Specific programming to improve diversity and inclusion amongst students and early career scientists has grown in recent years with almost every scientific society having such a program. The Society for Freshwater Science is no different and has recently undertaken a novel, year-long program known as Emerge. Emerge is intended to “broaden participation in freshwater sciences” and uses a combination of mentorship, skill workshops, and cohort-based programming to meet this goal. To add to the novelty of Emerge and its existing evaluations, we employed an autoethnography as 3 current participants of the program. We created talking and reflecting themes and questions from the propositions of the program and recorded a series of sessions discussing these themes. After 1 reflection session, we reconvened to code responses in Nvivo and add any missing points. We found that Emerge is successful in meeting most of its outcomes but may consider additional goals based on fellow suggestions. In particular, a participant-derived subgroup to lead discussions, reflections and even skill-building tutorials would be an important step in deepening the community bond and providing the often missing participant voice in program planning. We also identified that while all participants agree and have similar experiences with regards to Emerge and their development as Freshwater Scientists, the differences in their identities including career stage, may be key areas where their experiences differed. Overall, reflecting upon participant experiences is important to evaluating the success of programs geared towards the recruitment and retention of systemically excluded people in the sciences. Such reflections are even more powerful when coming from the participants themselves.