Aligning Our Action, Learning, and Outcomes

Few evaluation frameworks are grounded in the experience of racial equity practitioners working to advance systems change within a local, regional or state government context. Drawing on the real-world practice and experience of racial equity and data lead staff from 24 jurisdictions across the GARE network, the Racial Equity Evaluation Framework is designed to support local, regional, and state jurisdictions in advancing racial equity that:

  • Integrates a phased, ongoing evaluation approach based on where jurisdictions are in their racial equity journeys.
  • Centers a long-term vision of achieving racial equity outcomes  
  • Recognizes the dual role of local, regional, and state government as both one institution among many influencing community outcomes and uniquely responsible for protect and providing for community members through its policies, funding, and operations.
  • Emphasizes that equitable evaluation is multi-layered. Individual evaluators and data practitioners ground their mindset and methods in racial equity as a foundation for systemic transformation. 

The framework is designed to strengthen jurisdictions’ ability to:

  • Provide a shared language to evaluate their racial equity progress.
  • Evaluate structural, cultural, and relational shifts and outcomes.
  • Build the internal conditions necessary to sustain racial equity work.    
  • Avoid evaluation methods that take from communities without giving back
  • Center racial equity both as a process and an outcome.

Download the Full Framework

Jurisdiction Theory of Change

Advancing racial equity via all three of these levers creates the conditions for community members to thrive more equitably. 

The Jurisdiction Theory of Change identifies three interdependent levers that jurisdictions can engage to advance racial equity: Capacity, Influence, and Authority. Together, these levers describe how governments can strengthen their internal systems, external relationships, and formal authority to create the conditions so that all families and communities live long, healthy, joyful lives, no matter their race, class, or zip code.

Every government, regardless of size or geographic context, continuously and systematically exerts all three levers. 

Governments demonstrate capacity through programs and services they deliver, such as economic development, health and human services, public safety, and community infrastructure. 
They exercise influence through partnerships with other systems that affect residents' lives, including the healthcare sector, business community, and nonprofit organizations. 
They manifest authority through formal powers: the ability to enact and enforce laws, regulations, policies, and zoning ordinances, and to direct public resources through procurement and contracting.

These levers overlap and reinforce one another.

    • Capacity enables Influence and Authority. Staff skill, leadership alignment, and equity tools create conditions for structural change.
    • Authority is government’s strongest lever. Only government can pass laws, set regulations, or direct public dollars.
    • Influence expands reach. Cross-sector partnerships magnify jurisdictional impact.

Download the Theory of Change

Outcomes

This framework recognizes that evaluating racial equity work requires looking at both what a jurisdiction does and how it does it. Jurisdictions can measure three types of outcomes: process, institutional-change, and community-level outcomes.

Process & Culture Outcomes

Short-term (1-3 years)

Changes in:

  • behaviors
  • practices
  • workflows
  • skills
  • relationships
  • decision-making approaches

What it looks like...

  • Teams adopt equity tools (Capacity)
  • New workflows integrate racial equity (Capacity)
  • Early engagement of community and partners  (Influence)
  • New cross-sector collaborations  (Influence)
  • Leaders integrate equity questions into budget, policy, and program decisions (Authority)
  • Pilot use of racial equity impact assessments in decision making (Authority)

Institutional Change Outcomes

Medium-term (4-9 years)

Changes in:

  • policies
  • how-to manuals
  • budgets
  • governance structures
  • accountability systems

What it looks like...

  • Equity goals embedded in performance management systems (Capacity)
  • Updated policy manuals with a racial equity lens (Capacity)
  • Formalized community engagement structures  (Influence)
  • Sustained partnerships with community-based organizations (Influence)
  • Policy reforms and budget reallocations (Authority)
  • Racially equitable procurement policies (Authority)

Community-Level Outcomes

Long-term (10+ years)

Changes in community members’ well-being:

  • Lived conditions
  • Health
  • Wealth
  • Overall well-being

What it looks like...

  • Increased service utilization in historically underserved communities (Capacity)
  • Improved service quality in programs leading to better social, health, and economic conditions (Capacity)
  • Underserved communities’ priorities shape decisions across sectors. (Influence)
  • Partnerships drive tangible changes in housing stability, health access, and economic opportunity  (Influence)
  • Improved social, economic, and health outcomes for communities most impacted by systemic racism (Authority)
  • Reduced disparities and expanded access to opportunity through equitable policy, budget, and enforcement decisions (Authority)

This is a block quote about the JELE Framework.

Evaluation Guide

This framework offers a comprehensive set of evaluation questions organized around the conditions that shape a jurisdiction's ability to sustainably advance racial equity. 

These themes reflect how government culture, leadership, workforce systems, community relationships, and budget decisions shape power, resource allocation, and long-term outcomes -  areas where jurisdictions have meaningful responsibility and leverage to drive sustained community impact. 

Evaluation Questions by Theme

Racial equity work is complex, evolving, and requires jurisdictions to continually reflect, adapt, and improve. Because government systems were not originally designed with racial equity in mind, jurisdictions must regularly examine policies and practices that may produce inequitable outcomes, learn from community experiences and data, and adjust course when needed. A strong learning culture helps shift equity work from compliance-driven action to an ongoing commitment to producing equitable outcomes.

CAPACITY
  • How does the jurisdiction’s culture support learning, experimentation, and honest reflection about racial equity? How have staff skills, confidence, or understanding of racial equity evolved over time, and what contributed to those changes (time, coaching, training, leadership modeling, etc.)?
  • What conditions support or hinder staff in applying racial equity tools and practices in their daily work? Where do staff experience psychological safety, belonging, and trust to raise concerns about equity or racism—and where are those conditions missing?
  • How effectively do departments use data to inform learning, pivots, and decisions? How is racial equity integrated into data interpretation, use, dissemination, and action?

INFLUENCE
  • How does the jurisdiction foster collaboration across departments to share learnings and address racial inequities? How does the jurisdiction work with external partners to drive impact?
  • What shared priorities or metrics exist across departments and partners? How effectively are they used?
  • What mechanisms ensure that lessons learned from community and their lived experiences are integrated into operations and policies? How is lived experience valued and incorporated into decision-making and jurisdictional learning? Does lived experience get valued in the jurisdiction?

AUTHORITY
  • What legislation or policies does the jurisdiction have that require transparency to the public?

Advancing racial equity across a jurisdiction requires visible and consistent leadership that shapes the political, operational, and cultural conditions needed for change. Leadership commitment moves racial equity from an optional good intention into a jurisdictional expectation, while providing the stability, legitimacy, and support needed to sustain that racial equity work.

CAPACITY
  • How do staff describe the jurisdiction’s racial equity vision, and how consistently is it understood across departments?
  • What structural conditions have leaders put in place to embed racial equity into day-to-day operations?
  • What signals indicate that racial equity is becoming institutionalized rather than dependent on individual champions?
  • How consistently and meaningfully are racial equity tools used to guide decision making across departments?
  • How are funding, staffing, training, and data capacity allocated and protected to advance racial equity priorities, even amid competing demands?

INFLUENCE
  • How do community members and external partners perceive the jurisdiction’s leadership as credible, responsive, and durable in advancing racial equity?

AUTHORITY
  • What political, legal, or structural constraints shape the jurisdiction’s ability to advance racial equity, and how are leaders navigating them?

Communities most impacted by inequities hold critical lived expertise about systemic problems and effective solutions. Meaningful engagement builds trust, repairs harm, and ensures policies, budgets, and services reflect community priorities rather than government assumptions. It also shifts power by expanding who shapes decisions and whose knowledge is valued, strengthening accountability and supporting lasting structural change.

CAPACITY
  • How do staff describe the jurisdiction’s racial equity vision, and how consistently is it understood across departments?
  • What structural conditions have leaders put in place to embed racial equity into day-to-day operations?
  • What signals indicate that racial equity is becoming institutionalized rather than dependent on individual champions?
  • How consistently and meaningfully are racial equity tools used to guide decision making across departments?
  • How are funding, staffing, training, and data capacity allocated and protected to advance racial equity priorities, even amid competing demands?

INFLUENCE
  • How do community members and external partners perceive the jurisdiction’s leadership as credible, responsive, and durable in advancing racial equity?

AUTHORITY
  • What political, legal, or structural constraints shape the jurisdiction’s ability to advance racial equity, and how are leaders navigating them?

Workforce equity is essential to racial equity because government shapes access to stable, career-building jobs and influence broader labor market practices. Equitable hiring, promotion, compensation, and workplace culture expand opportunity for workers of color while strengthening government’s ability to design and deliver services that meet community needs. When staff experience belonging, safety, and fair treatment, they are better positioned to innovate, collaborate, and advance racial equity effectively. 

CAPACITY
  • How do hiring, promotion, and performance management practices reflect the jurisdiction’s racial equity values?
  • How well do staff understand the jurisdiction’s equitable workforce practices and expectations?
  • Where do employees—especially employees of color—experience belonging, safety, and fair treatment? Where are these conditions lacking?
  • What investments (training, coaching, mentorship, career pathways) support workforce development and advancement for employees of color?
  • How is disaggregated workforce data)used to diagnose disparities and guide corrective actions?

INFLUENCE
  • How do cross-department HR or DEI teams collaborate to ensure consistent and equitable workforce practices?
  • How do unions, professional associations, or employee groups influence efforts to improve workforce equity? How is feedback used to guide new learnings, pivots, and implementation?

AUTHORITY
  • What changes have been made to HR policies, civil service rules, or labor agreements to advance workforce equity?
  • How have changes in workforce policies or practices influenced employee experience, retention, or advancement for staff of color?
  • How do workforce equity learnings drive adaptations in policies, training, and leadership behavior?

Budget equity is essential to racial equity because local and state government shape community outcomes through how public resources are allocated. Equitable budgeting helps address long-standing disparities by directing investments toward historically under-resourced communities. Through funding decisions across departments, programs, and neighborhoods, government can expand opportunity, repair past harms, expanding opportunity, and strengthen conditions for all communities to thrive. 

CAPACITY
  • How well do staff understand the jurisdiction’s budget equity goals and their role in advancing them?
  • What internal processes or tools support departments in applying an equity lens during budget development?
  • How effectively are departments using disaggregated data to identify disparities and inform budget recommendations?
  • How does the jurisdiction’s culture support transparent discussion of tradeoffs, historical inequities, and resource needs?

INFLUENCE
  • How have community priorities shaped budget decisions, investments, or reallocations? What examples show how community engagement, advocacy, or partnerships have influenced shifts in budget priorities or community conditions?
  • How do cross-sector partners collaborate with the jurisdiction to align investments toward shared racial equity goals?

AUTHORITY
  • What mechanisms hold jurisdictions and departments accountable for demonstrating equity impacts in their budget proposals?
  • In what ways have structural barriers changed, such as statutory limits, funding formulas, or revenue constraints, to advance budget equity?

Measurement Plan

The next step in the evaluation process is to create your long-term measurement plans (10+ years). This framework does not provide detailed guidance on selecting community-level indicators and performance measures as those should be tailored to your jurisdiction’s local context, priorities, and community conditions. 

One helpful paradigm for developing and selecting metrics is depicted in the table below. Of the performance types, "Better Off" measures provide the strongest indication of long-term impact and community change. A more detailed guide is available in Racial Equity Getting to Results.

Guidance for Responsive and Relational Evaluation Practice

Responsive and responsible evaluation requires the evaluator to be actively engaged and shaping the process in ways that honor context, voice, and impact. The questions they ask, how they ask them, how they analyze the results, and how they share findings all carry weight and influence. While racial equity leads may not conduct evaluations directly, they play a critical role in shaping how evaluations are designed and carried out.

The following guidance outlines key responsibilities and reflection questions for both racial equity leads and evaluators across the pre, during, and post evaluation phases.

Case Studies