The American Evaluation Association (AEA) Guiding Principles serve as a cornerstone for professional ethical conduct among evaluators. These principles are not merely guidelines; they embody the core values of the AEA and provide a robust framework for navigating the ethical dimensions of evaluation practice. Designed to guide evaluators in their professional duties, these five interconnected principles—Systematic Inquiry, Competence, Integrity, Respect for People, and Common Good and Equity—are essential for ensuring evaluations are conducted ethically and effectively.
These principles are not isolated concepts but rather interdependent elements that often require careful balancing. Evaluators must engage in thoughtful deliberation to justify their professional actions, especially when these principles appear to be in conflict.
The application of these Guiding Principles is comprehensive, spanning every phase of the evaluation process. From the initial discussions defining the scope and purpose of an evaluation to the design, implementation, reporting, and ultimate utilization of findings, these principles are paramount.
Recognizing the dynamic nature of the evaluation field and the evolving world context, the AEA views these principles as part of a continuous process of professional self-reflection. Regular revisions, occurring at least every five years since their inception in 1994, ensure the principles remain relevant and responsive to the needs of evaluators and stakeholders. It’s important to note that these principles are intended to complement, not replace, ethical standards from other disciplines or associations relevant to evaluators’ diverse roles.
Communicating and Upholding Ethical Principles
A fundamental aspect of ethical evaluation practice is the clear communication of these principles. Evaluators bear the primary responsibility for initiating discussions about ethical considerations with all parties involved in an evaluation. The Guiding Principles serve as a valuable tool for articulating to clients and stakeholders the expected ethical conduct of a professional evaluator.
Furthermore, continuous professional development in ethical reasoning is crucial. Evaluators are expected to actively seek opportunities to enhance their understanding of ethical principles and their application in practice. Consultation with peers is also encouraged as a means to navigate complex ethical dilemmas and ensure sound decision-making.
Structure of the Guiding Principles
Each of the five overarching principles is further elaborated by a set of sub-statements. These sub-statements are designed to clarify the meaning of each principle and offer practical guidance for its application in diverse evaluation contexts. It is important to understand that these sub-statements are illustrative and not exhaustive, nor do they function as rigid rules for disciplinary action. The Guiding Principles are distinct from both Evaluation Standards, which pertain to the quality of evaluations, and evaluator competencies, which define the skills required for effective practice.
Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation Ethics
To ensure clarity and shared understanding, the AEA Guiding Principles document includes a glossary of essential terms:
Common Good: This refers to the collective benefit shared by the majority of society members. It encompasses equitable opportunities, outcomes achieved through civic participation and collective endeavors, and shared resources such as cultural, social, economic, political, and natural assets, including clean air, water, and a sustainable environment.
Contextual Factors: These are the diverse conditions that can influence an evaluation, including geographic location, political and social climates, cultural norms, economic and historical backgrounds, technological advancements, environmental conditions, language, customs, local practices, timing, and other pertinent elements.
Culturally Competent Evaluator: This describes an evaluator adept at employing a broad spectrum of evaluation theories and methods to tailor evaluations to specific contexts. Such evaluators are skilled at incorporating diverse values and stakeholder perspectives when developing models and theories guiding the evaluation process.
Environment: This term encompasses the surrounding conditions influencing an evaluation, including the setting and circumstances in which evaluation activities occur.
Equity: Equity signifies the state of fair and just opportunities for all individuals to participate and thrive in society, irrespective of individual or group identity or differences. Achieving equity necessitates addressing historical disadvantages and existing structural inequalities.
Guiding Principles vs. Evaluation Standards: This distinction clarifies that Guiding Principles focus on the evaluator’s ethical conduct, whereas Evaluation Standards address the quality and rigor of the evaluation itself.
People or Groups: This broadly includes all those potentially affected by an evaluation, encompassing diverse populations defined by factors like race, ethnicity, religion, gender, income, status, health, ability, power, and levels of representation or disenfranchisement.
Professional Judgment: This refers to decisions and conclusions grounded in ethical principles and professional standards for evidence and argumentation within the evaluation process.
Stakeholders: Stakeholders are individuals, groups, or organizations with a vested interest in an evaluation, including those served by or affected by its outcomes.
The Five Guiding Principles Explained
The AEA Guiding Principles are categorized into five core areas, each crucial for ethical evaluation practice:
A. Systematic Inquiry: Rigor and Context in Data-Based Investigations
Systematic Inquiry emphasizes the evaluator’s commitment to conducting thorough, methodical, and contextually relevant data-based investigations. This principle underscores the importance of rigorous and defensible methods in evaluation.
- A1. Upholding Technical Standards: Evaluators must adhere to the highest technical standards appropriate for the chosen methods, while also considering the evaluation’s scale and available resources.
- A2. Collaborative Exploration of Evaluation Questions: Engaging primary stakeholders in discussing the strengths and limitations of core evaluation questions and potential approaches is essential for ensuring relevance and feasibility.
- A3. Transparent Communication of Methods: Clear and detailed communication of methods and approaches is necessary to enable understanding, interpretation, and critique by others.
- A4. Acknowledging Limitations: Evaluators are responsible for clearly stating the limitations of the evaluation and the scope of its results.
- A5. Contextualizing Interpretations: Values, assumptions, theories, methods, results, and analyses that significantly shape the evaluator’s interpretations must be discussed in contextually appropriate ways to ensure transparency and understanding.
- A6. Ethical Use of Emerging Technologies: Careful consideration of the ethical implications of using new technologies in evaluation practice is increasingly important in the rapidly evolving technological landscape.
B. Competence: Providing Skilled and Qualified Evaluation Services
Competence highlights the evaluator’s responsibility to provide skilled professional services, ensuring they possess the necessary expertise to conduct high-quality evaluations.
- B1. Ensuring Team Expertise: Evaluators must ensure that the evaluation team collectively possesses the education, abilities, skills, and experiences required for competent evaluation completion.
- B2. Addressing Limitations in Competence: When faced with assignments beyond the team’s expertise, transparent communication of potential limitations and proactive efforts to supplement skills are crucial ethical steps.
- B3. Cultural Competence: The evaluation team must possess or acquire the competencies needed to work effectively within the specific cultural context of the evaluation, demonstrating cultural sensitivity and awareness.
- B4. Continuous Professional Development: Ongoing education, training, and reflective practice are essential for evaluators to stay abreast of new concepts, techniques, and skills necessary for competent evaluation practice and to refine their expertise.
C. Integrity: Honesty and Transparency in Evaluation Processes
Integrity emphasizes the evaluator’s commitment to honesty and transparency, ensuring the credibility and trustworthiness of the evaluation process and its findings.
- C1. Truthful and Open Communication: Evaluators must communicate truthfully and openly with clients and stakeholders about all aspects of the evaluation, including its inherent limitations.
- C2. Disclosure and Management of Conflicts of Interest: Any conflicts of interest, or even the appearance of such conflicts, must be disclosed before accepting an evaluation assignment, with proactive management or mitigation strategies implemented throughout the evaluation.
- C3. Communicating Changes to Plans: Any deviations from the originally agreed-upon evaluation plans, along with the rationale and potential impacts, must be promptly communicated to all relevant parties.
- C4. Acknowledging Values and Perspectives: Evaluators must assess and make explicit the values, perspectives, and interests of stakeholders, clients, and themselves concerning the evaluation’s conduct and outcomes.
- C5. Accurate Representation: Evaluation procedures, data, and findings must be represented accurately and transparently to maintain the integrity of the evaluation.
- C6. Addressing Misleading Information: Concerns about procedures or activities likely to produce misleading information must be clearly communicated and justified, with consultation sought and assignments declined if necessary to uphold ethical standards.
- C7. Disclosing Funding and Request Sources: Transparency extends to disclosing all sources of financial support for an evaluation and the origin of the evaluation request itself.
D. Respect for People: Honoring Dignity and Cultural Context
Respect for People underscores the evaluator’s ethical obligation to honor the dignity, well-being, and self-worth of all individuals involved in the evaluation, recognizing the profound influence of culture.
- D1. Understanding Diverse Perspectives: Evaluators must strive to understand and treat fairly the range of perspectives and interests brought to the evaluation, including those from marginalized or dissenting voices.
- D2. Adhering to Ethical and Legal Standards: Compliance with current professional ethics, standards, and regulations, including informed consent, confidentiality, and harm prevention, is paramount when working with evaluation participants.
- D3. Maximizing Benefits and Minimizing Harm: Evaluators should actively seek to maximize benefits and reduce unnecessary risks or harms for all individuals and groups associated with the evaluation.
- D4. Ensuring Voluntary Participation and Benefit Awareness: Those who provide data and take risks should do so willingly, with full knowledge of the evaluation and the opportunity to benefit from its outcomes.
E. Common Good and Equity: Contributing to a Just and Equitable Society
Common Good and Equity reflects the evaluator’s broader societal responsibility to contribute to the common good and the advancement of an equitable and just society through their professional practice.
- E1. Balancing Interests: Evaluators must balance the interests of the client, stakeholders, and the common good, while simultaneously safeguarding the integrity of the evaluation process.
- E2. Addressing Threats to the Common Good: Potential threats to the common good arising from the evaluation, especially when stakeholder interests conflict with societal goals, must be identified and addressed proactively.
- E3. Mitigating Risks to Equity: Evaluations must consider and mitigate potential risks of exacerbating historical disadvantages or existing inequities within society.
- E4. Promoting Transparency and Equitable Access to Information: Transparency and the active sharing of data and findings in accessible formats, while respecting confidentiality, are essential for promoting equitable access to information.
- E5. Mitigating Bias and Power Imbalances: Evaluators should actively mitigate biases and power imbalances that may arise from the evaluation context, including self-reflection on their own privilege and positioning.
To delve deeper into the Guiding Principles, you can download the complete document in PDF format by clicking here. For hardcopies of the Guiding Principles, please reach out to the AEA office via email at [email protected] or by phone at 202-367-1166.
These Guiding Principles were last updated in 2018, reflecting the collaborative efforts of the Guiding Principles Task Force, AEA Leadership, and AEA Members, ensuring they remain a relevant and robust ethical framework for the evaluation profession.
