may measure the institution’s output or performance, however, it says nothing about impact. Various simple steps can be taken to measure the effectiveness of training initiatives. One, already commonly used by national institutions, is an evaluation form distributed to all participants. Usually it will ask that they describe their expectations before the training, and then afterwards, whether their expectations were met. Many other questions can be raised as well, such as sections of the training that were most relevant and well taught. An important further step (undertaken infrequently) is to evaluate trainees’ ­perceptions some months or years later. Exercises can test to which extent trainees have retained and are applying the information and skills they ­acquired. Further research can show how many trainees remain in posts ­relevant to the skills they learned (job turnover being a constant problem), while interviews with supervisors and colleagues can help NHRIs to assess whether their ­ training has been communicated to others. Training prison officers The activity – Suppose a national institution wants to improve human rights awareness among prison officers, and aims to ensure that ­ officers will impart what they have learned when they return to their prisons. Indicators of output – It is straightforward to gather indicators showing that the activity has been completed, by recording the numbers of workshops organised and prison officers who participated. Indicators of performance – At the start of workshops, all participants ­(including trainers) are asked to express their expectations. What do they anticipate they will have learned by the end and what difference will this make? At the end, participants complete an evaluation form, noting how far expectations were met. The forms are analysed to provide information about the quality and usefulness of the course, and the teaching. This information can also be quantified (X participants satisfied, Y unsatisfied and so on). Indicators of impact – To evaluate impact is difficult and cannot be done immediately. It is most useful to review the impact six months or a year later. Evaluators can re-contact participants and their colleagues to determine how far the training is remembered and applied. It may be desirable (but not always practical) to consider the overall performance of the institutions in which trainees work. A survey within the prison system, including inmates’ opinions, before and after the training, may determine if there has been a discernible change in the number of prisoner complaints and, if so, why. iii) Evaluating public awareness and education programmes Many of the same considerations will apply to human rights education programmes. Education programmes are also best evaluated some time after completion. 36 Assessing the Effectiveness of National Human Rights Institutions