Conducting a National Inquiry into Systemic Patterns of Human Rights Violation 16.3. WHO MONITORS AND EVALUATES? Monitoring and evaluation can be undertaken internally or externally. Different types of reviewers could be appropriate at different times. Monitoring progress during the course of the inquiry is usually undertaken internally. It is a series of discrete tasks and it needs to be done quickly, easily and regularly. The NHRI will need to have staff who have or can be trained in the appropriate skills. However, the evaluation a year after the report is released would be appropriate for an external evaluator. It is the major evaluation of the whole project. It lends itself to being undertaken by an external evaluation specialist who has the necessary expertise and distance and can look with “fresh eyes” at the process. External evaluation can be more reliable because it is more independent and, for that reason, a positive external evaluation can enhance the stature of the NHRI. 16.4. HOW TO MONITOR AND EVALUATE? Monitoring and evaluation need not be long, complex or expensive. Certainly, a major external evaluation, such as that of the full inquiry a year after it has reported, will be a significant undertaking. However, the process of continuing evaluation can be simple, straightforward and quick. Monitoring and evaluation can take many forms and it is good practice to determine what they may be according to the topic, context and nature of the inquiry. An effective monitoring process can be framed around key questions such as • How are we doing so far against the inquiry’s objectives? • What feedback do we have available? • Are we getting the information we need? • Are we hearing all appropriate stakeholders’ views? Are there others we are missing? • What is working well? • What are the gaps? • What do we need to do better? An effective evaluation can be framed around key questions such as • What did we do well? • What could we have done better? • What do the stakeholders think of the inquiry’s process and results? • What lessons have we learned for future inquiries? • What results have we achieved? It is critical to monitor and evaluate against the inquiry’s objectives. Looking at the objectives of a national inquiry, this approach would ask a key question about each one. Investigation • Monitoring: Is the inquiry getting all the facts needed? • Evaluation: Did the inquiry get all the facts needed? Analysis • Monitoring: Is the inquiry obtaining a good understanding of the situation? • Evaluation: Did it obtain and present a good understanding of the situation? Information • Evaluation: Did it present facts and analysis clearly and convincingly? Education • Monitoring: Is the process of the inquiry increasing public knowledge of this issue and/or human rights generally? • Evaluation: Did it increase public knowledge of this issue and/or human rights generally? 78