Endnotes 1 APF (2019) Guide to Strategic Planning for National Human Rights institutions in the Pacific www.asiapacificforum.net/media/resource_file/APF_Guide_to_Strategic_Planning.pdf 2 Ibid, Section 4.2. 3 Ibid, Section 4.1. 4 Note that a stocktake can also be called other names such as an environmental scan, a MEAL audit. 5 This section has been informed by How do I use data? A guide for National Human Rights Institutions. Regional Rights Resource Team, Pacific Community (2020). 6 Humanitarian Practice Network (2020). Monitoring and Evaluation, Accountability and Participation 7 Some NHRIs may already have a M&E Framework, rather than a MEAL Framework, that they can build on. 8 Refer to the Australian Human Rights Commission’s case studies. Note the use of the term ‘process outcomes’ (in this Guide we use ‘activities’) and the progression from ‘intermediate outcomes’ to ‘ultimate outcomes’. 9 Refer to the case study from the National Human Rights Commission of India, where the Commission has identified the issue and the long and short-term outcomes, inputs, outputs and activities. 10 INTRAC Quantitative and qualitative methods www.intrac.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Quantitative-and-qualitative-methods.pdf 11 Adapted from INTRAC Quantitative and qualitative methods www.intrac.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Quantitative-and-qualitative-methods.pdf 12 Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. Human Rights Indicators (2012) www.ohchr.org/documents/publications/human_rights_indicators_en.pdf 13 Noting that monitoring and evaluating domestic violence (as with other sensitive issues) is complex. Surveys that are several years apart, for example, may be different from each other. Violence is also perpetuated by the silences created by perpetrators and others. Reducing this silence may mean the reports of violence will increase, which in itself is a good thing. One way of addressing this is by having affected communities/groups identify indicators. Another is by having more than one baseline and triangulating the data collected. 14 Refer to the Australian Human Rights Commission’s case studies Note the identification of influencing factors, assumptions and mechanisms. 15 This table has been informed by How do I use data? A guide for National Human Rights Institutions. Regional Rights Resource Team, Pacific Community (2020). More detail is available in that resource. 16 INTRAC Outcomes Harvesting www.intrac.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Outcome-harvesting.pdf 17 Your local university or library may have guidelines for storing data that are appropriate for your context. 18 How do I use data? A guide for National Human Rights Institutions. Regional Rights Resource Team, Pacific Community (2020) 19 UN Records and information management guidance https://archives.un.org/sites/archives.un.org/files/7-guidance_secure_records.pdf 20 www.nakivo.com/blog/3-2-1-backup-rule-efficient-data-protection-strategy/ 21 This section has been taken from How do I use data? A guide for National Human Rights Institutions. Regional Rights Resource Team, Pacific Community (2020) 22 Refer to the Australian Human Rights Commission’s case studies. Note that the Commission indicates in these frameworks when they would use monitoring approaches* and when they would use evaluation approaches**. 23 While the 4xA Framework is borrowed from the right to education movement, it is transferable to your MEAL Plan. 24 Intrac for civil society Learning-based M&E systems (2018) www.intrac.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Learning-based-ME.pdf 89