Jara Dean-Coffey is the founder and director of the Equitable Evaluation Initiative. For the past 25 years, she has worked at the intersections of values, context, strategy, and evaluative thinking to align practices to be in service of equity, justice, and liberation. She is the president and CEO of jdcPARTNERSHIPS, where she develops new approaches; advises people, efforts, and organizations; and sparks conversation and curiosity through things like her own musings and machinations.

Marcia Coné is Director of Practice Engagement and Evolution at the Equitable Evaluation Initiative. She focuses on building a field of evaluation, learning, and research practitioners who advance the Equitable Evaluation Framework by expanding definitions of rigor, validity, and embracing 21st-century complexity. For nearly three decades, Marcia has worked in partnership with non-governmental organizations, philanthropy, philanthropy-serving organizations, and grassroots and grasstops leaders to shift the paradigm and create cultures where intersectional equity is at the center.

BACK TO EPISODES

Learn more:

Equitable Evaluation Framework (EEF)

EEF 2023 Expansion

Transcript

Jara Dean-Coffey:

No one was thinking about evaluation other than the diversity of the evaluator. If we changed the color, the language, somehow the quality, the relevance, the validity of the evaluation would somehow become more appropriate and meaningful. And what I realized is no one had been thinking about it any differently than what they had been led to believe was the only path forward since the ’70s.

Leon T. Andrews, Jr.:

Welcome to The Measure. I am your host and moderator, Leon Andrews, President and CEO of Equal Measure. Equal Measure partners with foundations, nonprofits, and government organizations to apply new ways of thinking and learning to advance social change. On The Measure, we host conversations about centering racial equity and how to design, implement, evaluate, and communicate efforts to transform inequitable systems. We are honored and thrilled to welcome today’s guests.

Jara Dean-Coffey is the CEO of JDC Partnerships. Jara works at the intersections of values, context, organizational culture, strategy, and evaluative thinking to bring practices in service of equity, justice and liberation. She does this by advising people, efforts, and organizations, sparking curiosity and conversation through Luminary Group and the Equitable Evaluation Initiative. She joins us today in her role as the founder and director of the Equitable Evaluation Initiative. Welcome, Jara.

Jara Dean-Coffey:

Thank you.

Leon T. Andrews, Jr.:

Jara is joined by her colleague at the initiative, Marcia Coné, Director of Practice Engagement and Evolution. Marcia focuses on building a field of evaluation, learning, and research practitioners who advance the Equitable Evaluation Framework by expanding definitions of rigor, validity, and embracing 21st century complexity. Welcome, Marcia.

Marcia Coné:

Thank you.

Leon T. Andrews, Jr.:

I’d like to start with more of a personal question for both of you. Much of our focus at Equal Measure is on place-based work, which looks at long-term investments in historically marginalized communities that intend to transform the inequitable systems for health, education, and economic mobility that disproportionately impact the lives of our Black, Indigenous, Hispanic, other people of color. So we think a lot about places, their culture and context. I think it is also important to personalize this work. I think we all have our own personal stories, so we better understand and appreciate the impact we are trying to have in communities. So, I’d like to start there. Please introduce yourselves and share how you think about place, culture, and context within your life journey. Jara, I would like to start with you.

Jara Dean-Coffey:

A few highlights that offer a sense of me at this moment: I’m a descendant of free, stolen, and enslaved people from the lands of the Appomattoc and the Monacan, which is Virginia, and the Lenape, which is Ohio. My ethnic and racial heritage, because those are not the same, reflects that truth, which I can trace back to the 1600s, which also tells you a little bit, that I can trace my heritage back to the 1600s, which many of my people cannot.

I grew up in Malvern, which was the original lands of the Lenape and the Lenni, and what’s referred to euphemistically as the Main Line, which is outside of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. And I grew with my brother and my still-married and really hysterical parents who retired 30 years ago and live on a golf course.

In terms of place, I feel at home in my skin in almost every setting, which is a curiosity to some and an upset to others, both of which I enjoy. So, as I think about context, my answer to that question today is, I’m a member of the human species that’s fortunate enough to live on a planet with other species at a time when many of us are understanding ourselves in new ways to transform.

Leon T. Andrews, Jr.:

Marcia, I want to give you the same space.

Marcia Coné:

I really believe we can’t know or understand one another without context, which includes place, culture, family, faith, language, rituals, and the meaning that each of us actually assign to those things, which is different from family to family, from town to town. So, I was born and raised in rural Illinois on Winnebago, Potawatomi, Sauk and Fox lands.

I grew up in a very large, one of seven children, poor Catholic family, and all of their families made it to rural Illinois by fleeing their home countries because they wanted to be able to practice their faith. As is the history of this country, often the oppressed, as they move and migrate, become the oppressors. I think if we start to embrace the real complexity of who we are as human beings and accept that we actually know far, far less than we think we know, then again we invite that curiosity, and we invite the opportunity for relationship and getting to know each other in the many ways that we might come to know one another. And I think there’s the magic.

Leon T. Andrews, Jr.:

I appreciate both of you in modeling how important it is to be able to reflect in such the way that you have as you introduce yourself. There’s so many nuances as we think about who we are and as we think about how that impacts the work we do as, we think about place, culture, and context. And so I want to pivot and talk about the work that you both lead, the Equitable Evaluation Initiative which has evolved into a community of organizations committed to catalyzing change within their industry and exploring concepts in the Equitable Evaluation framework which you first developed in 2017. Equal Measure is a proud member of that community. But can you describe the why that drives your work?

Jara Dean-Coffey:

In 2014, I was doing some work for a foundation, and I had a tiny little aha moment. Everybody was talking about racial equity. When I mean everybody, there were eight foundations back then. And when I started to do research for this other client about evaluative work, no one was thinking about evaluation other than the diversity of the evaluator. If we change the color, the language, somehow the quality, the relevance, the validity of the evaluation would somehow become more appropriate and meaningful. And I was shocked.

And so then that led to a deeper, more purposeful exploration of how were folks really thinking about evaluative practice? And what I realized is no one had been thinking about it any differently than what they had been led to believe was the only path forward since the ’70s. And, so, when I had that [inaudible 00:07:04], I knew that I couldn’t be the only one, and I had to do more investigation to understand what really were the roots of evaluative practice? ‘Cause I hadn’t learned it in school.

And that led to me doing the research. That led to the Equitable Evaluation Framework. It was a aha about the origins of validity and rigor and objectivity, understanding that they were rooted in a different context, in a different place, for a different purpose, and that as we do this work in the 21st century, it’s no wonder it often feels less than at best, and often it feels harmful, because it was never designed to do what we’re asking it to do. So, the onus was on us, I believe, to make it what it needs to be for this context. And not for the 22nd century, just for right now, based on who are the people that are in the mix?

Leon T. Andrews, Jr.:

When you had the aha moment and started to ask, asking if they were seeing what you were seeing, where were folks as you were asking that question to them?

Jara Dean-Coffey:

There were two responses. One was literally, “Shit. I didn’t notice it. I honestly never paid attention to it. I was so focused on the thing that I never looked what was under our around the thing.” And then for other folks, and this is the one that hurt my heart even more so, the folks that were actually doing really deeply thoughtful, heartful, contextualized, relevant, evaluative work did not call it evaluation. Because how could it be evaluation if it felt right, if it was useful, if it was respectful, if it was relevant to the questions that I had answers to, if it was honest and embraced multiplicity? That said, “Oh, we have done a terrible, terrible disservice to a whole discipline, that people that have really moved it forward fundamentally reject it,” ’cause those were the people that we needed to be in relationship with. Those are the people, I think, that needed to be shaping the conversation.

Leon T. Andrews, Jr.:

Marcia, can you describe the why that drives your work?

Marcia Coné:

I came to work with EEI, through invitation by Jara, to help her figure out what it might mean to be in practice of the Equitable Evaluation framework with someone that knew how to engage individuals and organizations who understood how change works and how to create conditions for change.

By nature, we do not want to change. That’s just human nature. And so really creating the conditions where people can step into what might be possible, without being able to see it ahead of them, creates a particular place and space, which we call the practice. And, so, the practice of the Equitable Evaluation Framework is a space where folks get to reflect, reflex, and then realign what they’re doing to be aligned with the current context and all the [inaudible 00:10:06] they want to become as they evolve as well. So, the space and the practice space really gives permission to people to say things out loud without any retribution or comment back or judgment, to be able to play with ideas, to challenge their own thinking, the thinking of their institutions, all the doing bias that’s aligned with who and how we do our work.

Jara Dean-Coffey:

Leon, can I just add one more thing? Part of the way EEI and EEF are perhaps different is because they really speak to the axiological intention of your aim. What is it you believe is of value in the world? Things that we talk about in strategy a little bit, but in evaluation we just show up objectively neutral, which is impossible as a human being. Then in strategy, we talk about, “Well, whose opinion did we consider?” We talk about the types of information we take into consideration to think of our strategy.

But somehow in evaluation we don’t have a deliberate discourse to choose. There is this thing we take off the shelf, and that’s just what you do, and that’s who you talk to. And, so, all of that nuance, all of that yummy, juicy stuff that happens in strategy, you go to evaluation, conventional evaluation, and you lose all that. I think, again, back to your context question, evaluative work should be contextualized. And part of that contextualization is making explicit what you believe, why you believe, to what end, what you will consider to be valid, rigorous, and objective and having a conversation about that.

Leon T. Andrews, Jr.:

I want to talk a little bit more about the framework and want to give you some space to share a little bit more. The framework is grounded in being clear about the racist and capitalistic origins and history of both American philanthropy and evaluation that you were naming some already earlier. Can you talk about that some more? How have people in philanthropy and evaluation responded, and have you seen change?

Jara Dean-Coffey:

It’s about place and time. There were particular individuals who had the agency to declare and decide what evaluation should be that would serve their purpose. The question is, does it still serve our purpose? It’s literally that simple. Does it still serve our purpose? And if it does, then feel free to continue to do it. But if it does not, then the responsibility is ours to evolve it.

So, it’s not a blame game, it’s not any of that stuff. People want to call it this, call it that. It’s just the truth of where it came from at a moment in time. I had to think really carefully about what the message was and how it would be received merely because of my physical presence. I say that because we call it the Equitable Evaluation Framework because race will show up if you’re talking about things in this set of federated states, but equity is a larger frame. That the way we define knowledge because of the individuals who came up with the definitions did not consider poor folks regardless of their race; it did not consider ableism; it did not consider a whole host of things.

So, the framework is purposefully designed in the moment at which it was, which was a moment to invite us to embrace the complexity of the human experience and the ways in which we know lots of different things in lots of different ways.

Marcia Coné:

The other thing I would say that happens often is that folks in the philanthropic ecosystem are so used to getting a toolkit or a guide or a something, and they’re like, “Okay, I just do this, and then I can check the box. I’m doing equity work.” When we say to them, “No, it’s actually who you are.” Back to context. It’s who you are and who you want to be in this work and how you’re going to show up in this work. And then how that will inform how you think about this work, which will then inform how you do this work.

But if we lead, which so many of us do, with the bias to just getting down to business and getting it done, we’re just going to perpetuate the same things. And, so, as we invite people to be in the practice and to explore the varying elements of the Equitable Evaluation Framework, they continue to have these oh-gosh experiences because they’re actually having to go back in and continue to sit in hard conversations with their colleagues and their leaders and understanding that they’re actually the instrument of change.

Leon T. Andrews, Jr.:

I was set with wondering if there’s any … the reflections on the different identities that have come through and engaged in the framework, and if there’s some nuances of, as you see people’s journeys and growth, that will be important to name and sit with.

Marcia Coné:

I would say that of course there’s a different experience for different folks with different identities and the many layered identities that we come in. Not one of us are a monolith; we’re not one thing. I can speak about this as a white woman. I have certain ways to opt out of doing certain things just because of who I am. So, I can see or notice things that are going on and not step forward or not have, and Jara and I talk about this in our own relationship, or not have an honest conversation with Jara about who’s to step forward and who’s to hold back, given who we are and what the context is, and how we might move forward in support of one another in that space.

So, I think that there are nuances in that, but I will tell you, Leon, that from where wherever your identities fit in your context, there is a multitude of aha moments because we’re all swimming in white-dominant norms, and we’re all very well-versed and practiced at it. And, so, we can be perpetuating things that we don’t even understand that we’re perpetuating because it’s just the way it has been.

Jara Dean-Coffey:

What I would add to that is that, again, I’m going to go back to validity, objectivity, and rigor; we use those words without understanding the norms, belief systems, and worldviews that they hide. And everybody uses them. And, so, once you get back underneath, then it becomes less about identity; it becomes more about, how then do I share this aha, and how do we move it forward? Again, not forever, just for now, with some integrity around them. And that usually helps people, I think, regardless of their identities. That it’s not a Black thing, it’s not a Brown thing, it’s not a white thing. Although we all have particular roles in this particular construct, it’s really about how we understand knowledge is limiting.

Leon T. Andrews, Jr.:

And, so, let’s talk about those principles. There are three principles of the Equitable Evaluation Framework. How has the framework been used in practice?

Jara Dean-Coffey:

People focus on the first principle, which is really about [inaudible 00:17:33] evaluative work should be in service of and contributes to equity, which, if that is your belief, it’s a game changer. You really do have to rethink, reimagine absolutely everything. And the other two principles still change the game. The second principle is that evaluative work should be designed and implemented with the values underlying equity. So, they should be multiculturally valid and oriented towards participant ownership, none of which are standard practice and in evaluative practices now.

So, even if you picked one of those sub-bullets, it would change the nature of almost every methodology that we use. You would think about power, you would think about voice. You wouldn’t just think about race, gender, sex, and class. You would think about history. And you would make different decisions and determinations about the certainty of your findings based on the limitations of what you were able to do.

You never can ask all the people all the questions all the time. But we refuse to be really honest about that when we offer up our findings and make our decisions. And if we would stop extracting the expertise of humans and repackaging them as our own, what might be possible if we all understood the same things? So, just those two elements, multicultural validity and participant ownership, would change everything, even if you didn’t believe in equity.

And equity only plays out in a particular context in the US. It’s not a word that you use within sovereign nations within our border. They don’t talk about equity. So, that word is a particular word that was chosen for the US settler-created philanthropic industrial complex. But the principles apply writ large. And then the third principle is about systemic drivers: history and context, which we’ve been talking about a lot. That just because I decided I care today doesn’t mean there weren’t a whole host of decisions or not decisions that were made that led to this. And, so, how do you understand the root of the problem, and how are your solutions or inquiries helping you understand that so you can get someplace else as opposed to what we typically do, which is just treat the symptoms?

Marcia Coné:

I think that folks are really understanding that data is well beyond quantitative data and traditionally the way that we think about qualitative data even. And, so, folks are really exploring how to get beyond the numerical to get a better sense of place, to get a better sense of context, to get a better sense of systems and structures, ritual, faith, relationships, and all the meaning that is assigned to them within community.

In the philanthropic sector, foundations are used to saying, “Leon, I’m giving you a million dollars, and your endeavor is a $7 million endeavor, but I gave you a million, and so whatever you do is I get to take credit for.” And we’re really trying to shift those orthodoxies, and we’re seeing folks really play with those orthodoxies and saying, “We’re making a contribution. How do we align our expectations with that contribution, and how do we actually think about indications or indicators of progress that we hold aligned with our own strategy, and then how the investments in these portfolios actually might speak to that?” What’s great about the framework and what we talk about in practice all the time is don’t try to ramrod the whole thing through.

Jara Dean-Coffey:

Exactly.

Marcia Coné:

Right?

Leon T. Andrews, Jr.:

Mm-hmm.

Marcia Coné:

You’re not going to get anywhere doing that. What if we just sat with participant ownership? What if we just moved on that one idea?

Leon T. Andrews, Jr.:

Exactly.

Marcia Coné:

What might be possible?

Leon T. Andrews, Jr.:

There is so much more we could talk about and so much more work that needs to be done. And as you were sharing, this work continues to evolve. And I’m not hearing that you’re saying it sounds overwhelming as you think about the future. I’d like to end with this question about what gives you hope and wanting to have you, Marcia, if you wanted to speak to that first.

Marcia Coné:

Hope has been a really tricky word for me. I think that where I’ve been landing over the last few years as I continue to evolve is that I’ve moved hope to a verb. So, now I feel hope rising in me. And in part it’s because of the work I’m doing through the initiative and with folks who are in the practice because as a verb then, hope actually requires something from me. And in this space, it requires me to hold space, requires me to be present, to stay attuned and attuned. It requires me to offer what I’m noticing and what’s surfacing in the work. It requires me to give folks permission. It invites me to celebrate the small steps and the simple shifts. So, I have hope because, in the practice, I get to bear witness to individual transformation, which is a beautiful gift. And then I get to also witness team transformation and departmental transformation and, even now, organizational change and transformation.

Leon T. Andrews, Jr.:

I love that, moving hope from a noun to a verb. And be staying attuned and attuned, I think, is such an important way of naming and acknowledging how we should be sitting with hope. So, thank you for that, Marcia. Jara, where do you sit as you think about what gives you hope?

Jara Dean-Coffey:

It’s funny, hope isn’t a word I ever use. It’s not part of my everyday vernacular. I get inspired, I’m optimistic, but hope isn’t a word I tend to use. I am optimistic because much has happened prior to me walking on this planet. Things are happening while I’m on this planet. So, I am optimistic that, as a species, in spite of particular moments, we are interested in our survival, and as a consequence we will evolve because that’s really the only option.

And I see people all the time in the practice. I get people come up to me, and it’s awkward, and they definitely have had an aha moment. And I know, even though we may not work together, they’re forever changed.

Leon T. Andrews, Jr.:

Your inspiration and your optimism gives me hope, Jara. And your definition of hope as a verb, as well, I take with me, Marcia. Thank you. Thank you, Jara and Marcia, for joining us today. It was a pleasure to learn more about you and the important work of the Equitable Evaluation Initiative.

I would like to leave you with a quote inspired by my conversation with Jara and Marcia. It is from the late Ida B. Wells: “The way to right wrongs is to turn the light of truth upon them.”

Please join us next time on The Measure. You can learn more about Equal Measure’s work by visiting us at equalmeasure.org. And be sure to subscribe to The Measure Podcast to receive our latest updates.