Interview With Kore Global’s Emily Boost: Learning How to Learn & Feminist MEL

Learning and evaluation in the philanthropy space can be a hotly contested issue. Oftentimes, the ‘impact’ funders request to see from charity partners is tied to outputs which focus on short-term service delivery rather than non-linear, longer-term change. Many funders also tend to prioritise quantitative data over stories and experiences, gloss over the value of ‘failures’ and challenges for learning, and neglect the importance of the monitoring and evaluation process itself for upholding values of equity and inclusion.

As an Advisor at I.G. Advisors, I hear some of these frustrations from our charity clients and contacts first-hand. I also work closely with funder initiatives that are looking to do things differently. I recently spoke to Emily Boost (she/her), Co-CEO & Co-Founder of Kore Global, a woman-led consulting firm which specialises in feminist monitoring, evaluation and learning, as well as strategy. I was keen to learn more about how feminist evaluation compares to other, more traditional approaches to evaluation, and what applying a feminist lens means and looks like in practice.

Caitlin McLoughlin: How would you describe a feminist approach to learning and evaluation to someone who had never experienced it before?

Emily Boost: Feminist approaches recognise that ‘evaluation’ exercises are deeply political: who we consult to understand the impact of programmes, how we do this, what we do with the evidence, and why, all ties into questions of power relations. This understanding is what sets feminist evaluation apart from more traditional approaches to evaluation. 

A feminist approach also involves recognising that our own biases influence how we interpret findings and what we perceive to be the ‘truth’ of a situation. This means that data shouldn’t be interpreted by any one person, through any one lens. Instead, feminist evaluation approaches think about intersectionality and tend to include a range of people, from a range of backgrounds, to interpret and analyse the results of programmes and strategies.

Isn’t feminist evaluation just ‘best practice’? 

Ideally, yes – feminist evaluation should be seen as ‘best practice’. But, in reality, feminist evaluation isn’t a mainstream concept. In some spaces, there are still misconceptions about what ‘feminist approaches’ are and a lack of understanding of their benefits and applicability to all contexts. 

How else does feminist evaluation differ from other approaches?

Traditional evaluation processes are often top-down, extractive, and led by ‘experts’ in the global north, while feminist evaluations involve purposely, mindfully, and proactively avoiding ‘extractive’ practices. In this way, feminist evaluation has a lot of overlap with participatory evaluation, and the notion of interrogating who is taking part in a process and why. A feminist evaluation would ensure that everyone involved has a chance to learn from what comes out of the process, has something to gain from their involvement, and is aware of the final results and how they are being used to inform future decisions. It’s about power-sharing – within the evaluation team, with clients, and with evaluation participants.

Typical evaluations also tend to cut corners, as they’re often restricted in terms of time and driven by a sense of urgency to meet a donor’s deadline. This is problematic for feminist approaches, where deep, inclusive, and meaningful participation is so important. A feminist approach would unpack why a certain budget has been allocated (which often tends to be quite arbitrary!), and question why more time (and sometimes money) can’t be spent.

When are feminist approaches relevant?

Feminist evaluation is relevant in all contexts. However, clients and organisations must be fully committed to the process. If true, meaningful commitment isn’t there, the feminist lens won’t be successful, as the co-design process relies on the availability and participation of multiple team members.

What’s your biggest frustration when it comes to this work? 

There has been a lot of interest in the concept of decolonising development recently. When people talk about decolonised approaches, and yet are resistant to feminist approaches, this is frustrating. Feminist approaches are so relevant as they question issues of power, acknowledge multiple and alternative ways of knowing, and challenge what is meant and known about development.

If people are to take one thing away, what would you want them to remember?

Taking a feminist approach doesn’t necessarily mean that evaluation has to be harder, longer or more expensive, and it doesn’t require a completely different set of tools – though you do need to be more thoughtful and bring more humility, empathy and patience. Feminist evaluation is about coming at things from a different angle or lens and holding each other to account for turning feminist principles into tangible behaviours. You can read about our experience conducting a feminist evaluation for the Hewlett Foundation’s Women’s Economic Empowerment strategy if you want to learn more!

The sector is hungry for feminist approaches, and they’re not going away any time soon.

Caitlin McLoughlin is an Advisor at I.G. Advisors. This article was originally published in Alliance Magazine.