The following section suggests practical ways in which national institutions can measure their impact. i) Evaluating complaint handling NHRIs commonly keep detailed records of complaints they receive. Though it is often suspected that complaint handling is measured merely because it is easily measurable, useful statistics can be gathered: ▪ Total numbers of complaints – Compared year by year this may indicate the public profile of the national institution or show deterioration or improvement in the human rights situation. ▪ Breakdown of complaints by type – This may reveal the more widespread human rights violations – or just the issues which the public feels can be resolved through NHRIs. Measures must be taken to guarantee that cases are properly identified and categorised in accordance with international norms (rather than idiosyncratically). ▪ Breakdown of complaints by body complained against – This may reveal which institutions have the worst record, or merely where complainants were most hopeful of achieving a result. ▪ Breakdown of complaints by complainant – Complainants can be categorised by gender, social or ethnic origin, language, place of residence and so on. Complaint patterns can reveal which categories are most vulnerable to human rights abuses, or those whom the NHRI is reaching successfully. ▪ Tracking of complaints by location – This may indicate whether a particular problem is localised or has a national dimension. ▪ Tracking of complaints by outcome – Many national institutions report ­resolution rates and duration of cases. This information can help them to evaluate their performance. Nevertheless, such figures should be ­handled with care. A speedy resolution is not necessarily a satisfactory one; a ­difficult case, involving risks for the complainant, may be closed for ­alleged “lack of interest of the complainant”. Satisfaction of the ­complainant and compliance with the NHRI’s recommendations are more important ­measures, though less frequently gathered. Raw statistics are only the starting point for evaluating impact. Institutions should supplement them with qualitative analysis. Opinion surveys need to ­ascertain whether the process for handling complaints was efficient, rigorous and sensitive to the complainant’s needs. Such surveys should also seek to assess whether those against whom allegations have been made were given a fair opportunity to respond and to remedy the situation at stake. ii) Evaluating training programmes NHRIs often present statistics about their training programmes (numbers of courses held, people trained etc.) because these too are measurable. Some break down trainees by gender, ethnic origin and so on. While this information Assessing the Effectiveness of National Human Rights Institutions 35