Introduction
Research and Evaluation are an important part of the work ANA does. ANA conducts impact evaluation visits with one-third of its current grantees each year. Impact visits provide ANA the opportunity to meet with project staff and beneficiaries in order to collect qualitative and quantitative information.
The purpose of the impact visit is threefold:
- To assess the impact of ANA funding on Native American communities, in accordance with the Native American Programs Act of 1974 (42 USC 2991) Section 811 (42 USC 2992), and the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993;
- To increase knowledge about the successes and challenges of ANA grantees, improving ANA service delivery; and
- To increase transparency and collaboration by sharing the unique stories of ANA grantees with native communities and the public.
ANA utilizes information collected to bolster its project planning and development, pre-application, and post-award training and technical assistance offerings to tribes and Native American organizations so that applicants understand the common pitfalls of ANA projects and are better equipped to develop, and later implement, realistic project work plans.
In this interview, Lisa Ojibway from ICF asks Mr. Strickland to reflect on the changes he’s seen at ACF regarding research and evaluation with tribal communities over his career. Roadmap for Collaborative and Effective Evaluation with Tribal Communities
Citation
- Brave Heart, M. (1998). The return to the sacred path: Healing the historical trauma and historical unresolved grief response among the Lakota through psychoeducational group intervention. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 68(3), 287-305.
- Brave Heart, M., & DeBruyn, L. (1998). The American Indian holocaust: Healing historical unresolved grief. American Indian and Alaska Native Mental Health Research: Journal of the National Center, 8(2), 56-78.
- Cashman, S., Adeky, S., Allen, A., Corburn, J., Israel, B., Montaño, J., & Eng, E. (2008). The power and the promise: Working with communities to analyze data, interpret findings, and get to outcomes. American Journal of Public Health, 98(8), 1407-1417.
- Cross, T. (1997). Understanding the relational worldview in Indian families. Pathways Practice Digest, 12(4).
- Duran, E. & Duran, B. (1995). Native American postcolonial psychology. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
- Fisher, P. A., & Ball, T. J. (2003). Tribal participatory research: Mechanisms of a collaborative model. American Journal of Community Psychology, 32(3/4), 207-216.
- Indian child welfare act (ICWA). (n.d.). In The adoption history project. Retrieved December 16, 2013, from http://pag es.uoregon.edu/adoption/topics/ICWA.html.
- Kreisher, K. (2002). Coming home: The lingering effects of the Indian adoption project. Retrieved December 16, 2013, from http://www.cwla.org/articles/cv0203indianadopt.html.
- LaFrance, J., & Nichols, R. (2010). Reframing evaluation: Defining an indigenous evaluation framework. The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 23(2), 13-31.
- Mazzocchi, F. (2006). Western science and traditional knowledge: Despite their variations, different forms of knowledge can learn from each other. Science and Society, 7(5), 463-466.
- Science. (2005). In Oxford English Dictionary online. Retrieved September 24, 2013, from http://oxforddictionaries.com/ definition/english/science.
- Unger, S. (1977). Destruction of American Indian families. New York, NY: Association on American Indian Affairs.
- U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1979). Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human sub jects of research. Retrieved December 16, 2013, from http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/belmont.html.
- Warriner, G. & Engelstad K. (Directors and Producers). (1985). More than bows and arrows [Motion picture]. United States: Camera One.