Tekaria’karéhton (it’s been thought out)
Centering Kanien’kehá:ka concepts in Health Promotion Evaluation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18357/cjpe.2026.40.1.1218Keywords:
Indigenous evaluation, Indigenous health promotion, community-based programs, community-engaged research, process evaluationAbstract
Evaluation frameworks grounded in Western constructs such as reach, fidelity, and dose delivered/received, do not translate well to the implementation of community-based health promotion in Indigenous settings. There is a pressing need for culturally grounded evaluation approaches that reflect Indigenous values and knowledge systems, and that promote self-determination. This study aimed to identify best practices for health promotion evaluation from the lived experience of one Kanien’kehá:ka community, in order to inform the development of a culturally grounded evaluation framework.
We conducted a community-engaged qualitative research study grounded in Indigenous methodology with the Kanien’kehá:ka community of Akwesasne. Twenty-seven Kitchen Table Talks were held with knowledge carriers, health program staff, and Indigenous scholars. All participants received a tobacco tie and provided informed, verbal consent. Transcripts were analyzed using a thematic approach with participant-identified in vivo Kanien’kéha codes, developed into a codebook applied across all transcripts. Two member-checking Talking Circle sessions were held with interview participants confirming that findings represented the knowledges of individual participants and the wider community.
Participants identified four Kanien’kehá:ka concepts as central to understanding successful health promotion implementation: Skén:nen (Peace), Ka’nikonhrí:io (A Good Mind), Ka’shatsténhsera (Strength/Empowerment), and Konnoronhkwàtshera (Love & Care). These concepts, rooted in the Kaienere’kó:wa (The Great Law of Peace) are also rendered in the form of beadwork by Akwesasró:non artist Niiostosera’ah Thompson.
Collectively, these concepts form the Tekaria’karéhton (it’s been thought out) Framework, which we present as a novel, culturally grounded process evaluation methodology. This framework offers program evaluators a culturally specific alternative to Western notions of program success, advancing evaluation practice for Indigenous and community-engaged health promotion. The Tekaria’karéhton (it’s been thought out) Framework contributes to a growing body of nation-specific Indigenous evaluation methodologies that center community values and self-determined criteria of success.
References
Bonaparte, D. (n.d. -a). Saiowisakeron: The Jake Ice Story. https://www.wampumchronicles.com/saiowisakeron.html
Bonaparte, D. (n.d. -b). The History of Akwesasne from Pre-Contact to Modern Times. https://www.wampumchronicles.com/history.html
Bonaparte, D. (n.d. -c). The History of the St. Regis Catholic Church and the Early Pastors. https://www.wampumchronicles.com/catholicchurch.html
Brown, M. A., & Di Lallo, S. (2020). Talking circles: A culturally responsive evaluation practice. American Journal of Evaluation, 41(3), 367–383. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214019899164 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214019899164
Indigenous Services Canada (2025). Evaluation of the urban programming for Indigenous Peoples program. Government of Canada. https://www.isc.gc.ca/eng/1743776373551/1743776420361#sec2
Charmaz, K. (2024). Constructing Grounded Theory (3rd Edition). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/constructing-grounded-theory/book255601
Cram, F. (2018). Conclusion: Lessons about Indigenous evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, 2018(159), 121–133. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20326 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20326
Johnston-Goodstar, K. (2012). Decolonizing evaluation: The necessity of evaluation advisory groups in indigenous evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, 2012(136), 109–117. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20038 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20038
Khudu-Petersen, K., & Chilisa, B. (2019). Diagnosing elements of colonization in Indigenous education: An African effort to research and transform education for Indigenous Peoples. In E. A. McKinley & L. T. Smith (Eds.), Handbook of Indigenous Education (pp. 997–1012). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3899-0_41 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3899-0_41
LaFrance, J., & Nichols, R. (2009). Indigenous evaluation framework: Telling our story in our place and time. Alexandria (VA): American Indian Higher Education Consortium.
LaFrance, J., Nichols, R., & Kirkhart, K. E. (2012). Culture writes the script: On the centrality of context in indigenous evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, 2012(135), 59–74. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20027 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20027
Shepherd, R. P., & Graham, K. A. (2020). Evaluation in Indigenous contexts: An Introduction to practice. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 34(4), 391–399. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.69010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.69010
Iroquois Confederacy of Nations: Hearing on S. Con. Res. 76 before the Select Committee on Indian Affairs, 100th Cong. (1987). https://search.catalog.loc.gov/instances/d4aa7a2a-760e-51c5-888d-d9da6003a5fb?option=lccn&query=88602174
Wilson, S. (2008). Research as ceremony: Indigenous research methods. Fernwood Publishing.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Brittany McBeath, Colin P. T. Baillie, Connie Lazore, Niiostosera:ah Thompson, Dave Bergeron, Brittany Wenniserí:iostha Jock

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors contributing to The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation agree to release their articles under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 (CC-BY-NC) license. This licence allows this work to be copied, distributed, remixed, transformed, and built upon for any purpose provided that appropriate attribution is given, a link is provided to the license, and changes made were indicated.
Authors retain copyright of their work and grant the journal right of first publication.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.


