Date: Tuesday, March 31, 2026
Youth Focused Evaluation Topical Interest Group is for Evaluation About Youth, for Youth, and with Youth. The Youth Focused Evaluation TIG aims to collaboratively create learning spaces for all evaluators and researchers (adult and youth) that focus on the practices and outcomes of positive youth development and participatory approaches across informal and formal contexts. The YFE-TIG speaks to youth and adult evaluators’ and researchers’ unique needs by promoting the development and use of responsive tools and methods leading to practical and transformative outcomes for young people. The YFE-TIG helps youth and adult evaluators and researchers develop effective practices in professional development, program quality, measurement, ethics, youth participation, and amplifying youth voice and power. Ultimately, we want to support more profound youth-informed or youth-led evaluation and decision-making.
I’m Elizabeth Cook of Child Trends, writing with Hope Gabikiny and David Floria, who are youth advisors; Morrigan Hunter; and Katherine McLaughlin of Elevatus Training. Last summer, Katherine, Morrigan, and I hosted a six-week sexual health class for 12 young adults with intellectual disabilities. After each class, we held conversations with participants to learn what was working and what needed improvement before a formal evaluation of the program occurs. Hope and David participated in the class and helped us reflect on the experience. We invited them to share what made it easier (or harder) to share their perspectives.
From here, Hope and David describe what helped them participate in meaningful ways.
For us, participation started before the class sessions even began. Getting materials ahead of time helped us prepare, understand unfamiliar words, and ask questions before meeting as a group. This was especially important when language was not written in plain language. Having definitions included in materials helped, and adding a glossary or index would make participation even easier.
Accessibility also meant sharing materials in different formats. Because I (Hope) have low vision, getting materials electronically helped me follow along and understand what others were talking about.
During sessions, slowing down conversations made a big difference. In many group settings, discussions move quickly, and it can be hard to know when to speak. Using guiding questions, allowing extra time to respond, and sometimes calling on people by name helped us know when it was okay to contribute.
It also helped to have different ways to communicate. Being able to type responses in the Zoom chat instead of speaking out loud made participation possible on days when talking felt difficult or overwhelming. When conversations became overstimulating, having the option to message the facilitators privately or talk with them after class helped us stay engaged.
Another important part of respectful design was allowing participants to have a support person present if they wanted one. A support person could be a family member, staff member, or trusted helper who attended the session on or off camera to help explain confusing information, check understanding, or talk things through afterward. Having someone with me (David) allowed real-time help understanding instructions or words that were unclear.
Respect also showed up in smaller but meaningful ways. Being paid for our time showed that our perspectives mattered. Reminders before sessions helped us remember to attend and feel ready. Meeting one-on-one before the class to explain the project and expectations helped us decide whether we felt comfortable joining.
One of the most important parts of the experience was being asked directly whether we felt respected. That does not happen often in disability services or educational settings. Being reminded that our feedback mattered and that staff would not be offended made it easier to speak honestly.
Trust also grew from transparency. Knowing that some project staff had disabilities themselves helped us connect with them and feel more comfortable sharing our perspectives.
Instead of using surveys, we talked together after each session about what worked and what did not. Those conversations made it easier to ask follow-up questions, explain our thinking, and talk about what mattered most to us.
This experience showed us that respect is not just a value, it is something you build into how evaluation is done. When people feel respected, supported, and understood, they can share feedback that makes programs stronger.
The American Evaluation Association is hosting YFE TIG Week with our colleagues in the Youth Focused Evaluation Topical Interest Group. The contributions all this week to AEA365 come from our YFE TIG members. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this AEA365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the AEA365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an AEA365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to AEA365@eval.org. AEA365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators. The views and opinions expressed on the AEA365 blog are solely those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of the American Evaluation Association, and/or any/all contributors to this site.