop targeted programs and services.
Measure the impact of their work.
Advocate for increased resources.
This approach has not only improved outcomes for the local Aboriginal Community but also created a valuable economic asset in the form of data that can be used to inform future planning and decision-making.
Investing in Aboriginal expertise through Community-centered evaluations is not only the right thing to do, but it's also the smart thing to do. By empowering communities to lead the way, we can unlock significant cost benefits, create sustainable solutions, and build a more prosperous future for all Australians.
References
Dutton flags review of Indigenous programs. The Guardian. [Internet]. 2018 Jan 18
Indigenous Australians say they are 'sick' of government evaluations. ABC News. [Internet]. 2021 Jun 22
Closing the Gap: 15 years, countless evaluations, little progress. The Conversation. [Internet]. 2020 Feb 12
Why another review of Indigenous affairs is doomed to fail. Croakey. [Internet]. 2019 Mar 4
Government's top-down approach to Indigenous affairs is failing. The Sydney Morning Herald. [Internet]. 2023 Aug 8
Self-determination and Indigenous Australians. Australian Human Rights Commission. [Internet]. Available from: https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-social-justice/self-determination-and-indigenous
The importance of self-determination for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Reconciliation Australia. [Internet].
Indigenous self-determination: What it means and why it matters. ANTaR. [Internet].
Lowitja Institute: Our Approach. Lowitja Institute. [Internet].
SNAICC - National Voice for our Children. SNAICC. [Internet]. Available from: https://www.snaicc.org.au/
Submission to the Productivity Commission's Inquiry into Indigenous Evaluation. National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation (NACCHO). [Internet]. Available from: https://www.naccho.org.au/
Submission to the Joint Select Committee on Closing the Gap in Indigenous Disadvantage. Oxfam Australia. [Internet]. [cited 2025 Jan 17]. Available from: https://www.oxfam.org.au/what-we-do/indigenous-australia/ 13. Submission to the Senate Community Affairs References Committee Inquiry into the Provisions of the Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Repeal of Cashless Debit Card and Other Measures) Bill 2022. Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS). [Internet]. [cited 2025 Jan 17]. Available from: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Community_Affairs/CashlessDebitCardBill
Submission to the Inquiry into Indigenous Evaluation. Productivity Commission. [Internet]. [cited 2025 Jan 17]. Available from: https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/indigenous-evaluation
Submission to the Inquiry into Indigenous Affairs. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. [Internet]. [cited 2025 Jan 17]. Available from: https://www.aihw.gov.au/about-us/submissions
Submission to the Productivity Commission's Inquiry into Indigenous Evaluation. Kowa Collaboration. [Internet]. [cited 2025 Jan 17]. Available from: https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/indigenous-evaluation/strategy/contents
The National Agreement on Closing the Gap and Indigenous Data Sovereignty. Kowa Collaboration [Internet]. [cited 2025 Jan 17]. Available from: [Insert Link Here]
Response to the Productivity Commission's Draft Indigenous Evaluation Strategy and Guide. National Centre of Indigenous Excellence (NCIE). [Internet]. [cited 2025 Jan 17]. Available from: https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/indigenous-evaluation
Indigenous knowledge and western science. CSIRO. [Internet]. [cited 2025 Jan 17]. Available from: https://www.csiro.au/en/research/indigenous-science/indigenous-knowledge
Cultural competency in Indigenous health. Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet. [Internet]. [cited 2025 Jan 17]. Available from: https://healthinfonet.ecu.edu.au/.
Reconciliation1 Australia. [Internet]. [cited 2025 Jan 18]. Available from: https://www.reconciliation.org.au/reconciliation-action-plans/
Creating a culturally safe space. In: The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Mental Health First Aid Manual. 2nd ed. Canberra: Mental Health First Aid Australia; 2013. p. 35-46.
National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation (NACCHO). National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Plan 2013-2023 [Internet]. Canberra: NACCHO; 2013 [cited 2025 Jan 18].
Korff J. Aboriginal health and well-being: The importance of cultural awareness. Aust J Rural Health. 2018;26(1):19-23.
Walker R. Aboriginal health and wellbeing: Towards a strengths-based approach. Med J Aust. 2014;200(1):34-35.
Reconciliation Australia. Innovate Reconciliation Action Plan (RAP) [Internet]. [cited 2025 Jan 18].
National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC).2 Keeping research on track II: A companion3 document for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health researchers [Internet]. Canberra: NHMRC; 2018 [cited 2025 Jan 18]. Available from: [invalid URL removed]
Fredericks B, Anderson D, Coffin J, et al. Indigenous health: The foundation for a culturally safe health system. In: Australia's health4 2018. Canberra: AIHW; 2018. p. 303-320. (AIHW cat. no. AUS 221).
Dudgeon P, Milroy H, Walker R. Working together: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander mental health and wellbeing principles and practice. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia; 2014.
Grieves V. Aboriginal spirituality:5 Aboriginal philosophy. In: The Oxford handbook of philosophy and race. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2016. p. 569-586.
Bessarab D, Ng'andu B. Yarning about yarning as a legitimate method in Indigenous research. Int J Crit Indig Stud. 2010;3(1):1-10.
Martin K. Please knock before you enter: Aboriginal regulation of outsiders and the implications for researchers. Aust J Indig Educ. 2008;37(Suppl):21-34.
Chino M, DeBruyn L. Building true7 capacity: Indigenous models for Indigenous communities. Am J Public Health. 2006;96(4):596-599.
Goodman D, Morris M, Zaal-Jones N. Community-based8 participatory research: A model for practice. J Community Pract. 2003;11(3):213-228.
Macaulay AC, Commanda LE, Freeman WL, et al. Participatory research maximises community and lay involvement. BMJ. 1999;319(7212):774-778.
Israel BA, Schulz AJ, Parker EA, et al. Review of community-based research: Assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annu Rev Public Health. 1998;19(1):173-202.
Wallerstein N, Duran B. Using community-based participatory research to address health disparities. Health Promot Pract. 2006;7(3 Suppl):312-323.
Minkler M, Wallerstein N. Community-based participatory research for health. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2003.