Evaluating Activism

Activists would do well to borrow from the tenets of advocacy and policy change evaluation to enhance their efforts.

by ANNETTE L. GARDNER and CLAIRE D. BRINDIS

Images (left to right) from the 2014 New York City Climate March (CC BY-SA 4.0), the 2017 March for Science (CC BY-SA 3.0), and the 2017 Women's March (public domain).

The 2016 election has embroiled the United States in political upheaval, the likes of which have not been seen in recent times. The politics of inclusion are competing head-on with those of division, and political rancor runs high. Advocacy is now front and center, with much of it being creative and engaging, but not all of it. Considered a critical means for expanding democracy, this broad swath of political actors, whom we call “advocates,” are bringing to bear their influence, using traditional strategies and tactics, such as organizing protests and showing up in force at town hall meetings. However, without thoughtful reflection, advocacy strategies are unlikely to result in the policy mobilization and impact that they intend; those who seek greater social justice will be thwarted in their efforts unless they more fully understand what is effective in mobilizing communities and shaping public and political opinion.

Advocacy and Policy Change Evaluation » looks at the concepts, designs, methods, and tools needed to conduct effective advocacy and policy change evaluations.

This is where evaluation comes in. Skilled evaluators have long been at work designing appropriate evaluations to meet diverse needs: increased foundation interest in supporting advocacy and policy change initiatives to achieve systems change; evaluation of democracy-building initiatives worldwide; and diffusion of advocacy capacity beyond the traditional advocacy community. Evaluators have met many of these needs with good success, building a new field of evaluation practice, adapting and creating evaluation concepts and methods, and shaping advocate, funder, and evaluator thinking on advocacy and policy change in all its diverse manifestations. We predict the field will only continue to grow and evolve, and those aiming to effect political change, whether at the grassroots, or institutionally, would do well to borrow from the tenets of advocacy and policy change evaluation to guide and enhance their efforts.

Those seeking to bring about policy change need to be prepared to evaluate a broad range of advocacy strategies and tactics to be effective.

Those seeking to bring about policy change need to be prepared to evaluate a broad range of advocacy strategies and tactics to be effective. Coalition building, public awareness campaigns, community organizing, media advocacy, and policymaker education are precisely the kinds of activities that advocacy and policy evaluators focus on, and speak to the broad range of activities and expertise required to make substantive headway in the public policy arena. For instance, evaluators employed a collaborative, utilization-focused, and mixed-method framework to assess an anti-smoking program organized by ClearWay Minnesota. The nonprofit launched The Tribal Tobacco Education and Policy (TTEP) initiative in 2007 to provide resources and assistance to five tribal Nations in order to address commercial tobacco through policy and advocacy approaches. The five Nations developed their own activities and strategies which focused on restoring sacred use of traditional tobacco and adopting smoke-free policies in public areas through educating tribal members, decision-makers, elected leaders, commissioners, and department heads. Evaluators used a battery of instruments to assess Tribal advocacy capacity gains, increased community awareness of the dangers of second-hand smoke, and local policy ‘wins,’ such as restrictions on smoking in casinos, while being mindful to the evolving nature of the program and the unique cultural context.

Understanding the historical, cultural, and substantive dimensions of a policy or policy arena is a key effort that evaluators should strive to make a central priority in their practice. Not only will this policy acumen strengthen evaluation design, but it will also strengthen the partnership with advocates and their funders who may or may not be very knowledgeable of the policy process and political actors. For example, since 2009, the Let Girls Lead program has been building a global movement of champions and strengthening civil society leaders and girl advocates to promote and fund girl-friendly laws, policies, and programs in Guatemala, Honduras, Liberia, Malawi, and Ethiopia. Fellows learn and undertake a range of advocacy tactics—from communicating with policymakers to broad public education—all tailored to each individual country.

Understanding the historical, cultural, and substantive dimensions of a policy or policy arena is a key effort that evaluators should strive to make a central priority in their practice.

While the complexity of the policy process is sometimes daunting, we urge advocates and those evaluating the progress of advocacy work to understand and embrace the complexity (and chaos) that characterizes public policy, bringing to bear systems thinking tools and flexible design. Having an understanding of the dynamic and complicated nature of the policymaking process based on existing and emerging models and scholarship creates a reality check for evaluation designs, such as whether to hold advocates responsible for securing passage of a piece of legislation or monitoring the implementation of a policy to assure fidelity to the law’s requirements.

While fueled by the need for strengthened evaluation practice, the results of the 2016 elections speak to the need for evaluation practice to focus more on strategic learning so that advocacy can fulfill its vision more effectively. Using credible evidence to inform advocacy in real-time is as important as assessing initiative effectiveness in an era where policy change (such as the signing of executive orders) is occurring at break-neck speed. Advocates, who must now work at the top of their game, will benefit from having a compendium of evaluation strategies and tools to monitor their strategies and tactics though they may still require expertise in designing and implementing a full-scale evaluation. Funders that are developing a funding strategy and/or are evaluating advocacy and/or policy change initiatives will find the theoretical dimensions of advocacy and policy change very helpful for developing realizable initiatives. Moreover, evaluators, advocates and funders have to take stock in the nature and quality of their evaluation partnerships, realizing that they need to tread carefully in tumultuous political waters while fostering an enduring and collaborative partnership. We are very hopeful here. The findings from the Aspen/UCSF Survey and six evaluation cases indicate that advocacy and policy change evaluators are well positioned to inform and support the many different ways that individuals, organizations, and communities speak truth to power as well as contribute to a growing knowledge base of successful forms of influence and improved policy solutions.

BEYOND THE TEXT:The Advocacy and Policy Change Evaluation book launch

Start reading Advocacy and Policy Change Evaluation »

Annette L. Gardner, PhD is Assistant Professor in the Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences at the University of California, San Francisco. She is co-author of Advocacy and Policy Change Evaluation: Theory and Practice.

Claire D. Brindis, DrPH is Professor of Pediatrics and Health Policy and Director of the Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies at the University of California, San Francisco. She is co-author of Advocacy and Policy Change Evaluation: Theory and Practice.