Reclaiming Our Narratives
An Indigenous Evaluation Framework for Urban American Indian/Alaska Native Communities
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.75518Keywords:
Indigenous evaluation, urban Native, decolonize data, community, urban Indian organizationAbstract
Aligning with the Western Door—Do Good Work, this article outlines Urban Indian Health Institute’s (UIHI) Indigenous Evaluation Framework, created to explicitly include and empower urban Indigenous communities to reclaim their narratives by using evaluation as a tool to tell their stories and to build capacity to take ownership of research and evaluation. The framework includes the following core values: Urban Indigenous People Create Communities Wherever They Are, Resilient and Strength-Based, Decolonize Data, and Community Centered. The authors provide an overview of how they applied the framework in collaboration with 18 urban Indian organizations through the UIHI’s community grants program and include a first-hand example of implementation of the framework from the Native American Youth and Family Center, a community grantee. The authors highlight the importance of including urban Indigenous people in evaluation contexts, as evaluation is not just an exercise in methods or logistics but also a political act and an assertion of Indigenous values and sovereignty, one that defines who is counted, how people are counted, and what decisions are made. The UIHI’s Indigenous Evaluation Framework aims to decolonize data to reclaim urban Indigenous narratives from colonial understandings and tell the stories of our communities.
References
Anderson, C., Chase, M., Johnson, J., Mekiana, D., McIntyre, D., Ruerup, A., & Kerr, S. (2012). It is only new because it has been missing for so long: Indigenous evaluation capacity building. American Journal of Evaluation, 33(4), 566–582.
Anner, J. (1991). To the U.S. Census Bureau, Native Americans are practically invisible. Minority Trendsletter, 4(1), 15–21.
Bowman, N. (2020). Nation-to-nation in evaluation: Utilizing an Indigenous evaluation model to frame systems and government evaluations. New Directions for Evaluation, 2020(166), 101–118.
Bowman, N. R., Francis, C. D., & Tyndall, M. (2015). Culturally responsive Indigenous evaluation: A practical approach for evaluating Indigenous projects in tribal reservation contexts. In S Hood, R. Hopson, & H. Frierson (Eds.), Continuing the Journey to Reposition Culture and Cultural Context in Evaluation Theory and Practice (pp. 335–359). Information Age Publishing. http://lead.wceruw.org/Bowman-bookChapter.pdf
Brayboy, B. M. J. (2005). Toward a tribal critical race theory in education. The Urban Review, 37, 425–446.
Cochran, P. A. L., Marshall, C. A., Garcia-Downing, C., Kendall, E., Cook, D., McCubbin, L., & Gover, R. M. S. (2008). Indigenous ways of knowing: Implications for participatory research and community. American Journal of Public Health, 98(1), 22–27.
Cram, F., Pipi, K., & Paipa, K. (2018). Kaupapa Māori evaluation in Aotearoa New Zealand. New Directions for Indigenous Evaluation, 2018(159), 63–77.
Davis, J. J., Roscigno, V. J., & Wilson, G. (2016). American Indian poverty in the contemporary United States. Sociological Forum, 31(1), 5–28.
Foulks, E. F. (1987). Social stratification and alcohol use in North Alaska. Journal of Community Psychology, 15(3), 349–356.
Gaut, B. (2005, May 27). Scientists trace corn ancestry from ancient grass to modern crop. National Science Foundation. https://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=104207
Grover, J. G. (2008). Challenges in applying Indigenous evaluation practices in mainstream grant programs to Indigenous communities. Canadian Evaluation Society, 23(2), 33–50.
Hall, B. L., & Tandon, R. (2017). Decolonization of knowledge, epistemicide, participatory research and higher education. Research for All, 1(1), 6–19.
Halverson, K., Puig, M. E., & Byers, S. R. (2002). Culture loss: American Indian family disruption, urbanization and the Indian Child Welfare Act. Child Welfare, 81(2), 319–336.
Huyser, K., & Locklear, S. (2021). Reversing statistical erasure of Indigenous Peoples: The social construction of American Indians and Alaska Natives in the United States using national data sets. In M. Walter, T. Kukutai, A. A. Gonzales, & R. Henry (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Indigenous sociology, 1–22. Oxford University Press.
Indian Health Service. (n.d.). Urban Indian organizations. Retrieved May 1, 2022, from Office of Urban Indian Health Programs website: https://www.ihs.gov/urban/urban-indian-organizations/
Kukutai, T., & Taylor, J. (Eds.). (2016). Indigenous data sovereignty: Toward an agenda. Australia National University Press. https://press-files.anu.edu.au/downloads/press/n2140/pdf/book.pdf
LaFrance, J., & Nichols, R. (2008). Reframing evaluation: Defining an Indigenous evaluation framework. Canadian Evaluation Society, 23(2), 13–31.
LaFrance, J., Nichols, R., & Kirkhart, K. E. (2012). Culture writes the script: On the centrality of context in Indigenous evaluation. New Direction for Evaluation, 2012(135), 59–74.
Lawrence, T. J., & James, R. D. (2019). Good health and wellness: Measuring impact through an Indigenous lens. Preventing Chronic Disease, 16.
McKegg, K. (2019). White privilege and the decolonization work needed in evaluation to support Indigenous sovereignty and self-determination. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 34(2), 357–367.
Native American Youth and Family Center. (n.d.). Retrieved May 11, 2022, from https://nayapdx.org/
Oré, C. E., Teufel-Shone, N. I., & Chico-Jarillo, T. M. (2016). American Indian and Alaska Native resilience along the life course and across generations: A literature review. Centers for American Indian and Alaska Native Health, 23(3), 134–157. Medline:27383090
Ramirez, R. K. (2007). Native hubs: Culture, community, and belonging in Silicon Valley and beyond. Duke University Press.
Redvers, N., & Blondin, B. (2020). Traditional Indigenous medicine in North America: A scoping review. PLoS ONE, 15(8), e023753.
Seattle Indian Health Board. (n.d.). About Seattle Indian Health Board. Retrieved May 11, 2022, from https://www.sihb.org/about/
Serrat, O. (2017). The most significant change technique. In Knowledge solutions, 35–38. Springer.
Smithers, G. D. (2019). Native ecologies: Environmental lessons from Indigenous histories. The History Teacher, 52(2), 26.
Tribal Evaluation Workgroup. (2013). A roadmap for collaborative and effective evaluation in tribal communities. Children’s Bureau, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/cb/tribal_roadmap.pdf
Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, 1(1). https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/des/article/view/18630
United Nations. (2007). United Nations declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples: Resolution adopted by the General Assembly. https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/wp-content/uploads/sites/19/2018/11/UNDRIP_E_web.pdf
United States Census Bureau. (2022, January 27). County population by characteristics: 2010–2020. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/technical-documentation/research/evaluation-estimates/2020-evaluation-estimates/2010s-county-detail.html
Urban Indian Health Institute. (2021). Community health profile: National aggregate of urban Indian organization service areas. Urban Indian Health Institute. https://www.uihi.org/download/community-health-profile-national-aggregate-of-urban-indian-organization-service-areas/?wpdmdl=19113&refresh=627c350b16ff31652307211
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Sofia Locklear, Martell Hesketh, Natalyn Begay, Jennifer Brixey, Abigail Echo-Hawk, Rosalina James
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.
