An external evaluation of the community engagement process was undertaken by Clear Horizon Consulting, experts in evaluation.

They assessed how well the engagement activities adhered to the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) Core Values for Public Participation and the City of Melbourne Community Engagement Evaluation Framework which includes other aspects of good practice community engagement (such as value for money).

The evaluation found that community engagement for this project was both highly effective and appropriate in terms of the IAP2 Core Values and other good-practice community engagement criteria.

All seven Core Values were either well expressed or expressed at the highest level of achievement[1] throughout the community engagement process for the 10 Year Financial Plan:

1. Participation was based on the belief that those who are affected by the decision have a right to be involved. This was demonstrated generally through the City of Melbourne’s Community Engagement Framework and specifically through the Community Engagement and Communications Plan for the 10-Year Financial Plan.

- Those affected by a decision were engaged

2. Participation included the promise that the public’s contribution will influence the decision. This was clear in the planning documentation; internal and external communications about the community engagement activities; and Council’s response to the presentation of the People’s Panel recommendations.

- Councils promise to ensure that public contribution influenced decision making was upheld

- Public contribution influenced decision making

3. Participation promoted sustainable decisions by recognising and communicating the needs and interests of all participants, including decision makers. Consideration of participant needs and interests at both the planning stage, and throughout implementation, ensured recommendations ‘acceptable to the public’ - a key factor in the sustainability of Council decisions.

- Sustainable decisions were achieved through recognition and communication of stakeholder needs and interests

- Identification of stakeholder needs and interests lead to sustainable decisions

4. Participation sought out and facilitated the involvement of those potentially affected by or interested in a decision. The two-pronged approach to community engagement aimed for (and achieved) both breadth (broad community engagement) and depth (the People’s Panel) of involvement of those potentially affected.

- Broad community engagement and deep consultation (People’s Panel) ensured those affected by a decision were involved

- The breadth and depth of engagement ensured those affected by a decision were involved

5. Participation sought input from participants in designing how they participate. Input to the design of the process was an explicit and deliberate aspect of participation. The majority of participants felt they had sufficient opportunities to drive the direction of the sessions to a ‘good’ or ‘excellent’ extent.

Participants felt able to influence the way in which they were engaged

6. Participation provided participants with the information they needed to participate in a meaningful way. There were deliberate efforts to ensure participation was designed to meet different needs. Most participants self-reported the good-to-excellent extent to which the information provided enabled their meaningful participation.

- Consideration of engagement and information needs meant participants felt their contribution was meaningful

7. Participation communicated to participants how their input affected the decision. Council has stated that when the Council’s draft 10 Year Financial Plan is released (April 2015), the People’s Panel report (of recommendations) will be included in its entirety, along with an explanation about whether or not each recommendation has been adopted.

- Participants have received feedback as to how recommendations affected the adopted 10 Year Financial Plan

Read the Evaluation Report: