000			04183nam a22004217a 4500
999			_c6508 _d6508
005			20250625151520.0
008			200122s2019 -nz||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
040			_aAFVC
100			_aCargo, Margaret _98816
245			_aStrategies to support culturally safe health and wellbeing evaluations in Indigenous settings in Australia and New Zealand : _ba concept mapping study _cMargaret Cargo, Gill Potaka-Osborne, Lynley Cvitanovic, Lisa Warner, Sharon Clarke, Jenni Judd, Amal Chakraborty and Amohia Boulton
260			_bBMC, _c2019
500			_aInternational Journal for Equity in Health, 2019, 18: 194. Online
520			_aBackground: In recent decades, financial investment has been made in health-related programs and services to overcome inequities and improve Indigenous people’s wellbeing in Australia and New Zealand. Despite policies aiming to ‘close the gap’, limited evaluation evidence has informed evidence-based policy and practice. Indigenous leaders have called for evaluation stakeholders to align their practices with Indigenous approaches. Methods: This study aimed to strengthen culturally safe evaluation practice in Indigenous settings by engaging evaluation stakeholders, in both countries, in a participatory concept mapping study. Concept maps for each country were generated from multi-dimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis. Results: The 12-cluster Australia map identifies four cluster regions: An Evaluation Approach that Honours Community; Respect and Reciprocity; Core Heart of the Evaluation; and Cultural Integrity of the Evaluation. The 11-cluster New Zealand map identifies four cluster regions: Authentic Evaluation Practice; Building Māori Evaluation Expertise; Integrity in Māori Evaluation; and Putting Community First. Both maps highlight the importance of cultural integrity in evaluation. Differences include the distinctiveness of the ‘Respecting Language Protocols’ concept in the Australia map in contrast to language being embedded within the cluster of ‘Knowing Yourself as an Evaluator in a Māori Evaluation Context’ in the New Zealand map. Participant ratings highlight the importance of all clusters with some relatively more difficult to achieve, in practice. Notably, the ‘Funding Responsive to Community Needs and Priorities’ and ‘Translating Evaluation Findings to Benefit Community’ clusters were rated the least achievable, in Australia. The ‘Conduct of the Evaluation’ and the ‘Prioritising Māori Interests’ clusters were rated as least achievable in New Zealand. In both countries, clusters of strategies related to commissioning were deemed least achievable. Conclusions: The results suggest that the commissioning of evaluation is crucial as it sets the stage for whether evaluations: reflect Indigenous interests, are planned in ways that align with Indigenous ways of working and are translated to benefit Indigenous communities Identified strategies align with health promotion principles and relational accountability values of Indigenous approaches to research. These findings may be relevant to the commissioning and conduct of Indigenous health program evaluations in developed nations. (Authors' abstract). Record #6508
650		5	_974 _aABORIGINAL & TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER PEOPLES
650		5	_aCULTURE _9179
650		5	_aEVALUATION _9236
650		5	_aHEALTH _9283
650		5	_aINDIGENOUS PEOPLES _9307
650		5	_aMĀORI _9357
650		0	_aWELLBEING _96275
650		5	_aHAUORA _9281
650		5	_aIWI TAKETAKE _95589
650		5	_aORA _95716
650		5	_aRANGAHAU MĀORI _95532
651		4	_aAUSTRALIA _92597
651		4	_aNEW ZEALAND _92588
700			_aPotaka-Osborne, Gill _97706
700			_97707 _aCvitanovic, Lynley
700			_aWarner, Lisa _98817
700			_aClarke, Sharon _98818
700			_4Judd, Jenni
700			_aChakraborty, Amal _98819
700			_93543 _aBoulton, Amohia F.
773	0		_tInternational Journal for Equity in Health, 2019, 18: 194. Online
830			_aInternational Journal for Equity in Health _98815
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-019-1094-z
942			_2ddc _cARTICLE