Ideas

In our recent newsletters, we talked about Strengthening Cultural Competencies for Rural Capacity Building, Research, and Evaluation:

Rural Capacity Building
Self-Reflection in Rural Capacity Building
Strengthening Cultural Competencies in Rural Capacity Building and Evaluation

We focused on why it’s so important to understand rural cultures in a deep and respectful way. Rural communities are not all the same. They include many different people, histories, and ways of living. To truly work with rural communities, we need to be open-minded, ask questions, and be willing to reflect on our own views. This article continues that conversation by exploring what cultural competency looks like in place-based evaluation, especially when the evaluators, funders, or intermediaries aren’t from the community themselves.

It Starts with the Basics – Know the Place and People

Evaluating rural initiatives isn’t only about collecting data. It’s also about building trust, honoring local history and experience, and really understanding the place. Every rural place has its own story. And if you don’t know that story, your evaluation risks missing the mark.

You might be thinking, “Isn’t this true for all communities?” Absolutely. But just like with urban, Black, Latino, or LGBTQ communities, there are dominant narratives about rural America that subtly (or not so subtly) shape how we show up. That’s why it’s so important to treat rural cultures with the same level of care and cultural responsiveness we bring to other communities.

Reframing the Narrative

Evaluators can take an asset-based approach when working with rural communities. That means acknowledging the real challenges rural communities face—like underinvestment and infrastructure gaps—while also elevating their strengths. Rural communities have important cultural traditions, deep knowledge of the environment, and strong social connections. They also offer space for things like building infrastructure or enjoying nature away from fast-paced, digital life. Their unique characteristics can help drive social innovation (Steiner et al., 2023).

In one project we worked on, some rural leaders felt discouraged that they were facing major barriers toward their goals for housing and economic development. We helped them view these barriers as potential assets, for instance, housing was more affordable where they were, and they were not too far away from major towns. Of course, it’s also important that growth is planned carefully so that long-time residents aren’t pushed out and that local farms, small businesses, and affordable housing are protected.

Widen Your Lens

Even when they’re far from big towns or cities, rural communities aren’t completely isolated. The resources people rely on, including jobs, healthcare, and education, are often connected to nearby towns or regional systems. That means what happens in one area can affect what happens in another. When evaluating community and systems change initiatives in rural places, it’s important to understand how these places are connected to others around them. Evaluators should look at the bigger picture and consider how these connections shape the results they see.

Celebrate the Wins, Tell the Full Story

Evaluators also need to celebrate clear wins, like starting a youth program or hiring a local health worker. They should also highlight less visible, but equally important successes, such as building trust and forming new relationships across differences in power, distance, or status.

Many rural projects aim to change systems so that people can live healthier, safer lives. But in the communities we’ve worked with, systems change wasn’t always the first goal. More urgent needs came first, like giving young people a safe place to go in the summer, helping older adults access healthcare, or fixing a local playground. Meanwhile, they had to travel long distances just to attend a town council meeting or speak with an elected official to advocate for their community—something that’s no small ask in a place where people already juggle multiple jobs and roles. That’s the full story evaluators need to tell.

Defining Equity—From the Ground Up

When working in rural areas, evaluators need to ask: What does equity mean to this community and Where do they see equity happening? Then, they need to really listen. In one of our evaluations, the funder wanted to focus on racial and ethnic health differences. But rural leaders said their whole community in addition to specific subpopulations in the community, were being left out because they live in a remote area and have been overlooked by those in power. Applying grantmaking strategies and evaluation frameworks typically used in urban settings signals to rural leaders that funders, intermediaries, and evaluators may not truly be interested in understanding, supporting, or learning from them.

Rethinking How Relationships and Networks Are Assessed

Evaluators also need to think differently about how they study relationships in rural communities. In small towns, leaders and residents often play many roles, for instance someone who’s a teacher may also run the food pantry, or someone who has the dual role of school superintendent and principal (Khokhar, 2021; Van Regenmorter et al., 2025). Also, relationships are based on personal connections rather than formal roles or titles. Evaluators need to capture this complexity when mapping relationships and networks.

When we did a survey in rural Mississippi, we let people list both the organizations and the individuals they work with. We also gave them space to write in other roles or relationships they had. This takes more time, but it gives a more accurate and respectful understanding of the community.

Meet People Where They Are (Literally)

It’s also important to literally meet people where they are. This might seem obvious, but sometimes evaluators ask people to travel long distances to complete a survey or join an interview. For rural residents, that’s often not realistic. Public transportation or even a ride share may not exist, and people are already traveling far for things like groceries, work, or healthcare. I remember one case where a person had to pay for their own gas just to get to a meeting because there were no buses available. In our work, we’ve held meetings at local pizza shops or done surveys at the neighborhood market—places where people already go.

Plan for the Distance—and the Time

Evaluators also need to plan for the time and money it takes to travel between small towns. It’s not simply about getting from one place to another—it’s about spending time with people and understanding the local context. A reasonable day might include three 90-minute interviews, with time for travel, breaks, and relationship-building. Budgets should include enough funding for things like flights, rental cars, gas, and reasonable compensation. Funders need to support this because it’s not just a travel issue, but it shows respect for the community and cultural competency. People notice when evaluators make the effort to show up in person (Homer, 2016; Puma et al., 2017).

Technology Gaps Are Real

Evaluators shouldn’t assume rural people have strong internet access, either. Many communities lack reliable broadband or the right equipment for video calls or online surveys. In these cases, face-to-face meetings are often better. As we mentioned earlier, we’ve had success collecting feedback in places where people already hang out. When computer use is needed, evaluators can work with libraries to offer access, or they can design phone-friendly surveys that are easy to complete.

In Summary, it’s About Building Bridges, Shifting Narratives, and Ensuring Accurate Evaluation Findings

There is a wide diversity among rural places, each with its own unique culture and context. Cultural and linguistic competency isn’t only about doing better evaluations—it’s about being a better partner. If you’re an evaluator, funder, or intermediary who doesn’t come from a rural background or from the rural community of interest, this is an essential skillset. When done right, this work helps make sure that all people, no matter where they live, have a fair chance to thrive.

References

Homer, A. (2016, September 22). Six Tips for Conducting Meaningful Evaluation in Rural and Remote Communities, Tamarack Institute. https://www.tamarackcommunity.ca/latest/six-tips-for-conducting-meaningful-evaluation-in-rural-and-remote-communities?utm_source=chatgpt.com.

Khokhar, H. (2021). Meeting leaders where they are: Lessons from the Rural Community Leadership Program. In A. Dumont & D.P. Davis (Eds.), Investing in Rural Prosperity (pp. 409-424). St Louis, MO: Federal Reserve Bank o St. Louis.

Puma, J.E, Belansky, E.S, Garcia, R., Scarbro S., Williford D. & Marshall J.A. (2017). A community-engaged approach to collecting rural health surveillance data. Journal of Rural Health, 33(3):257-265.

Steiner, A., Calo, F. & Shucksmith, M. (2023). Rurality and social innovation processes and outcomes: A realist evaluation of rural social enterprise activities. Journal of Rural Studies, 99, 284-292.

Van Regenmorter, A., Lehmann, E., Grichko, V. & Newland, L. (2025). The complex art of wearing multiple hats: A case study of dual-role administrators in rural school districts. The Rural Educator, 46(1), 35-48.