From Metrics to Meaning: Centering Community Voice in Evidence-Informed Decision-Making

Collaborative blog post by Indigo Strategic Health Advisors and Everstead Strategies, focusing on the importance of incorporating community voices in evidence-informed decision-making.

We often say, “what gets measured gets done.” But just as important (and far less examined) is the question of who gets to decide what’s measured, whose questions are prioritized, how we meaningfully engage communities, and whose voices shape the meaning of results.

In philanthropy and nonprofit work, evaluation is often framed as neutral or objective. But behind every indicator, metric, or report are a series of choices about what matters, what gets shared, and what gets excluded. Traditionally, those choices are made by people who are often removed from the communities most impacted by the work. As such, the selected evaluation findings may be less relevant and useful to those who need them—worse, the story is altered which distorts reality.

Over the years, we’ve seen this dynamic play out in subtle and systemic ways, as pointed out with examples offered in an earlier post:

• Program staff feedback is softened or edited before it reaches users;

• Community partners insights are dismissed as “anecdotal,” while funder-driven methods carry the most weight;

• Grantees asked to report on metrics that align with funder priorities, rather than their work; and/or

• Reports focus on what will land well with Boards, not necessarily what reflects on-the-ground truths.

Such issues rarely stem from malice. Instead, they often reflect deep-rooted systems that prioritize top-down control, standardization, and highlighting or emphasizing what’s fundable over what’s useful. It is a learned path of least resistance for many individuals and organizations. Without consistent input from those with lived experience—whether staff, partners, or communities—we end up generating and reporting evidence that may be compelling on the surface, but hollow underneath.

If we’re serious about equity, we have to get serious about voice in evaluation—not just in data collection, but throughout the entire learning cycle:

• Building trust and relationships by meaningfully engaging with relevant communities;

• Sharing power in design, interpretation, and meaning-making; 

• Framing questions that reflect community priorities;

• Respecting access to and for communities in a culturally responsive manner;

• Protecting dissent, even when it complicates the narrative; and/or

• Telling the whole story, not just what’s easier or more comfortable to report.

While there’s growing momentum for more engaged, equity-centered evaluations, there is a lot more work to be done. It takes cultural shifts, trust-building, and a willingness to sit with discomfort—especially when the findings challenge organizational narratives or anticipated funding strategies.

At the end of the day, evaluation doesn’t just measure progress—it shapes decisions, resource flows, and public perception. If we aren’t paying attention to whose voices are included and centered, we risk reinforcing inequities driven by biases and assumptions that produce weak or lopsided evidence.

We’d love to hear from others in this space:

• What shifts are you seeing—or making—to ensure evaluation reflects community-centered truth, not just compliance?

• What supports honest learning in your organization—and what gets in the way?

If your team is exploring how to move toward equity-centered evaluation and reporting, this is the kind of work we support at Indigo Strategic Health Advisors and Everstead Strategies.

About the Authors:

Alicia L. Thomas, DrPH, MHS, leads Indigo Strategic Health Advisors, a consulting firm dedicated to helping funders and public health organizations embed equity, trust, and community voice into their work. Drawing on her background in philanthropy, research, and stakeholder engagement, Alicia focuses on bridging data with lived experience to drive more inclusive and authentic decision-making.

Esther C. Nolton, PhD, MEd, CDMP, leads Everstead Strategies, a boutique consulting firm committed to building stronger organizational culture and capacity for evidence generation and utilization. We bring extensive experience using culturally responsive, meaningfully engaged, and human-centered design approaches to data, strategy, and policy across various domains and sectors. Everstead helps plan for the evidence you need before you need it to make the good you do even better.