The evaluation involved a desktop review and interviews with selected stakeholders of the NWA program. Documents for the desktop review were provided by OfW and included grant administration documents, funding agreements, activity work plans, strategic documents related to the project such as program logic, and copies of previous reviews and evaluations. 

Key stakeholders for interview were identified in discussion between OfW and GIWL. The initial sampling strategy sought to include representatives from the Alliances, the Office for Women, other government agencies, and the women sector. Due to time and resource constraints, it was not possible to include individuals or representatives of the women's sector (either members or non-members of the Alliances). Table 1 below presents the number of interviews and participants in each stakeholder category. A full list is provided in Appendix 1. All interviews were conducted using a semi structured interview schedule. Some interviews were individual interviews while others were group interviews (focus groups).

All interviews were recorded and transcribed using speech to text software. Emergent thematic analysis and lines of argument synthesis were used to analyse interview data. Emergent thematic analysis involves reading interview transcripts to identify, analyse, and interpret patterns in participant responses. Lines of argument synthesis involves reviewing participant responses to interview questions to identify their core position on an issue (e.g., resourcing, representation), and how these positions interact in an overall line of argument about a topic or phenomena—in this case, the NWA model.

The project was conducted in partnership between OfW and GIWL and as such is not an independent evaluation. The project may be best characterised as a review rather than a full evaluation, as no outcome data were collected, and no data were collected from the target beneficiaries of the program (Australian women in general, the women’s sector, and under-represented women in particular).

This partnership model has allowed for a collaborative mode of research to occur, however, it may have inadvertently introduced power imbalances into the research methodology. The presence of the OfW representatives (as funders of the NWA) likely influenced the nature and completeness of data captured in interviews. These limitations and data integrity issues should be considered when interpreting the findings of this evaluation.

The benefits and risks of the methods of data collection, especially the interviews, were carefully considered by OfW and GIWL. OfW was very aware of the potential power imbalance, which shaped the interview design. The insights gained from the opportunity for OfW to listen first-hand to participant perspectives will directly lead to improvements in management practice and relationship building between OFW and Alliances.

The authors offer their thanks to all those who participated in the interviews for sharing their expertise, time, and, especially, their commitment to improving the NWA model. That generosity and dedication to amplifying women’s voices added enormous value to this report.