12. Evaluation and successor plans 12.1 Evaluation issues This Handbook has recommended that a specific time frame should be set for the plan as a whole. Although it will vary according to the situation and institutions of the country concerned, we have suggested that a period of five years may be appropriate. Whatever the period, it is desirable to conduct a more substantial and independent evaluation of the plan as a whole. The purpose of this evaluation is to determine the degree of success of the plan in terms of achievements measured against objectives. It will serve to justify the expenditure of the resources allocated to the plan. Beyond this more programmatic justification, the evaluation will represent an important report to the government, the human rights community and the general public on the plan’s outcomes. It will also be useful to other countries, which stand to gain from the experience of countries that have had plans in place for some time. This applies both to countries that have already initiated national plans and to those that are contemplating doing so. An important point to decide is who should undertake the overall evaluation. The coordinating committee (or any other monitoring body designated for the purpose) will naturally wish to evaluate the programme for which it has had responsibility for a number of years. There is also a strong argument, however, for an external evaluation. As the plan will have been largely developed and managed by the coordinating committee, it may be difficult for the committee to maintain a rigorous and credible independent approach. Thus, while care should be taken not to undermine the committee’s work, it may be worthwhile commissioning an external evaluation, since it would be likely to add substantially to the credibility of both the plan itself and the broader action plan process. If an external evaluation is undertaken, it is probably desirable to have a small committee chaired by a senior independent expert but including, say, two other members, one representing government agencies and the other non-governmental organizations. For the overall assessment, the same basic approach should be adopted as for other evaluations, namely assessing achievements against stated objectives and targets. At this level, however, it is also desirable to address the broader mission and goals of the plan. An important aspect of the overall review will be any recommendations made for further work on human rights protection and promotion, particularly a successor national action plan. As with the annual and semi-annual reviews, every effort should be made to keep the process succinct. At the same time, the overall review should be treated as a significant aspect of the plan. The final review should be issued as a public document for the government, interested agencies and organizations, and the general public. With regard to timing, the final overall evaluation should be set in motion well before the formal end of the plan period. Thus, if the plan is due to expire at the end of a calendar year, it will probably be found useful to commence the review by the middle 98