V. >> F ramework in Practice - Implementing and Monitoring Rights >> Using indicators for human rights or stakeholders, impact indicators are positive or negative long-term effects on identifiable population groups produced by a development intervention, directly or indirectly, intended or unintended. These effects can be economic, sociocultural, institutional, environmental, technological or of other types. Outcomes represent changes in development conditions which occur between the completion of outputs and the achievement of impact.10 So for a development programme on education, one could identify indicators such as expenditure on primary education as part of the said programme (input); number of primary schoolteachers trained by the programme (output); proportion of pupils starting grade 1 who reach grade 5 (outcome); and literacy rates (impact) to assess the performance of the programme in meeting its stated objectives. These indicators could be compared with the indicators identified for the right to education (chap. IV, table 6). The input indicator can be related to process indicators such as the “annual public expenditure per primary pupil as a percentage of GDP per capita”, a common socioeconomic statistic compiled by UNESCO, which is useful in assessing the (budgetary) efforts undertaken by a State to fulfil its obligations for implementing the right to primary education. The output indicator is similar to the process indicator “density/proportion of primary schoolteachers fully qualified and trained”, which also helps assess efforts made to implement the right. The “proportion of pupils starting grade 1 who reach grade 5” and “literacy rates”, both MDG indicators and respectively outcome and impact performance indicator, are also identified as outcome indicators in the table on the right to education. They reflect, to some extent, certain aspects of people’s enjoy- ment of this right. So the performance indicators are consistent and sometimes identical with the indicators identified for use in human rights compliance assessments. As both indicator frameworks apply a logical chain and cause-and-effect approach, they potentially enrich each other. However, the indicator framework for human rights compliance assessments builds on the performance assessment framework in several ways. Firstly, the indicators identified for human rights assessments are explicitly anchored in human rights standards. This is, generally, not the case with performance indicators, which are essentially related to and stem from programme objectives. Secondly, the structural indicators, which primarily capture the commitment of a State (government agencies and other duty bearers) to implement international human rights standards are an important part of the human rights compliance assessment framework, but are often left outside the framework for performance indicators. This is the case with a structural indicator like the “time frame and coverage of a plan of action adopted by the State to implement the principle of compulsory primary education free of charge for all” (chap. IV, table 6 ), which, though potentially useful for development programmes on education, may not even be considered in a performance assessment framework.11 The use of this indicator in human rights compliance assessments will inform and reinforce the commitment of a State to fulfilling its human rights obligations and help in identifying benchmarks and holding the State accountable for implementing the right to universal primary education. Finally, by defining the process indicators in terms of the duty bearer’s efforts under way to promote or protect a right, the human rights compliance assessment framework incorporates the three distinct categories of input, output and out- 10. More generally, results include the output, outcome or impact (intended or unintended, positive and/or negative) of a development intervention, which may flow over or beyond the lifespan of an intervention (see Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results Based Management). 11. Article 14 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights emphasizes the need for State parties to adopt a “plan of action for the progressive implementation, within a reasonable number of years, to be fixed in the plan, of the principle of compulsory education free of charge for all”. Human Rights Indicators 111