If I may : a couple of things I found *personally* fascinating about the research @valuingculture [led by @BenWalmsley & @RobynDowlen] on what organisations, independent researchers & practitioners think of their #evaluation practice & that of #arts #culture #heritage sector

OBVIOUS POINT ALARM Not all evaluation practice aims to do the same thing We found a broad range (& of course considerable overlap) of definitions when asked 'How would YOU define evaluation?' Picked out some key themes to try & map it out (soz for dodgy screengrabs)

It might also be obvious that funder & organisational/individual priorities don't always match. But this has a real 'opportunity' cost - think of all the valuable research that COULD be happening, but isn't!

For instance, we often heard: “I tend to prioritise the funder’s evaluation process/objectives as I do not have capacity to do two different evaluations.” [practitioner] or that research into 'operational aspects of delivery from a staff perspective... takes a back seat' [org]

There's obvs loads more, but just want to share one more idea I keep coming back to. One practitioner nailed it for me, in this data-centred-information-heavy-story-mistrusting world, THIS is was what evaluation in practice should is about

Anyhoo, if any of that tickles your interest, you can check out the full @valuingculture reports, u lucky things! https://www.culturalvalue.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/CCV-Exec-Summary-evaluation-survey-web-Nov-2020.pdf [from which all images* are taken] Also article with Ben in @ArtsPro discussing some themes here: https://www.artsprofessional.co.uk/magazine/article/culture-led-funding-or-funding-led-culture [*excl. monkeys]