Report on the bicultural symposium at conference

Kia ora koutou. I decided to submit the current paper as a way to say thank you to the large group of people in attendance at the bicultural stream at the national conference in late August that was held at Waikato University. It was their continued presence and participation that served as a catalyst and motivator for this paper. I'm conscious that while there was a large number of people in the symposium, there were other streams occurring at the same time, so I thought giving an overview of the success of the symposium would be a good way to let people know who the symposium went. However, before talking specifically about the symposium, I'd like to give mention to other events of the day..

Developing a kaupapa Māori evaluation model – one size fits all?

Health statistics in Aotearoa (New Zealand) highlight that Māori, the indigenous people Aotearoa have poorer health than non- Māori. In response to the statistics a number of Māori health providers have established services that address specific areas of need in their regions. Initially there were minimal accountability requirements of providers. However, changes in the health system now mean that groups wanting to establish a new service must provide accountability measures before, during and after the funding has been allocated. As a result providers need to develop a rationale behind their decisions and assess the measure of change that has taken place as a result of the service or programme to ensure continued funding. The requirements reflect the dominant Western paradigm in which health promotion is understood to be about producing specific quantifiable behaviour changes in individuals. Māori health providers on the other hand have tended to take a holistic approach to health. Thus they have found themselves in the position of trying to show change within a paradigm where measurements are not easily taken. This has created frustration amongst Māori providers who face losing their funding because of an inability to report measurable outcomes using a framework that does not apply to their culture

Ngā kanohi hou – identifying and exploring the issues: Experiences of an intern

The current paper reflects upon the discovery of an intern from the post graduate diploma in community psychology programme (PGDipPsych (Com). The PGDipPsych (Com) is currently facilitated through the University of Waikato School of Arts and Social Sciences, Psychology Department. This journey of discovery is presented from the perspective of a Māori student who is employed in a mainstream public health organisation. The perspective of a person who is new to the workforce, and the “real world,” who views the surrounding environment with a pair of fresh eyes. This paper highlights the importance of the internship period as it supports the student who moves from a structured environment with a strong emphasis on theory, towards a competitive, semi structured environment that is driven by deadlines, budgets and contracts. Factors identified are the demands of Māori communities on Māori health researchers, supportive versus competitive environments, the benefits and drawbacks of being based in a mainstream health organisation, and the future direction of Māori health research. It is hoped that the current paper will encourage further discussion about the future direction of a diploma programme such as the PGDipPsychCom for Māori graduates of a New Zealand tertiary institution

A critical analysis of the place of culture in evaluation

For the past 100 or so years formal evaluation has taken its lead from frameworks that originate from a culturally blind standpoint. Worldwide the major influence on evaluation practice comes from the United States of America. The absence of non-dominant (or indigenous) culturally constructed frameworks has been replicated around the world. Before the formation of the Aotearoa New Zealand Evaluation Association (ANZEA), as a New Zealand specific evaluation group, practitioners generally belonged to the Australasian Evaluation Society (AES) and joined in the sharing, adoption and adaptation of USAs Program Evaluation Standards. However, the context of evaluation in New Zealand has been somewhat different from the rest of the world, becoming more culturally centered than other countries. The role and place of the Treaty of Waitangi has been acknowledged as an attributing factor (ANZEA, 2011). Four indigenous “By Maori for Maori” health & wellbeing programmes externally evaluated were case studies within my research. I draw upon examples from the cases studies to highlight the vulnerable and contentious position indigenous service providers and indigenous evaluators were in. Adapting Sandra Grande’s (2004) analysis, I critiqued the context of the case study evaluations that commissioners considered as Kaupapa Maori. In this presentation I argue that while stakeholders perceived the work to be an indigenous evaluation, the case studies demonstrate that whitestream evaluation was prevalent

"That's the price we pay": Kaupapa Māori Programme stakeholder experiences of external evaluation

This thesis takes a critical approach to the evaluation of Māori social and health service provision progammes through an in-depth exploration of the dynamics, impacts and politics of such exercises within Māori communities, and upon relationships between Māori and the Crown, and its agents. Since the mid 1980s, New Zealand government devolved responsibilities that heralded a change in economic focus and provided a pathway for targeted service provision, such as social and health programmes, amongst communities. The combined shift to Neoliberal economics and the virtual hegemony enjoyed by right wing economic commentators, policy-makers and business leaders meant that newly anointed Māori service providers were not fully prepared for the subsequent rise in demand for narrowly defined accountability requirements that did not reflect Māori aspirations or values. This study sought to critically engage with the experiences of stakeholders affected by an external evaluation of “By Māori, for Māori” services. Qualitative data capturing stakeholder narratives, demonstrated the complex relationships and range of emotions experienced by programme stakeholders. Four case studies contain stories that highlight: service provider relationships built on betrayal that contributed to programme tensions and influenced the design of the evaluation; different stakeholder information needs that shaped their expectation of an evaluation; service provider vulnerability when implementing cultural values with their funder, who then seeks financial gain from that knowledge, and; the close links of Kaupapa Māori programmes and their evaluations to socio-cultural and political agendas. The cases highlight ways Māori evaluators operated from a reflexive approach that recognised two worldviews (Mātauranga Māori and the dominant models of Western social science) and sought to facilitate engaged evaluation relationships with different stakeholders. A proposed Cultural Confluent Evaluation model lays out the dynamics and tensions in an attempt to make visible the underlying agendas, but also the glossed ideologies of power and control attached to conventional evaluations. As existing programmes continue to be examined for their cultural responsiveness, and as new culturally-centred programmes are proposed, the need for culturally embedded evaluation is even more evident

Researching the Process of Auahi Kore for Marae

• The current report is piece of a qualitative research exploring issues relating the development of Marae Auahi Kore. Such aspects as; factors that aid or impede the process, resources available or required by marae, and people's perceptions of the Auahi Kore brand were explored. • Interviews were conducted with people from a variety of backgrounds. Research participants included: Marae Trustees, Public Health Workers, Runanga Staff as well as Kaumatua and Kuia. These people were identified as key informants for the current project. A total of 25 people were interviewed during March and April using an open interview schedule. • Exploration into the Smokefree policies of marae was not pursued within the current project as this was not the focus nor the intent of the research. Project constraints such as time and budget meant there was a limit to what could be undertaken for the current piece of research

Experiences of Māori of Aotearoa New Zealand's public health system: a systematic review of two decades of published qualitative research

Objective: This paper aims to synthesise the broader perspectives of Māori patients and their whānau (extended family, family group) of their treatment within the public health system. Our research question was ‘What are the experiences of Māori in the public health and/or hospital system in Aotearoa New Zealand?’ Methods: A systematic search using PRISMA protocols and reflexive typology organised around the categories of Māori, public healthcare and qualitative research identified 14 papers that covered all three categories. We undertook a qualitative metasynthesis on these papers using a critical community psychology approach. Results: Māori patients and whānau from the included papers mention both barriers and facilitators to health. We categorised barriers as organisational structures, staff interactions and practical considerations. Facilitators were categorised as the provision of whānau support in the form of practical assistance, emotional care and health system navigation. Conclusions: For many Māori, the existing public health system is experienced as hostile and alienating. Whānau members provide support to mitigate this, but it comes as a cost to whānau. Implications for public health: Public health providers must find ways to ensure that Māori consistently experience positive, high-quality healthcare interactions that support Māori ways of being

An evaluation of the cultural supervision prototype undertaken within the Department of Corrections, Hamilton

Disproportionately high rates of offending and recidivism among Māori are well documented. As part of its attempt to better meet the needs of Māori offenders, the Department of Corrections is developing cultural supervision for staff in the Community Probation Service, the Public Prisons Service and the Psychological Service. The aims of cultural supervision include improving staff members’ knowledge of Māori cultural values, providing support for staff in managing complex cultural issues, and ensuring safe practice and culturally appropriate behaviour. During 2002, the Māori and Psychology Research Unit was contracted to conduct a survey of current practices in relation to cultural supervision and a process evaluation of a prototype of cultural supervision being trialled in the Waikato among probation officers (Hamilton Area) and sentence planners (Waikeria Prison) (Karapu, Masters, Robertson, Trynes, & Waitoki, 2002). Findings from the survey indicated that most staff had informal cultural support or advice available to them. Usually, this was in the form of Māori colleagues within the Department. Less commonly, support was sought from Māori in other organisations, from knowledgeable non-Māori within the Department, kaumātua and kuia, and whānau members. About a third of Corrections staff were receiving some formal cultural supervision, most of whom regarded it positively. Among other staff, both Māori and non-Māori, there was a high level of interest in cultural supervision, and a view that it would be beneficial to their professional practice. Overall, staff felt that the support and advice currently available to them was inadequate. Findings from the evaluation of the prototype suggested that while many of the participants viewed cultural supervision as important for their job, fewer considered that the supervision they were receiving was meeting their needs. Some experienced non-Māori staff seemed to be resistant to the idea of cultural supervision, feeling that they already knew how to relate to Māori offenders. Māori staff were generally enthusiastic about cultural supervision but wanted it to focus on their personal safety as Māori within a “mainstream” institution rather than on their practice. However, both Māori and non-Māori staff generally felt that the cultural supervision sessions provided a safe environment. The prototype appeared to be a good beginning and the model should be stronger when modified in the light of experience