WT/COMTD/W/ 261/Rev.1  
 
 
26 June 2023  
(23-4248) Page: 1/37 
Institute for Training and Technical Cooperation  Original: English   
 
  
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN  2024-2025 
Revision  
1   BACKGROUND  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............  2 
2   TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  ................................ ................................ .............................  2 
2.1   TA offer and Target audience  ................................ ................................ ......................  3 
2.2   Partnerships  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............  3 
2.3   Budget  ................................ ................................ ................................ .....................  3 
3   EVALUATION  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  4 
3.1   Key Result 1  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............  4 
3.1.1   Onsite Evaluations  ................................ ................................ ..........................  5 
3.1.2   Country Assessments  ................................ ................................ ......................  6 
3.1.3   Ex-post Evaluations  ................................ ................................ ........................  6 
3.1.4   Online TA Dashboards  ................................ ................................ .....................  6 
3.1.5   TA Annual Report  ................................ ................................ ...........................  7 
3.1.6   External evaluations  ................................ ................................ .......................  7 
3.2   Key Result 2  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............  7 
3.3   Key Result 3  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............  7 
3.4   Key Result 4  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............  8 
4   WTO TA LOGFRAME 2024 -25 ................................ ................................ .......................  9 
4.1   Indicators  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................  18 
5   DATA FLOW  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  28 
6   DATA ANALYSIS AND REPORTING FLOW  ................................ ................................ ... 29 
ANNEX I: ONSITE EVALUATION OF TA ACTIVITIES  ................................ ........................  30 
ANNEX II: COUNTRY -BASED TA EFFECTS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT  .............................  33 
ANNEX III: EX -POST EVALUATIONS  ................................ ................................ ...............  36 
 
  WT/COMTD/W/ 261/Rev.1  
 
- 2 - 
 
  1  BACKGROUND  
1.1.  Trade -related Technical Assistance (TRTA) is a core function of the  World Trade Organization  
(WTO). Its main purpose is to enhance the human and institutional capacities of beneficiaries , so 
that they may fully benefit from the rules -based Multilateral Trading System (MTS), meet their 
obligations and enforce their rights as Members, and deal with emerging  trade -related challenges.  
1.2.  WTO Technical Ass istance (TA) activities are carried out in accordance with the Biennial 
Technical Assistance and Training Plan (TA Plan), prepared by the Secretariat in close consultation 
with TA beneficiaries , Members and Observers . TA activities are coordinated by the Secretariat  which 
adopts  a Result -Based Management (RBM) approach, focusing on achieving measurable results 
through improved planning, decision -making, transparency and accountability.  The design, 
management, coordination  and delivery of the TA activities a re a shared responsibility across the 
Secretariat . They regularly  involve partners and outside experts . 
1.3.  The Institute for Training and Technical Cooperation (ITTC)  is responsible for coordinating the 
Secretariat 's TA monitoring, evaluation and quality assu rance functions, and for producing each year 
an annual report on  the implementation of TA activities  and their results .  
1.4.  This Monitoring and Evaluation ( M&E) Plan incorporates  recommendations 11, 18, 22, 23 and 
26 of the TA external evaluation performed in 2016.1 As a dynamic tool, it will be adjusted  according 
to the circumstances affecting the delivery of TA during the biennium . It provides an overall structure 
for the monit oring and evaluation of TA activities, using R BM and Logical Framework approaches.  
1.5.  The purpose of the M&E Plan is to help TA funders, beneficiaries and trainers to develop a joint 
understanding of the M&E Framework for the Secretariat TA  operations.  The Plan intends to:  
a. Describe the M&E  approach and system to assess progress , results  and impact of the TA  
activities , individually and at the level of programmes and beneficiaries ; 
b. Explain the overall purpose and rationale of the M&E Framework ; 
c. State roles and responsibilities as well as the information flow s; 
d. Promote a better integration of M&E a t all the stages of the TA offer;  
e. Provide accountability to TA donors , beneficiaries and other key stakeholders;  
f. Preserve the WTO institutional memory.  
2  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  
2.1.  As stated in the background , the TA Plan presents the Secretariat's approach to the delivery of 
TRTA. The TA Plan is a policy framework that identifies pr iorities, anticipated results, mechanisms 
for implementation and sources of funding.  The TA Plan for 202 4-25 is structured around four main 
Key Results (KRs) that TA should contribute to achieve,  and which  are defined as follows:  
• KR 1. Government officials  are implementing WTO Agreements and fully realising Members' 
rights and obligations;  
• KR 2. Acceding governments /separate customs territories  are participating in accession 
negotiations;  
• KR 3. Academic institutions and other stakeholders are analysing WTO issues and reaching 
out to policy makers; and  
• KR 4. Non -governmental stakeholders are aware of and knowledgeable about WTO work and 
issues.  
 
1 Recommendation 11 was to continue monitoring and reporting on participation by gender.  
Recommendation 18 was to build working links with a wider range of academic centres.  Recommendation 22 
was to continue work to apply the Progressive Learning System.  Recommendation 23 was to monitor the TA 
offer by language.  Recommendation 26 was to strengthen result -based management of TA.  WT/COMTD/W/ 261/Rev.1  
 
- 3 - 
 
  2.2.  The TA Plan for 202 4-25 explains how the se four Key Results will be pursued over the biennium, 
taking into consideration beneficiaries'  needs and the outcome of the most recent Ministerial 
Conferences.2 The TA Plan also identifies the performance indicators and targets that will be used to 
measure the attainment of the Key Results.  
2.1  TA offer and Target audience  
2.3.  TA activities may be  delivered face -to-face, virtually  or online .3 Face-to-face and virtual 
activities take place at  national, regional and global levels covering a variety of trade topics.  Online  
courses, wh ich allow  participants to learn at their own pace, are available on the WTO e -Learning 
platform on a 24/7 basis.  This offer is complemented by  learning by doing programmes (internships  
and Young Professionals Programme).  
2.4.  The TA programme promotes inclusion by giving priority to  least-developed countries  (LDCs), 
promoting a gender balance amongst participants and a multilingual offer . TA target s primarily 
government officials.  Specific activities and programmes are also designed for non -government 
officials, such as journalists, leg islators, academics or representatives from the private sector and 
civil society.  
2.2  Partnerships4 
2.5.  The WTO co operates  with many  inter-governmental and non -governmental organizations to 
deliver TA activities.  These partnerships produce  synergies and leverage financial and human 
resources.  By bringing additional expertise and knowledge, partnerships help offering 
context -sensitive T A. They are also instrumental in promoting the benefits of WTO TA and delivering 
activities more efficiently. The WTO's network of partnerships played an important role in 2022 and 
62% of the activities were implemented with the involvement of a partner.  
2.6.  The nature of the partnership varies widely, depending on the institution.  For example, partners 
frequently share their knowledge of the local context or their expertise in specific domains to improve 
the quality and relevance of the TA provided to benefic iaries.  The WTO also regularly participates in 
events organized by partners . The WTO makes use of the services of external consultants or 
academics who contribute to  the delivery of TA activities and who undertake research.  
2.3  Budget  
2.7.  The implementation costs for the 
TA Plan have been CHF 1 5.7 million  per 
year on average between 201 3 and 
2019.5 In 2020, they shrank to 
CHF 7.8 million because of the travel 
restrictions imposed to control t he 
Covid -19 pandemic.  The Secretariat was 
able to resume face -to-face TA activities 
in the second half of 2022. As a result, 
spending on TA increased again, 
although it only reached 60% of the 
average pre -pandemic leve l.  
 
2 See WT/COMTD/W/ 273. 
3 Blended activities can combine face -to-face, virtu al, online and other elements such as self -training.  
4 Please visit WTO 's website for a comprehensive list of partners: 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/devel_e/te ccop_e/partnerships_e.htm . 
5 Please see "Financing of TRTA ": 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/devel_e/teccop_e/financing_trta_e.htm .  
WT/COMTD/W/ 261/Rev.1  
 
- 4 - 
 
  2.8.  The WTO training activities are 
funded from two main sources: the WTO 
regular budget financed  by WTO 
Members , and voluntary contributions 
from certain Members into trust funds .6 
Contributions from WTO Members have 
declined in recent years owing to the 
lasting impact of the 2008 global 
financial crisis  and the Covid -19 
pandemic . The voluntary contributions 
received during 2022 to finance TA 
reached a new historic low, amounting 
to 6.6 million CHF – the th ird consecutive 
such reduction.  Today, o ne of the key 
challenges for the WTO is to stabilise the 
funding of its TA  activities  as well as to 
ensure the timely receipt of  
contributions.  
 
3  EVALUATION  
3.1.  The evaluation of TA activities is a strategic function cont ributing to  increase quality, 
accountability and transparency to wards Members, donors, partners and other stakeholders . The 
M&E of WTO TA assess es the efficiency, effectiveness, impact and continued relevance of courses, 
workshops or seminars, and any potential for improvement .7 
3.2.  The e valuation approach involves the use of standard ised tools the implementation of which is 
then tailored to the specif icities of each activity, programme or beneficiary .8 
3.3.  An essential element in the implementation of RBM is the TA Management System (TAMS9). 
This online tool facilitates the collection of data for RBM purposes such as information on 
beneficiaries' TA need s, level of demand for TA and partnerships. The Secretariat intends to continue 
refining the operation of TAMS, to increase efficiency, transparency, and accountability, including by 
improving the recently developed dashboards  (see 3.1.4 below)  to allow Me mbers real time access 
to all TA relevant data.  
3.4.  The relative importance of each of the KRs defined in the TA Plan is  quite variable.  KR 1 has 
traditionally been the most significant, representing approximately 87% of the activities, participants 
or expense s. However, these figures changed during the COVID -19 pandemic, e.g., only 55% of the 
total expenditure was spent in 2022 on this Key Result. This was due to the late resumption of face 
to-face activities, which absorb most of the expenditure. The share of  KRs 2 and 3 has traditionally 
been approximately 5% each and KR 4, 3%. To the extent possible, the M&E Plan will take this 
distribution into account. This will be pursued over several years. This means that the large majority 
of the evaluation work will f ocus on TA activities primarily designed to achieve KR 1, reason why the 
evaluation methodology for KR 1 is significantly more sophisticated than for the other three KRs.  
3.1  Key Result 1  
3.5.  When planning an activity, the organisers should complete an Activity Request (eAR) in which 
they identify the Key Result and output which the activity undertakes to pursue. They should define 
the objectives of the activity; identify the category of each objective and the various indicators they 
will use to measure the extent to which the objective has been achieved; and define the profile of 
 
6 Please consult the list o f contributions here: 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/devel_e/teccop_e/financing_trta_e.htm#contributions .  
7 WTO uses the DAC Criteria for Evaluating Development Assistance – OECD, to structure each data 
record form for comparative analysis and for evaluation report conclusions.  
8 Please see Annexes I, II and III in this document.  
9 Please see: https://tams.wto.org/ . 
WT/COMTD/W/ 261/Rev.1  
 
- 5 - 
 
  eligible or desired participants and any prerequisite to be fulfilled by the applicants. The draft 
programme of the activity and the invitation letters should also be attached.  
3.6.  Objectives : The activity objectives state what the activity aims to achieve. Objectives must 
be Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time -bound (SMART). The Technical Assistance 
Monitoring and Evaluation Unit (TAME) is available to advise trainer s on the monitoring and 
evaluation of TA activities and to provide more details and examples.  
3.7.  Indicators : The performance indicators are used to measure the extent to which each activity 
objective has been achieved. TAME  highly recommend s having  several ty pes of indicators for each 
objective in order to increase the objectivity of the measure. Indicators may be quantitative or 
qualitative, depending of the objective. A decision to use certain indicators (e.g., quizzes) will 
influence the programme of the ac tivity. While the level of satisfaction of participants or their opinion 
is an important element that should be properly analysed, it should never be the sole indicator used 
and, in most cases, it should not even be the main one.  
3.8.  PEFs.  The Participant Eval uation Form (PEF) is the main instrument to measure participants' 
reaction to a training activity.  PEFs must be completed – online or on paper – by participants at the 
end of each activity to give their feedback on a set of predefined issues (closed questi ons) and share 
their comments and suggestions for improvement (free text).  TAME process es the PEFs and provide s 
their statistics to the organisers of the activit ies. These statistics and participants' comments should 
be analysed by the trainers in the BTOR s, in its section on the assessment by participants.  
3.9.  BTORs.  The Back -to-Office -Report (BTOR) is a standardised instrument through which the 
organisers and trainers assess various parameters of the training activity they have delivered, such 
as the extent t o which its learning objectives have been reached by participants, the contribution of 
partners, etc.  BTORs present a  self-evaluation by the trainers, whose credibility depends entirely on 
their intellectual honesty.  TAME has three objectives concerning BTORs:  
a. Maintain a high level of reporting;  
b. Accelerate the submission  of BTORs; and  
c. Improve the quality of the data gathered through BTORs.  
3.10.  The data contained in BTORs  accumulate in the TAMS database and constitute the basis on 
which many indicators identified in the TA Plan logframe will be measured at the end of each year.  
3.11.  The graph b elow shows  the 13 successive steps of the workflow through which the Secretariat 
implements TA activities , from the initial request to the approval of the BTOR . In the example, the 
steps in green  have been completed by the responsible person ; the process is currently at the step 
in yellow; and future steps still to be completed appear in grey. This example corresponds to an 
approved activity not yet implemented, a nd for which  its BTOR is not yet in preparation.  
 
3.1.1   Onsite Evaluations10 
3.12.  Onsite evaluations are a powerful tool to observe training dynamics, through participants' 
body language and  interaction with the trainers and peers; the change in knowledge and skills of 
the participants; whether the programme meets the learning objectives; whether participants' prior 
knowledge was adequate; the level of interaction between participants and tra iners; the various 
training methods used; whether the level of the activity was adequate;  etc. They allow the evaluator 
to engage in informal discussions and interviews throughout the training.  
 
10 See Annex I for a detailed methodology.  
WT/COMTD/W/ 261/Rev.1  
 
- 6 - 
 
  3.13.  They also give a higher standing to the final evaluation session in which focused questions 
can be addressed collectively by the participants.  This first -hand feedback enables the evaluator to 
measure participants' reaction to the training.  
3.14.  Periodic o nsite evaluations also contribute to lending a high er level of credibility to the 
self-evaluations performed by the trainers in their BTORs.  A recent comparison showed that the 
trainers tend to inflate the level of success of their activities in their BTORs  by 20% compared to 
TAME's evaluation.  Whilst not insignificant, this margin remains limited  and confirms that the  
self-evaluations in the BTORs can generally be relied upon to assess  whether TA activities are 
reaching their learning objectives . 
3.15.  Under normal circumstances , TAME would  carry out around six  onsite evaluations per year in 
order to diversify the subjects and regions covered, so that all the WTO subjects and regions be 
reviewed over a two to three -year cycle.  In the absence of face -to-face TA, the conduct of onsite 
evaluations will depend on th e identification of suitable virtual activities.  
3.1.2   Country  Assessments11 
3.16.  Country  assessments were initially launched in 2009 on an opportunistic basis.  Taking 
advantage of TAME's presence in a country for an onsite evaluation, meetings are organised with 
the authorities of the host country to collect evidence on the changes of behaviour observed among 
their officials who attended WTO activities over a given period of time, long enough to measure 
changes and short enough to keep track of the participants (five  years).  
3.17.  To evaluate the concrete results to which  the TA provided by the WTO may have contributed, 
country assessments are based on informal interviews with key representatives from the national 
authorities.  The anecdotal evidence gathered on these occasi ons ha s the potential to build over time 
a critical mass of facts and opinions.  
3.18.  Under normal circumstances , TAME would  perform a country assessment on the occasion of 
each of the onsite evaluations undertaken outside Geneva during the year.  In the absence of TA 
activities outside Geneva, no country assessment will be conducted.  
3.1.3   Ex-post Evaluations12 
3.19.  Ex-post evaluations ai m to identify how far former trainees have changed their behaviour 
following their participation in a specific programme , and the influence this had on the capacity and 
competence of their institution . Ex-post evaluations  cover a certain period of time lon g enough to 
measure changes and short enough to keep track of the participants (five years).  
3.20.  Through a rigorous approach to collect former participants' and other stakeholders' feedback, 
ex-post evaluations measure some concrete results produced by a speci fic training programme in 
the various countries which benefited from it over a period of time.  
3.21.  TAME aims to perform one ex -post evaluation per year, targeting in priority the most 
significant programmes in terms of participants or budget.  
3.1.4   Online TA Dashboa rds 
3.22.  The online TA dashboards , available in the TAMS portal,  present in real time the data 
accumulated by the Secretariat on the TA activities it organises and delivers.  At the moment, they 
present data on the TA activities, their topics, geographical distr ibution, languages, level, KR, reach, 
etc. and on the participation in these activities according to the same criteria.  They are progressively 
developed to provide a comprehensive view of the TA provided by the Secretariat.  TA data can be 
freely downloaded  from the dashboards for further analysis.  
 
11 See Annex II for a detailed methodology.  
12 See Annex III for a detailed methodology.  WT/COMTD/W/ 261/Rev.1  
 
- 7 - 
 
  3.1.5   TA Annual Report  
3.23.  At the level of the overall WTO TA portfolio, the TA Annual Report  communicates  the results 
of TA activities and, in conjunction with the online TA dashboards,  presents for each of the indicators 
identified in  the logframe of the TA Plan, the evidence that could be gathered.  The TA annual report 
and the online TA dashboards are the tools used by  the Secretariat  to report back to Members on 
how the TA logframe was implemented and the results this led to, based on  the data sources 
identified in the TA Plan  and on beneficiaries' feedback13. 
3.1.6   External evaluations  
3.24.  External evaluations provide the most rigorous approach to collecting evidence on the impact 
of WTO TA for beneficiaries.  However, they are too complex, time consuming and expensive to be 
conducted annually . So far, external evaluations have been conducted at the request of donors  and 
approved by Members . Their periodicity has been every ten years ; the last one t ook place in 2016.  
3.25.  In the absence of a clear signal from the donors, it has been assumed that no such external 
evaluation would take place in the foreseeable future.  
3.2  Key Result 2  
3.26.  Most of the TA activities designed to achieve KR 2 are similar to those designed to achieve 
KR 1. The only difference comes from their public, since under KR 2 the participants come from 
Observers, whereas they come from Members under KR 1.  This means that the evaluation 
instruments and methodologies used under KR 1 e qually apply under KR 2.  
3.27.  As most of the TA activities held in Observers have a national scope, TAME is unlikely to travel 
regularly to observe such activities, especially given the limited volume of TA dedicated to KR  2. 
This means that the reaction of tra inees to a TA activity and the achievement of their learning 
objectives will be primarily measured through PEFs and BTORs.  
3.28.  Since TAME's travel to an Observer country will remain rare, so will the performance of a 
country assessment in an Observer.  This mea ns that any change in Observers' participants behaviour 
and the results this led to will have to be primarily measured through ex -post evaluations and the 
TA annual report.  
3.3  Key Result 3  
3.29.  The nature of the TA provided under KR 3 is significantly different fr om the rest of the WTO 
TA portfolio.  As the public is comprised exclusively of students and academics, like any investment 
in public education the TA provided by the WTO will not produce any direct and measurable 
immediate result for Members and Observers,  even when tak ing the form of training activities.  
3.30.  KR 3 is also the only domain in which the WTO is sponsoring through the allocation of grants 
other institutions' activities, programmes or projects instead of implementing them itself.  Data on 
the results of such activities, programmes or projects will not be directly available to the WTO, as 
they will come through the filter of its academic partners and will be  difficult to verify.  Only the 
quality of the management of the grant s by the WTO staff can be assessed first -hand by TAME.  
3.31.  The nature of the activities, programmes or projects under KR 3, when they do not pertain to 
training and education ( e.g., academic research or curriculum development), is also very different 
from other  more traditional WTO TA, reason why their results  are more difficult to assess . 
3.32.  For these reasons, whilst  TAME will continue to monitor  the management of the programme s 
under KR 3, the assessment of their results will rely on self -evaluation between two e xternal 
evaluations . The last external evaluation of KR 3 results took place in 2019.  
 
13 See https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/devel_e/teccop_e/taannrep2022_e.htm . WT/COMTD/W/ 261/Rev.1  
 
- 8 - 
 
  3.4  Key Result 4  
3.33.  The TA provided under KR 4 addresses a different kind of public too (journalists, MPs, NGOs, 
private sector representatives, etc.) and its objectives are to reach out to different stakeholders and 
not to train them on anything, according to the organisers.  KR 4 has traditionally been the part of 
the TA Plan with the highest rate of data not available on the indicators identified in the TA logframe 
when evaluat ing performance in the TA annual report.  
3.34.  Against this challenging background, TAME will rely on a combination of BTORs and occasional 
onsite evaluations, and to a lesser extent on the TA annual report to assess the results achieved 
under KR  4.   
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 9 - 4  WTO TA LOGFRAME 2024 -25 
4.1.  The Logframe is the main TA planning tool within the RBM M&E Framework.  The Logframe  is a dynamic tool and will be used to record actual 
progress against the plans and can be used to re -assess and revise the activities as they develop and as circumstances change during implementation.  
 Results  Indicators  Baseline  Target  Evidence  Assumption  
Impact14 Developing and LDC 
Members are benefiting 
from their active 
participation in the WTO  • Share of developing 
Members' total trade 
(imports and exports)  • 2019-21 
average: 41.96%  • > 40%  • WTO statistics  • Global economic and 
political stability or 
improvement  
• Share of LDC Members' 
total trade (imports 
and exports)  • 2019-21 
average: 1.1%  • > 1.00%  • WTO statistics  • The number of LDCs 
remains constant over the 
biennium  
Key 
Result  1: Government officials 
are implementing WTO 
Agreements and fully 
realising Members' 
rights and obligations  • Number of documents 
submitted by 
beneficiary developing 
and LDC Members to 
WTO Bodies  • Annual average 
2019-2022:  
• Developing: 587  
• LDCs: 103  Increase  • WTO Documents Online 
database  • 1. Political support for 
WTO-related issues  
• 2. Trained staff retained in 
relevant positions  
3. Human and financial 
resources available  • Number of outstanding 
notifications by TA 
beneficiary Member  • 26 per 
beneficiary 
Member on 
average in 2017 -
19 • Decrease  • Notifications database 
(CRN)  
Output  1.1: Government officials 
have enhanced 
knowledge about the WTO 
Agreements, formulation 
of trade policies and 
conduct of trade 
negotiations  • Number of participants 
completing each PLS 
level • Annual average 
2017-19: 
• Level 1 – 3,608  
• Level 2 - 11,746  
• Level 3 - 1,833  • Stability for levels 
1 and 2  
• Increase in 
level 3 • TAMS database  • 1. WTO negotiations remain 
active  
• 2. Trained staff retained in 
relevant positions  
• 3. Members present suitable 
candidates  
4. Ava ilability of training 
facilities in Geneva  
  • Number of national 
activities requested  • 2017-19 average: 
145 • Increase  • TAMS database  • The number of TA 
beneficiaries under WTO 
administrative measures 
does not increase  
 
14 In accordance with the RBM approach, the impact is the highest -level result to which WTO cont ributes jointly with other stakeholders. It is not an exclusive 
attribution to WTO TA, but an indication of the contribution the WTO TA is making to a common impact – see section 6 for further information. The baseline from the 
2022-2023 TA Plan has not ad justed to indicators that were significantly impacted by C OVID -19.   
   
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 10 -  Results  Indicators  Baseline  Target  Evidence  Assumption  
  • Number of beneficiary 
Members and 
Observers participating 
in TA courses  • 2017-19 
average: 163  • Stability  • TAMS database  • 1. WTO negotiations remain 
active  
• 2. The number of TA 
beneficiaries under WTO 
administrative measures 
does not increase  
  • Number of LDCs  
participating in TA 
courses  • 2017-19 
average: 43  • Stability  • TAMS database  • 1. Number of LDCs remains 
constant  
• 2. The number of TA 
beneficiaries under WTO 
administrative measures 
does not increase  
• Interactive training 
methods' share of time 
in each activity 
(exercises, case 
studies, simulations, 
Q&A, participation in 
Committee meetings, 
etc.) • 2017-19 
average:  
• - 42% lectures  
• - 58% interactive 
methods  • Increase share of 
interactive 
training methods 
to an average of 
at least 60%  • TAMS database  • 1. Enough W TO staff 
undergo training on 
pedagogical skills  
• 2. Courses delivered as 
face-to-face training  
  • Success rate in RTPCs 
and ATPCs  • 2017-19 average 
(RTPC): 96%  • Stability  • BTORs  •  
  • Distinction rate in 
RTPCs and ATPCs  • 2017-19 average 
(RTPC): 37%  • Stability  • BTORs  •  
  • Percentage of 
participants rating the 
overall content and 
results in RTPCs, ATPCs 
and advanced thematic 
courses with the two 
top marks15 • 2017-19 
average:   • BTORs  • A representative number of 
complete assessment forms 
by participants are received 
at the end of such training 
activities    • - RTPCs: 98%  • Stability  
  - ATPCs: 93%  • Stability  
  • - advanced 
thematic 
courses: 96%  • Stability  
 
15 The top two marks are normally f ive out of five and four o ut of five.    
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 11 -  Results  Indicators  Baseline  Target  Evidence  Assumption  
  • Number of participants 
trained in advanced 
trade negotiating skills  • 2017-19 
average: 238  • Stability  • TAMS database  • 1. Enough demand for 
training activities  
• 2. Availability of resources  
• 3. Courses delivered as 
face-to-face training  
• 4. Availability of training 
facilities in Geneva  
  • Number of advanced 
thematic courses using 
pre-diagnostics, 
coaching, leadership, 
action plans or follow -
ups16 • 2019: 5  • Stability  • BTORs  
• TAMS database  • 1. Enough demand for 
training activities  
• 2. Availability of resources  
• 3. Courses delivered as 
face-to-face training  
• 4. Availability of training 
facilities in Geneva  
  • Number of interns 
trained by various 
Internship programmes  • 2019-22 average:  
FIMIP: 20; NTP: 
15  
Stability FIMIP  
Stability for NTP  
•  • BTORs  
• TAMS database  • 1. Availability of adequate 
funding  
• 2. Members present suitable 
candidates  
• 3. Selected interns are able 
to participate in the 
programmes  
  • Number of interns 
trained by the Regional 
Coordinators Internship 
Programme  • 2017-19 average: 
RCI: 6 • Stability  • BTORs  
• TAMS database  • 1. Availability of funding  
• 2. Members present suitable 
candidates  
  • Final evaluation of each 
intern by their 
supervisor  • 100% of at least 
fully satisfactory 
in 2020 -22 • Stability  • Evaluation by the 
supervisors  •  
  • New, revised or 
translated e -Learning 
courses released during 
the year  • 2017-19 
average: 10  • Stability  • BTOR  • 1. Appropriate e -Learning 
resources  
• 2. Absence of disturbance in 
 
16 On topics  such as Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures; Technical Barriers to Trade; Agriculture Notifications; Import Licensing; and Tr ade in Services 
Statistics. WTO Technical Assistance Annual Report 20 19, WT/COMTD/W/256 , para. 5.75.    
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 12 -  Results  Indicators  Baseline  Target  Evidence  Assumption  
• Percentage of e -
Learning courses in 
interactive formats  • 2022: 77%  • Increase   • BTOR  e-Learning platform  
• 3. Continued availability of 
current platform for e -
Learning programme  
  • Percentage of 
participants rating the 
quality of the e -
Learning courses 
content with the two 
top marks  • 2020-22 
average: 96%  • Stability  • BTOR  Absence of disturbance in 
e-Learning platform  
  • Percentage of 
participants rating the 
e-Learning platform 
with the two top marks  • 2020-22 
average: 94%  • Stability  • BTOR  • Absence of disturbance in 
e-Learning platform  
  • e-Learning success rate 
of participants 
attending the courses  • 2019-2022 
average: 61.5%  • Stability  • BTOR  • Absence of disturbance in 
e-Learning platform  
  • e-Learning drop -out 
rate • 2017-19 
average: 24%  • Stability  
  • e-Learning distinction 
rate • 2020-22 
average: 54%  • Stability  
Output  1.2: Effective 
partnerships established  • Proportion of activities 
with the involvement of 
a partner  • 2020-22 
average: 57%  • Stability  • TAMS database  • Potential partners are 
interested and have the 
required resources and 
knowledge in areas where 
WTO may not have the 
necessary knowledge or 
skills • Proportion of partners' 
contribution to the TA 
activities  • 2017-22 
average: 47% 
low contributions  • Decrease the 
proportion of low 
contributions  
Output  1.3: Members' TA needs 
and priorities identified 
periodically  
 • Number of responses 
to TA questionnaire  • 2019-2022 
average: 82  • Stability  • Secretariat questionnaires  • Members can identify and 
prioritize their needs  
• Number of TPR Follow -
ups • 2017-19 
average: 8  • Stability  • BTORs  • Stability in the number of 
TPRs and constant demand 
for TPR follow -ups 
Output  1.4: WTO data and 
databases accessed by 
Members  • Visits by Members' 
logging into the WTO 
website  • 2020-2022 
average:  87 ,866 • Increase  • WTO Webmaster  • Members' willingness to 
use available WTO data 
sources    
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 13 -  Results  Indicators  Baseline  Target  Evidence  Assumption  
• Number of TA activities 
that include training on 
WTO databases as one 
of their objectives  • 2017-19 
average: 60  • Increase  • TAMS database  
• BTORs  • Enough demand for training 
on WTO databases  
Key 
Result  2: Acceding 
governments/separate 
customs territories are 
participating in 
accession negotiations  • Number of formal or 
informal Working Party 
meetings held for 
acceding beneficiary 
governments/territories  • 2017-19 
average: 6  • Stability  • DG Annual Report on 
Accessions  • Acces sions are active  
• Governments/separate 
customs territories submit 
required input to their 
Working Parties  
Output  2.1: Acceding 
governments/separate 
customs territories 
participants' knowledge 
on WTO substantive and 
procedural matters 
enhanced  • Number of participants 
from observer 
governments/separate 
customs territories 
attending TA activities 
focused on accessions  • 2017-19 
average: 1,179  • Stability  • BTORs  
• TAMS Database  
• DG Annual Report on 
Accessions  • 1. Accessions are active  
• 2. The number of TA 
beneficiaries  under WTO 
administrative measures 
does not increase  
• 3. Trained staff are retained 
in relevant positions  
Output  2.2: Accessions 
Internship programme 
participants' knowledge 
enhanced  • Final evaluation rate of 
each intern by 
supervisor  • 2017-19 
average: 100% 
at least fully 
satisfactory  • Stability  • Evaluation by the 
supervisors  • Availability of funding  
• Members present suitable 
candidates  
Output  2.3: Interested Members' 
expertise on GPA rules 
and accession 
negotiations enhanced  • Average no. of relevant 
accession -related 
documents circulated 
per TA -eligible GPA 
acceding Member17 • 2017-19 
average: 5.2  • Stability  • Documents online  • GPA accession negotiations 
remain active  
•  
• Average no. of 
interventions made by 
TA-eligible GPA -
acceding Parties during 
meetings of the CGP  • 2018-20 
average: 2.9  • Stability  • Documents online  
• Average no. of bilateral 
meetings of TA -eligible 
GPA-acceding Parties 
with the Chair of the 
CGP • 2018-20 
average: 1.29  • Stability  • Internal database  
 
17 Eligible documents for purposes of the indicator includ e(a) GPA/ACC/ * series documents; (b) rel evant documents in the GPA/*; WT/Let/ *; GPA/W/ *; GPA/CD/ * 
(from 2018); RD/GPA/ * series: and (c) any other relevant documents.    
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 14 -  Results  Indicators  Baseline  Target  Evidence  Assumption  
 3: Academic 
institutions and other 
stakeholders are 
analysing WTO issues 
and reaching out to 
policy makers  • Diversity of 
WTO-related topics 
covered by activities  • 2018-19 average  • Stability  Intermediate and annual 
reporting by the Chairs  
• BTORs  • Academic institutions and 
other stakeholders remain 
interested in WTO issues  
Output  3.1: Research on trade 
policy and WTO - related 
matters generated by the 
WCP • Number of publications  • Phase III Chair 
average 
2020-22: 171  
 
• Rolling 
Programme New 
Chair:  
• To be collected  
•  • Phase III Chairs: 
Increase  
 
 
New Chairs:  
• To be determined  
•  • Publications,  
• Annual Reports from the 
Chairs  
• Evaluations/Assessments 
Report by the Advisory 
Board  Compliance with 
programme guidelines  
•  
• Assessment of the 
quality of the key 
research output per 
Chair per year by the 
Advisory Board  • Phase III Chairs:  
• Individual 
baselines 
established 
based on past 
outputs  
 
 
• Rolling 
Programme New 
Chair:  
• To be collected  
•  • Positive 
evaluation  • Advisory Board Reports    
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 15 -  Results  Indicators  Baseline  Target  Evidence  Assumption  
Output  3.2: Courses with WTO 
content developed by 
WCP Chairs  • Number of students 
completing WTO -
related courses  Phase III Chairs: 
average  
2020-22: 
2,490 
•  
• Rolling 
Programme New 
Chair:  
• To be collected  
 • Phase III Chairs: 
Increase  
•  
•  
•  
• New Chairs:  
• To be determined  • Intermediate and annual 
reporting  
• Advisory Board and other 
Evaluations /Assessments  • Interest in multilateral 
trade.  
• Compliance with 
programme guidelines  
• Number of new or 
updated WTO -related 
courses  • Phase III Chairs:  
average 
2020-22:  28  
•  
• Rolling 
Programme New 
Chair:  
• To be collected  
•  • Phase III Chairs: 
Increase  
•  
•  
• New Chairs:  
• To be determined  • Intermediate and annual 
reporting  
• Advisory Board and other 
Evaluations/Assessments  
• WCP Platform and other 
online research network 
activities (inc. social 
media)  
Output  3.3: WTO Chairs' research 
disseminated to policy 
makers and other 
stakeholders  • Number of outreach 
events per year  • Phase III Chairs:  
• average 
2020-22: 
• 86  
•  
• Rolling 
Programme New 
Chair:  
• To be collected  • Phase III Chairs: 
Increase  
•  
•  
• New Chairs:  
• To be determined  • Intermediate and annual 
reporting  
• Advisory Board and other 
Evaluations/Assessments  
• WCP Platform and other 
online research network 
activities (inc. social 
media) • Compliance with 
programme guidelines    
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 16 -  Results  Indicators  Baseline  Target  Evidence  Assumption  
• Advice provided to 
governmental policy 
makers and other 
stakeholders  • Phase III Chairs:  
• Average 
2020-22: 
• 109 
•  
• Rolling 
Programme New 
Chair:  
• To be collected  
•  • Phase III Chairs: 
Increase  
•  
•  
•  
New Chairs:  
• To be determined  • Intermediate and annual 
reporting  
• Advisory Board and other 
Evaluations/Assessments  
• WCP Platform and other 
online research network 
activities (inc. social 
media)  
Output  3.4: Students trained on 
WTO work and issues  • Number of students 
participating in 
competitions supported 
by the WTO  • 2022: 344  • Stability  • BTORs  • External partner remains 
engaged  
• Number of PhD 
students supervised 
graduating with a PhD  • Students 
supervised 
graduate with a 
PhD each year: 5  • Stability  • BTORs  • PhD students remain 
interested in WTO issues  
Key 
Result  4: Non -governmental 
stakeholders and 
legislators are aware 
of and knowledgeable 
about WTO work and 
issues  • Diversity of WTO 
related topics covered 
by statements, reports, 
and papers produced 
by this group of 
stakeholders  • In 2017: 26 
WTO-related 
topics covered  • Stability  • Media reports when 
available,  
• Statements made by 
legislators, business 
associations, NGOs when 
available  • 1. Stakeholders remain 
interested in WTO issues  
• 2. Collaborating partners 
remain  interested in trade 
issues  
Output  4.1: Understanding of 
WTO work and issues by 
non-governmental 
stakeholders and 
legislators improved  • Number of seminars, 
workshops conducted  • 2017-19 
average:  
7 activities  • Stability  • TAMS database  • Legislators, journalists and 
civil society remain 
interested in WTO issues  
• Number of key non -
governmental 
stakeholders and 
legislators reached 
during the year  • 2017-19 
average:  
• 355 legislators  
• 73 journalists  
• 28 civil societies  • Stability  • BTORs  •    
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 17 -  Results  Indicators  Baseline  Target  Evidence  Assumption  
Output  4.2: Improved access to 
WTO issues through e -
Learning training material 
for self -study  • Number of training 
material consulted  • 2020-22 
average: 3,718  • Increase  • Online form  • 1. Public interest in WTO 
issues  
• 2. Appropriate e -Learning 
resources  
• 3. Absence of external 
disturbance in the e -
Learning platform  
• 4. Continued availability of 
current platform for e -
Learning programme  
Output  4.3: Information on WTO 
trade -related TA accessed  • Number of views of the 
web pages on technical 
assistance including 
news items on this 
subject  • 2020-2022 
average: 
327,668  • Stability  • WTO webmaster  • Public interest in WTO 
issues  
Output  4.4: Young professionals 
are exposed to WTO work 
and issues  • Number of Young 
Professionals selected 
annually by the WTO  • 2020-22 
average: 13  • Increase  • TAMS database  • Selected YPs are able to 
participate in the 
programme  
• Final evaluation rate of 
each Young 
Professional's 
performance by their 
supervisor  • 100% at least 
fully satisfactory 
in 2020 -22 • Stability  • Evaluation by the 
supervisors    
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 18 - 4.1  Indicators  
Indicator  Purpose of indicator  Baseline  Target  Data collection  Expected timeline  Responsible  
• Share of developing 
Members' total trade 
(imports and exports)  • To assess whether 
beneficiaries are 
improving their capacity 
and use of trade 
policymaking, legislative 
compliance, trade 
negotiations and 
implementation of 
international trade 
agreements.  • 2019-21 
average: 
41.96%  • > 40%  • WTO Statistics  By December of each 
year  • WTO Economic 
Research and 
Statistics Division 
(focal point)  
• TAME Chief and 
Evaluation Specialists  
• Share of LDC  Members' 
total trade (imports and 
exports)  • To assess whether 
beneficiaries are improving 
their capacity and use of 
trade policy -making, 
legislative compliance, 
trade negotiations and 
implementation of 
international trade 
agreements.  • 2019-21 
average: 1.1%  • > 1.00%  • WTO Statistics  By December of each 
year  • WTO Economic 
Research and 
Statistics Division  
• TAME Chief and 
Evaluation Specialists  
• Number of documents 
submitted by 
beneficiary developing 
and LDC Members to 
WTO Bodies  • To assess whether 
beneficiaries are 
improving their capacity 
and use of legislative 
compliance, notifications 
and implementation of 
international trade 
agreements.  • Annual average 
2019-2022:  
• Developing: 
587 
LDCs: 103  • Increase  • WTO Documents online 
database  By December of each 
year • Language and 
Documentation 
Services Division  
• TAME Chief and 
Evaluation Specialists  
• Number of outstanding 
notifications by TA 
beneficiary Member  • To assess whether 
beneficiaries are 
complying with their 
transparency obligation 
requiring to report trade 
measures to the relevant 
WTO body  • 26 per 
beneficiary 
Member on 
average in 
2017-19 • Decrease  • Notifications database 
(CRN)  By December of each 
year • Language and 
Documentation 
Services Division  
• TAME Chief and 
Evaluation Specialists    
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 19 - Indicator  Purpose of indicator  Baseline  Target  Data collection  Expected timeline  Responsible  
• Number of participants 
completing each PLS 
level • To evaluate the level of 
overall participation in TA 
activities and the 
progression of participants 
between levels  • Annual average 
2017-19: 
• Level 1 – 3,608  
• Level 2 - 11,746  
Level 3 - 1,833  • Stability for 
levels 1 and 
2 
• Increase in 
level 3 • TAMS Database  By December of each 
year (the information 
is analysed in the 
Annual Report which 
reflects the previous 
year)  • TAME Chief and 
Database Specialists  
• Number of national 
activities requested  • To assess the needs of 
beneficiary countries on 
specific topic(s)  2017-19 
average: 145  • Increase  • TAMS database  By the end of the 
year • TAME Chief and 
Database Specialists  
• Number of beneficiary 
Members and Observers 
participating in TA 
courses  • To measure the overall 
participation of Members 
and Observers  2017-19 
average: 163  • Stability  • TAMS database  By the end of the year  • TAME Chief and 
Database Specialists  
• Number of beneficiary 
LDCs participating in TA 
courses  • To measure the overall 
participations of LDCs 
Members  • 2017-19 
average: 43  • Stability  • TAMS database  By the end of the 
year • TAME Chief and 
Database Specialists  
• Interactive training 
methods' share of time 
in each activity 
(exercises, case studies, 
simulations, Q&A, 
participation in 
Committee meetings, 
etc.) • To assess the level of 
interaction in each 
activity by type of 
learning method. 
Interactivity is a key 
component of adult 
learning.  • 2017-19 
average:  
• - 42% lectures  
- 58% 
interactive 
methods  • Increase 
share of 
interactive 
training 
methods to 
an average 
of at least 
60% • TAMS database  
• ITTC trainer(s)  By the end of the year  • TAME Chief and 
Database Specialists  
• ITTC Trainer(s) and 
organizers  
• M&E Specialists  
• Success rate in RTPCs 
and ATPCs  • To evaluate the extent of 
transferring an 
appropriate level of 
knowledge and skills on 
WTO matters to 
participants in two 
relevant products: RTPC 
and ATPC  • 2017-19 
average 
(RTPC): 96%  • Stability  • BTORs  Within one month after 
the delivery of the 
activity  • ITTC Organisers and 
trainers    
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 20 - Indicator  Purpose of indicator  Baseline  Target  Data collection  Expected timeline  Responsible  
• Distinction rate in 
RTPCs and ATPCs  • To evaluate the extent of 
transferring an 
appropriate level of 
knowledge and skills on 
WTO matters to 
participants in two 
relevant products: RTPC 
and ATPC  • 2017-19 
average 
(RTPC): 37%  • Stability  • BTORs  Within one month after 
the delivery of the 
activity  • ITTC Organisers and 
trainers  
• Percentage of 
participants rating the 
overall content and 
results in RTPCs, ATPCs  
and advanced thematic 
courses with the two 
top marks  • To evaluate the reaction 
of participants to the 
knowledge and skills 
transferred  2017-19 
average:  •  • BTORs  Within one month after 
the delivery of the 
activity  • ITTC Organisers and 
trainers  
• - RTPCs: 98%  • Stability  
• - ATPCs: 93%  • Stability  
• - advanced 
thematic 
courses: 96%  • Stability  
• Number of participants 
trained in advanced 
trade negotiating skills  • To evaluate the extent to 
which appropriate 
knowledge and skills in a 
key WTO had been 
transferred  • 2017-19 
average: 238  • Stability  • TAMS database  By the end of the year  • TAME Chief and 
Database Specialists  
• Number of advanced 
thematic courses using 
pre-diagnostics, 
coaching, leadership, 
action plans or follow -
ups • To evaluate the extent to 
which innovative training 
methods have been used. 
Such innovative training 
methods boost the results 
for beneficiaries.  • 2019: 5  • Stability  • BTORs  
• TAMS database  By the end of the year  • TAME Chief and 
Database Specialists  
• Number of interns 
trained in various 
Internship programmes  • To capture the number of 
interns involved in various 
learning -by-doing 
programmes  2019-22 
average:  
FIMIP: 20; NTP: 
15 Stability  for 
FIMIP  
Stability for 
NTP • BTORs  
• TAMS database  Within one month after 
the delivery of the 
activity  • ITTC Organizers and 
trainers  
• TAME M&E 
Specialists/Analysts    
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 21 - Indicator  Purpose of indicator  Baseline  Target  Data collection  Expected timeline  Responsible  
• Number of interns 
trained by the Regional 
Coordinators Internship 
Programme  • To capture the number of 
interns involved in the 
RCI learning -by-doing 
programme  • 2017-19 
average: 
RCI: 6 • Stability  • BTORs  
• TAMS database  Within one month 
after the delivery of 
the activity  • ITTC Organizers and 
trainers  
• TAME M&E 
Specialists/Analysts  
• Final evaluation of each 
intern by their 
supervisor  • To assess the quality of 
intern's contributions to 
their unit and evaluate 
their match with the 
selection criteria  100% of at 
least fully 
satisfactory in 
2020-22 • Stability  • Evaluation by the 
supervisors  End of the internship  • TAME M&E  
Specialists/Analysts  
• New, revised or 
translated online 
courses released during 
the year  • To assess the level of 
novelty and availability of 
courses in the three WTO 
languages  • 2017-19 
average: 10  • Stability  • BTOR  
• e-Learning Platform  By the end of the year  • e-Learning officers 
and platform  admins  
• Percentage of 
e-Learning  courses i n 
interactive  format  • To assess the level of 
interactivity and 
compatibility of eLearning 
courses  • 2022: 77%  • Increase  • BTOR  
• e-Learning Platform  By the end of the 
year • e-Learning officers 
and platform  admins   
• Percentage of 
participants rating the 
quality of the 
e-Learning courses 
content with the two top 
marks  • To measure the approval 
rating of online courses 
by the two top marks  • 2020-22 
average: 96%  • Stability  • BTOR  
• e-Learning Platform  By the end of the 
year • e-Learning officers 
and platform  admins   
• Percentage of 
participants rating the 
e-Learning platform 
with the two top marks  • To assess the level of 
interactivity and 
compatibility of the 
e-Learning platform  • 2020-22 
average: 94%  • Stability  • BTOR  
• e-Learning Platform  By the end of the 
year • e-Learning officers 
and platform  admins  
• e-Learning success rate 
of participants attending 
the courses  • To evaluate the extent of 
transferring an 
appropriate level of 
knowledge and skills on 
WTO matters to 
participants  • 2019-2022 
average: 
61.5%  • Stability  • BTOR  
• e-Learning Platform  By the end of the 
year • e-Learning officers 
and platform  admins    
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 22 - Indicator  Purpose of indicator  Baseline  Target  Data collection  Expected timeline  Responsible  
• e-Learning drop -out 
rate • To measure the number 
of participants who 
completed the entire 
online course  • 2017-19 
average: 24%  • Stability  • BTOR  
• e-Learning Platform  By the end of the 
year • e-Learning officers 
and platform  admins  
• e-Learning distinction 
rate • To evaluate the extent of 
transferring an 
appropriate level of 
knowledge and skills on 
WTO matters to 
participants  • 2020-22 
average: 54%  • Stability  • BTOR  
• e-Learning Platform  By the end of the 
year • e-Learning officers 
and platform  admins  
• Proportion of activities 
with the involvement of 
a partner  • To assess the share of TA 
partners involved in WTO 
TA activities  • 2020-22 
average: 57%  • Stability  • TAMS database  By the end of the 
year • TAME Chief and 
Database Specialists  
• Proportion of partners' 
contribution to the TA 
activities  • To assess the level of the 
contribution of partners to 
TA activities  • 2017-22 
average: 47% 
low 
contributions  • Decrease the 
proportion of 
low 
contributions  • TAMS database  By the end of the 
year • TAME Chief and 
Database Specialists  
• Number of responses to 
TA questionnaire  • To assess the extent to 
which beneficiaries' TA 
needs have been 
identified  2019-2022 
average: 82 • Stability  • Secretariat questionnaires  Every other year 
when preparing the 
TA Plan  • ITTC officer  
• No of TPR Follow -ups • To assess the extent to 
which the TA needs 
identified during the TPR 
have been followed -up • 2017-19 
average: 8  • Stability  • BTORs  
• TAMS database  Within one month 
after the delivery of 
the activity  • ITTC Organizers and 
trainers  
• TAME M&E  
Specialists/Analysts  
• Visits by Members' 
logging in to the WTO 
website  • To measure the quantity 
of visits by Members' 
logging in to the WTO 
Website  • 2020-2022 
average:  
87,866  • Increase  • WTO Webmaster /IERD  Ongoing monitoring  • WTO Webmaster 
(Information and 
External Relations 
Division – IERD)  
• Number of TA activities 
that include training on 
WTO databases as one 
of their objectives  • To measure the extent to 
which participants' 
autonomy has been 
raised  2017-19 
average: 60  
•  • Increase  • TAMS database  
• BTORs  By the end of the 
year • TAME Chief and 
Database Specialists    
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 23 - Indicator  Purpose of indicator  Baseline  Target  Data collection  Expected timeline  Responsible  
• Number of formal or 
informal Working Party 
meetings held for 
acceding beneficiary 
governments  • To capture the rate of 
activity during the 
'accession process' by 
beneficiary acceding 
governments  • 2017-19 
average: 6  • Stability  • DG Annual Report on 
Accessions  
• Accession Working Party 
Meetings  Ongoing  
Coordination with 
Accession by the end 
of the year  • Accession Division 
(TA focal point)  
• Number of participants 
from acceding 
governments attending 
TA activities focused 
on accessions  • To assess the relevance 
and target of TA activities 
focused on accessions  • 2017-19 
average: 
1,179  • Stability  • BTORs  
• TAMS Database  
• DG Annual Report on 
Accessions  
• Accession Working Party 
Meetings  Ongoing  
Coordination with 
Accession by the end 
of the year  • Trainers and 
organizers (ITTC)  
• Accession Division  
Final evaluation rate of 
each intern by 
supervisor  • To assess the quality of 
intern's contributions to 
their unit and evaluate 
their match with the 
selection criteria  2017-19 
average: 
100% at least 
fully 
satisfactory  
•  • Stability  • Evaluation by the 
supervisors  End of the internship  • Accession Division 
(TA foca l point)  
Average no. of 
relevant 
accession -related 
documents circulated 
per TA -eligible GPA 
acceding Member  • To assess the rate of 
activity during the 
accession process by 
beneficiary acceding 
governments  • 2017-19 
average: 5.2  • Stability  • Documents online  By December of each 
year • GPA team ( TA focal 
point)  
Average no. of 
interventions made by 
TA-eligible 
GPA-acceding Parties 
during meetings of the 
CGP • To assess the rate of 
activity during the 
accession process by 
beneficiary acceding 
governments  • 2018-20 
average: 2.9  • Stability  • Documents online  By December of each 
year • GPA team ( TA focal 
point)  
Average no. of 
bilateral meetings of 
TA-eligible 
GPA-acceding Parties 
with Chair of the CGP  • To assess the rate of 
activity during the 
accession process by 
beneficiary acceding 
governments  • 2018-20 
average: 1.29  • Stability  • Internal database  By December of each 
year • GPA team ( TA focal 
point)    
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 24 - Indicator  Purpose of indicator  Baseline  Target  Data collection  Expected timeline  Responsible  
Diversity of WTO 
related topics covered 
by activities  • To assess the extent to 
which academic 
institutions are analysing 
WTO issues  2018-19 
average  
 • Stability  • Intermediate and annual 
reporting by the Chairs  
• BTORs  By the end of the 
year • WTO Chairs 
Programme Unit  
• WCP Coordinator  
• Number of publications  • To assess the quantity of 
Journals in which WTO 
Chairs published articles  • Phase III 
Chair average 
2020-22: 171  
 
• Rolling 
Programme 
New Chair:  
• To be 
collected   • Phase III 
Chairs: 
Increase  
 
 
New Chairs:  
• To be 
determined   • Publications,  
• Annual Reports from the 
Chairs  
• Evaluations/Assessments 
Report by the Advisory 
Board  By the end of the 
year • WTO Chairs 
Programme Unit  
• WCP Coordinator  
• Assessment of the 
quality of the key 
research output per 
Chair per year by the 
Advisory Board  • To assess the quality of 
the research which WTO 
Chairs published  • Phase III 
Chairs:  
• Individual 
baselines 
established 
based on past 
outputs  
 
 
• Rolling 
Programme 
New Chair:  
• To be 
collected  
 • Positive 
evaluation  • Advisory Board Reports  By the end of the 
year • WTO Chairs 
Programme Unit  
• WCP Coordinator    
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 25 - Indicator  Purpose of indicator  Baseline  Target  Data collection  Expected timeline  Responsible  
• Number of students 
completing a 
WTO-related course  • To assess the number of 
students to whom WTO 
knowledge has been 
transferred by the WTO 
Chairs  Phase III 
Chairs: 
average  
2020-22: 
2,490  
•  
• Rolling 
Programme 
New Chair:  
• To be 
collected  
 • Phase III 
Chairs: 
Increase  
•  
•  
•  
• New Chairs:  
To be 
determined  • Intermediate and annual 
reporting  
• Advisory Board and other 
Evaluations /Assessments  By the end of the 
year • WTO Chairs 
Programme Unit  
• WCP Coordinator  
• Number of new or 
updated WTO -related 
courses  • To assess the ability of 
the WTO Chairs to update 
and upgrade their WTO -
related courses  • Phase III 
Chairs:  
average 
2020-22: 28  
•  
• Rolling 
Programme 
New Chair:  
• To be 
collected  
 • Phase III 
Chairs: 
Increase  
•  
•  
• New Chairs:  
To be 
determined  • Intermediate and annual 
reporting  
• Advisory Board and other 
Evaluations/Assessments  
• WCP Platform and other 
online research network 
activities (inc. social 
media)  By the end of the 
year • WTO Chairs 
Programme Unit  
• WCP Coordinator    
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 26 - Indicator  Purpose of indicator  Baseline  Target  Data collection  Expected timeline  Responsible  
• Number of outreach 
events per year 
organised by the WTO 
Chairs  • To measure the outreach 
level of the WTO Chairs in 
a specific year  • Phase III 
Chairs:  
• average 
2020-22: 
• 86  
•  
• Rolling 
Programme 
New Chair:  
To be 
collected  • Phase III 
Chairs: 
Increase  
•  
•  
• New Chairs:  
To be 
determined   • Intermediate and annual 
reporting  
• Advisory Board and other 
Evaluations/Assessments  
• WCP Platform and other 
online research network 
activities (inc. social 
media)  By the end of the 
year • WTO Chairs 
Programme Unit  
• WCP Coordinator  
• Outreach Counsellor  
• IERD 
• Advice provided to 
governmental policy 
makers and other 
stakeholders  • To assess the level of 
influence of the WTO 
Chairs in their respective 
countries  • Phase III 
Chairs:  
• Average 
2020-22: 
• 109 
•  
• Rolling 
Programme 
New Chair:  
• To be 
collected  
 • Phase III 
Chairs: 
Increase  
•  
•  
•  
New Chairs:  
To be 
determined  • Intermediate and annual 
reporting  
• Advisory Board and other 
Evaluations/Assessments  
• WCP Platform and other 
online research network 
activities (inc. social 
media)  By the end of the 
year • WTO Chairs 
Programme Unit  
• WCP Coordinator  
• Number of students 
participating in 
competitions 
supported by the WTO  • To assess the number of 
students reached by the 
competitions  • 2022: 344  • Stability  • BTORs  By the end of the 
year • Knowledge 
Management 
Division  
• Number of PhD 
students supervised 
graduating with a PhD  • To assess the impact of 
the support provided by 
the WTO to PhD students  • Students 
supervised 
graduate with 
a PhD each 
year: 5  • Stability  • BTORs  By the end of the 
year • Knowledge 
Management 
Division    
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 27 - Indicator  Purpose of indicator  Baseline  Target  Data collection  Expected timeline  Responsible  
Diversity of WTO 
related topics covered 
by statements, 
reports, and papers 
produced by this group 
of stakeholders  • To measure the diversity 
of WTO related topics  In 2017: 26 
WTO-related 
topics covered  • Stability  • Media reports when 
available,  
• Statements made by 
legislators, business 
associations, NGOs when 
available  Ongoing  
By the end of the 
year • Information and 
External Relations 
Division  
• Number of seminars, 
workshops conducted  • To measure the outreach 
level of the Secretariat  2017-19 
average:  
7 activities  Stability  • TAMS database  By the end of the 
year • Trainers and 
organizers  
• Outreach Counsellor  
• Number of key 
non-governmental 
stakeholders reached 
during the year  • To measure the outreach 
level of the Secretariat 
targeting 
non-governmental 
stakeholders  • 2017-19 
average:  
• 355 legislators  
• 73 journalists  
• 28 civil 
societies  • Stability  • BTORs  Within one month 
after the delivery of 
the activity  • Trainers and 
organizers  
• Outreach Counsellor  
• Number of training 
material consulted  • To assess the number of 
WTO training material 
consulted by the large 
audience  • 2020-22 
average: 
3,718  • Increase  • Online form  Ongoing  • WTO Webmaster  
• IERD 
• Number of views of 
the web pages on 
technical assistance 
including news items 
on this subject  • To measure the number 
of views and interest by 
topic of the web pages on 
technical assistance  • 2020-2022 
average: 
327,668  • Stability  • WTO webmaster  Ongoing  • WTO webmaster  
• IERD 
• Number of Young 
Professionals selected 
annually by the WTO  • To assess the number of 
YPs selected by WTO in a 
specific year.  2020-22 
average: 13  • Increase  • TAMS database  By the end of the 
year • TAME M&E 
Specialists/Annalists  
• HR Division  
• Final evaluation rate of 
each Young 
Professional's 
performance by their 
supervisor  • To assess the quality of 
YPs' contributions to their 
unit and evaluate their 
match with the selection 
criteria  • 100% at least 
fully 
satisfactory in 
2020-22 • Stabilit y • Evaluation by the 
supervisors  By the end of the 
year • TAME M&E  
Specialists/Analysts  
• HR Division  
    
  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 28 - 5  DATA FLOW  
5.1.  The information that follows in the next page is a graphical representation of a flow chart showing how the data input will f low from the place 
where it is collected up to the management team, leading to the final evaluations and reports.  
5.2.  The methodology used  as well as the source of information  is detailed in Annexes I, II and III of th e M&E Plan . 
WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 29 - 
 
  6  DATA ANALYSIS AND REPORT ING FLOW  
6.1.  It is recommended that M&E information, results and accountability are reported in the 
following order:  
1. Trainers and Unit Managers  
Draft M&E results and recommendations will be shared with  trainers and their supervisors  for 
their review and comment . Their views and comments should be considered  when finalising the 
evaluation.  
 
 
 
 
2. TA Management  
TA Management should receive the M&E reports for their validation, once the previous stage 
has been co mpleted. 
TA Management may wish to comment before the report is circulated.  
 
 
 
 
 
3. WTO Management  
WTO Management should receive the M&E reports validated by TA Management.  Depending on 
the scope of the report, other staff members, such as regional desk officers, directors or TA 
divisional focal points may also receive a copy of the report.  
 
 
 
 
4. Members and Donors  
In principle, M&E findings and reports will not be circulated to Members and d onors . Exceptions 
may be considered in particular circumstances.  The general thrust of the M&E findings and 
recommendations will be reflected in the TA annual report, wherever relevant .WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 30 - 
 
  ANNEX I: ONSITE EVALUATION OF TA ACTIVITIES  
1  BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE  
1.1.  As part of its mandate to promote RBM across WTO  TA activities, TAME undertakes regular 
reviews to assess the effectiveness of TA provided to Members and to identify good 
practice, innovative approa ches, and areas for further improvement.  These reviews are 
carried out using a variety of instruments ( e.g., activity -based on -site evaluations, 
activity/programme -based ex -post evaluations, country -based impact assessments, etc.) that 
measure different le vels of training effectiveness according to the Kirkpatrick's Training Evaluation 
Model.  This model identifies four levels:  
a. Reaction:  this level measures how trainees reacted to the training;  
b. Learning:  this level measures what the trainees have learnt from the activity;  
c. Behaviour:  this level evaluates how far the trainees have modified their behaviour as a 
result of the training received;  
d. Results:  finally, this level tries to assess the outcome of the t raining for the teams or 
organisations in which the trainees operate.  
1.2.  Onsite evaluations are used to assess the Reaction and Learning levels:  
a. To assess the learner's Reaction  to training, the evaluator observes the training's 
dynamics through participants' body language and interaction with the trainers and peers.  
The evaluator also engages in informal dialogue (guided interviews) with the participants 
throughout the training (usually during the breaks) to collect their impressions and 
investig ate any attention -grabbing behaviour observed ( e.g., difficulty with the training 
language).  Where possible, the evaluator leads the final evaluation session (using focus -
group discussion technique) to gather first -hand participants' feedback on the traini ng. 
b. To assess the Learning achieved by participants during the course, the evaluator 
considers factual evidence (results of pre - and post -course quizzes, individual projects, 
participants' self -reflection and takeaways sessions, etc.) and observes the chan ge in 
knowledge and skills of participants (ease of moving to higher level of difficulty, pertinence 
of the discussions, etc.).  Factors affecting the ease of learning are assessed by the 
evaluator: adequacy of expected learning outcomes (objectives) with t he level of training, 
adequacy of participants' prior knowledge and homogeneity of the audience, 
appropriateness of training methods used, preparation of the training, etc.  
1.3.  Several TA activities are selected annually by TAME for onsite evaluation taking in to account a 
set of objective criteria: rotation of the WTO topics and of TA regions, mix of PLS levels (2 or 3), 
coverage of the various Key Results of the TA plan, features of the activities (duration, standalone 
or module in larger activity, etc) . In some cases, an activity can be selected for evaluation outside 
of these criteria for various reasons including:  in response to a substantiated request from the 
organizers; for pilot -testing; to explore a feature of special interest (e.g. an innovative approa ch); 
as part of a meta -evaluation on a given topic (i.e. multiple activities on the same topic can be 
evaluated successively for comparative analysis) ; etc. 
2  IMPLEMENTATION OF ONSITE EVALUATIONS  
Upon selection of a TA activity for an onsite evaluation:  
• TAME  contacts the officers responsible for the activity (trainers and ITTC responsible officer) 
to collect preliminary information about the activity: background to the request (for regional 
or national activities), expected outcomes, participants profiles, se lection process, how is 
the activity being organized (partners, shared responsibilities , outside trainers, etc.).  
• TAME observes the preparation of the activity by being copied on relevant email exchanges, 
attending key preparatory meetings (with partners w hen relevant), by being updated on 
selection process; and by being given access to any documents' repository (GoogleDrive, 
Virtual Classroom, etc.) shared with partners and students.  As an observer, TAME does WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 31 - 
 
  not intervene in the decision -making process bu t only takes notes of the 
organizational arrangements for subsequent analysis.  
• TAME explores with the organizers the best way to integrate the evaluation into the 
programme without disturbing the natural flow of the activity ( e.g., when possible TAME is 
provided with a slot during the opening session of the activity  to briefly introduce the 
evaluation and seek participants' collaboration ; a final evaluation session of at least 1 hour 
is included in the programme and facilitated by TAME).  Activity's PEF can be tailored to the 
specificities of the activity  by TAME in some cases.  
During the activity:  
• TAME observes the activity and engages dialogue with the participants on the margin of the 
activity ( e.g., during the breaks) and with the trainer(s) and external speakers as needed.  
• TAME may interview local partners, when relevant.  
• TAME moderates the final evaluation of the activity.  
• TAME considers the tools used by the trainers to test the acquired knowledge . 
• At the end of the activity, TAME may hold a debrief session with the trainer(s) and partners 
to share initial feedback.  
After the activity:  
• TAME analyses the data gathered during the evaluation and when necessary,  triangulates 
the findings with historica l data (review BTORs and programmes of past editions of the same 
activity).  
• TAME reviews trainers' BTOR and analyses the appropriateness of RBM  indicators and 
sources of verification (results of pre - and post -course tests, final exam, project work, etc.) 
used by the trainers to assess activity's performance.  
• TAME prepares a draft evaluation report and shares it with the organizers (trainers and I TTC 
responsible officer) for correction of possible factual errors or clarification.  
• TAME finalizes the report based on input received and circulates it internally to selected 
recipients (activity evaluation reports are for restricted circulation within WT O). 
• Non-sensitive information ( e.g., generic data from the activity, recommendations applicable 
to other activities, good practice, lessons learned, etc.) is disseminated by TAME through 
the TA annual performance report and other means, as applicable.  
3  CONT ENT OF THE EVALUATION REPORT  
3.1.  There is no standard outline for an onsite  evaluation report.  The structure of the report will 
depend on the areas of emphasis identified for each activity.  However, throughout its various 
sections, it will seek to address thre e of the five OECD/DAC criteria featured in the evaluation 
framework for TA: relevance, effectiveness and efficiency.  A typical report would address:  
a. the background to explain the history of the activity when relevant, its context and general 
features;  
b. the evaluation methodology  and objectives ; 
c. the preparation of the activity and its efficiency ( e.g., when involving external partners);  
d. the relevance of the activity to the participants and the adequacy of the objectives;  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 32 - 
 
  e. the delivery of the programme (conten t and methods) and its alignment with for the 
objectives; and  
f. the conclusions arising from the analysis , highlighting lessons learned , good practice and 
recommendations for future improvements, if any.  
 
Annex A1 
 
Participant's Evaluation Form (PEF)2 
 
 
 
Venue     Date    Mission code  
 
 
 
Title of TA Activity  
 
 
 
1. What is your general opinion about this TA activity?  
2. Is this your first WTO TA activity? (Y/N)  
3. Your knowledge of the subject matter was:  
a. Prior to the activity  
b. After the activity  
4. To what extent were the following specific objectives achieved? (Description of the specific 
objectives)  
5. Do you find the TA activity professionally useful or relevant?  
6. Your overall opinion of the TA activity in the following areas:  
a. Quality of lectures and presentations  
b. Use of audio -visual aids  
c. Practical exercises, case studies  
d. Interaction with TA provider(s)  
e. Quality of training materials (handouts)  
f. References to national/regional experience  
g. Duration of the TA activity  
7. The logistical arrangements for the TA activity were  
8. Comments  
 
 
1 PEFs are used to collect  the necessary information which, combined with the trainers' self -assessment, 
allows the success of an activity to be measured. However, at the request of trainers or according to the 
specificities of the activity, TAME is available to add further questio ns or to customise them according to the 
context.  
2 All the questions are mandatory except for the comment box (Q8). The rating questions go from 1  
to 5, 1 being the lowest score and 5 the highest.   WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 33 - 
 
  ANNEX II: COUNTRY -BASED TA EFFECTS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT  
1  BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE  
1.1.  As part of its mandate to promote RBM across WTO  TA activities, TAME undertakes regular 
reviews to assess the effectiveness of TA provided to Members and to identify good 
practice, innovative approaches and areas for further improvement.  These reviews are 
carried out using a variety of instruments ( e.g., activity -based on -site evaluations, 
activity/programme -based ex -post evaluations, country -based effect and impact assessments, etc.) 
that measure different levels of training effectiveness according to the Kirkpatrick's Training 
Evaluation Model.  This model identifies four levels:  
a. Reaction:  this level measures how trainees reacted to the training;  
b. Learning:  this level measures what the trainees have learnt from the activity;  
c. Behaviour:  this level evaluates how far the trainees have modified their behaviour as a 
result of the training receive d; 
d. Results:  finally, this level tries to assess the outcome of the training for the teams or 
organisations in which the trainees operate.  
1.2.  Country -based effects and impact assessment of TA activities are used to assess the 
Behaviour and Results levels:  
a. To assess the change in past TA participants' Behaviour  at work as a result of trainings 
provided by the WTO, the evaluator will seek to gather information through  
self-assessment and 360° feedback.  
b. To assess the Results of the trainings provided by the WTO fo r the teams or organisations 
in which former trainees operate, the evaluator will collect evidence -based data about 
factors such as efficiency gains in the workplace, specific achievements, or introduction of 
new practices or systems in the workplace to cr eate a positive impact on desired results.  
1.3.  If possible , TAME will also  gather information on any possible impact that WTO TA has 
collectively contributed to at the national level and collect good practices implemented by TA 
beneficiaries to promote the sus tainability of TA results and disseminate them to other TA 
beneficiaries during other field missions or through TA annual performance reports.  
1.4.  Through exchange s with former TA participants, TAME may gather suggestions on how to 
improve TA activities.  Meeti ngs with past participants, their supervisors and line ministries, also 
provide an opportunity for TAME to collect input on TA needs for the future.  Information gathered in 
this regard is shared with the relevant Secretariat staff.  
1.5.  For an efficient use of resources TAME seeks, as much as possible, to couple country -based 
effects and impact assessment with onsite or ex -post evaluations.  However, a country -based 
assessment can be implemented independently should a TA M&E need arise.  
2  IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EVAL UATION  
Upon selection of a country for a TA effect and impact assessment:  
• TAME analyses the history of participation of the country in WTO TA activities over the past 
5 years.  The most frequently attended subjects and the main beneficiary national institu tions 
are identified.  
• TAME contacts the country's Permanent Mission to the WTO and  focal point in capital to 
organize the field visit.  An explanatory note of the purpose and methodology of the 
assessment is shared with the authorities.  WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 34 - 
 
  During the field mission:  
• TAME holds focus group discussion meetings with multiple national authorities and individual 
meetings to collect feedback on WTO TA received and on outstanding needs.  Guiding 
questions for the interviews are presented in Annex A.  
• Interviews/ focus group discussions target former trainees, their supervisors, head of 
national agencies who benefited f rom past trainings, and any other relevant national 
authorities identified by TAME as useful  informants ( e.g., agencies that have not benefited 
from WTO TA in their specific area of work can be interviewed by TAME if the area appears 
to be a priority for the country, to understand the background to non -participation).  
• TAME collects information on outstanding TA needs and any supporting data or informa tion 
to provide evidence of the relevance of TA provided, its impact and sustainability ( e.g., 
information on national policies, data on gain of efficiency or internal curricula developed 
based on WTO trainings, …).  
After the activity:  
• TAME analyses the data gathered during the evaluation and when necessary,  triangulates 
the findings with other data (review of BTORs of activities, or participation in WTO bodies, 
submission of notifications, etc.) and interviews with relevant staff member s. 
3  CONTENT OF THE ASSESSMENT  REPORT  
3.1.  There is no standard outline for the country assessment report.  The structure of the report and 
its thoroughness will depend on the extent of past participation of the country in WTO TA; the variety 
and number of nationa l interlocutors met during the field mission; and the depth  of information 
provided by national authorities.  The report  will address the OECD/DAC criteria: relevance, 
coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability1. The report could addre ss: 
a. The background and purpose of the country -based TA effects and impact assessment;  
b. A brief summary of the history of participation of national authorities in TA activities;  
c. TAME's analysis of the relevance of WTO TA to country's policy context and needs  
(alignment with national priorities, harmonization and synergies with other TA received 
from other providers);  
d. Indications gathered on the effectiveness of WTO TA and any suggestions for 
improvement;  
e. Evidence of TA results for beneficiaries at individual level and of impact for the ir institutions 
and national trade -related technical capacity as a whole;  
f. Evidence of contribution of WTO TA to higher level objectives (impact on trading capacity);  
g. Outstanding TA needs (in terms of subjects and type of activiti es). 
  
 
1 See: www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/daccriteriaforevaluatingdevelopmentassistance.htm . WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 35 - 
 
  Annex A  
 
Below are examples of guiding questions that the evaluator may address when meeting with national 
informants.  These questions are provided for reference only, for an interview with a supervisor of 
former TA participants . They will be adapted to the role of the institution/individual interviewed and 
will focus on any other element of interest arising from TAME's preliminary desk analysis of the 
country's context and history of past participation in WTO TA.  They are likely to ev olve according to 
the flow of the discussion.  
 
• Did you notice any effects and impacts of WTO TA on: 
- gaining advantages for your country from the multilateral trading system (e.g., use 
of dispute settlement system, TPR, improved trading environment, forei gn direct 
investment, transfer of technology, increased trade, etc. ); 
- concrete improvements on the implementation of the WTO Agreements (e.g., 
increased number notifications, organization of national focal points for TBT and SPS 
Agreement, other ); 
- an increased and more active participation in WTO work or trade negotiations 
(submission of documents to WTO bodies, elaboration of position papers, increased 
leadership and participation in the negotiations through elaboration of the country 
position, present ation of proposals and active participation in the meetings directly 
in the WTO or through a regional grouping ). 
 
• Did you notice any effects and impacts on the individuals who  participated in WTO 
TA programme o r activities?  
e.g., Knowledge of WTO Agreement s; quality of analytical work; work-related initiative; 
more independence at work; confidence in contributing to meetings; more active in writing 
papers or proposals; suggestions for better implementation of WTO Agreements;  etc. 
 
• To what extent did your di vision / service / department benefit from the 
knowledge and skills acquired by your colleagues  through WTO TA?  
e.g., Sharing of responsibilities; increased leadership on certain subjects; suggestions; 
contribution to the preparation of trade-related analy sis, papers, country position s; other . 
 
• Were the knowledge and skills acquired by your colleagues  relevant for meeting 
the needs of your division / service / department?  Are these knowledge and skills 
regularly applied?  
• What is your assessment of the overall effectiveness and efficiency of WTO TA? Are 
there any suggestions on how WTO TA could be improved?  
e.g., Procedures to benefit from  TA (availability of information on TA offer, identification of 
needs and beneficiaries, application and selection pr ocedures, etc.) ; duration of the TA 
activities; level of TA activities ; online  courses; volume of TA activities ; mix of  regional and 
national activities; multiyear approach; use of national resources to deliver TA  activities ; 
means of TA delivery (face -to-face, virtual, online, blended ); involvement of  
non-government officials (academia, trade -support institutions, private sector associations, 
etc.). 
 
• According to our data, X colleagues  from your team participated in X TA activities 
over the past 5 years . Were some of these activities more useful than others in 
terms of effects and impact?  
 
• Does your institution receive TRTA from other providers?  How do you qualify the 
synergy between WTO  and other providers'  TA? What is the value -added by WTO 
TA compared to other providers?  Any suggestions to enhance synergies and 
harmonization of TRTA received by your institution?  
 
• What are the outstanding needs of your institution?WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 36 - 
 
  ANNEX III: EX -POST EVALUATION S 
1  BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE  
1.1.  As part of its mandate to promote RBM across WTO  TA activities, TAME undertakes regular 
reviews to assess the effectiveness of TA provided to Members and to identify good 
practice, innovative approaches and areas for further improvement.  These reviews are 
carried out using a variety of instruments ( e.g., activity -based on -site evaluations, 
activity/programme -based ex -post evaluations, country -based effect and impact assessments, etc.) 
that measure different levels of t raining effectiveness according to the Kirkpatrick's Training 
Evaluation Model.  This model identifies four levels:  
a. Reaction:  this level measures how trainees reacted to the training;  
b. Learning:  this level measures what the trainees have learnt from the acti vity; 
c. Behaviour:  this level evaluates how far the trainees have modified their behaviour as a 
result of the training received;  
d. Results:  finally, this level tries to assess the outcome of the training for the teams or 
organisations in which the trainees ope rate. 
1.2.  Ex-post evaluations of a particular TA activity or programme are used to assess the Behaviour 
and Results levels:  
a. To assess the change in past participants' Behaviour  at work as a result of their 
participation in the activity/programme being evaluate d. The evaluator will seek to gather 
information through self -assessment s and 360° feedback.  
b. To assess the Results of the activity/programme for the teams or organisations in which 
former trainees operate, the evaluator will collect evidence -based data abo ut factors such 
as efficiency gains in the workplace, specific achievements, or introduction of new 
practices or systems in the workplace to create a positive impact on desired results.  
1.3.  Ex-post evaluations are an opportunity to identify  good practices impl emented at national level 
to promote the sustainability of the results produced by the TA activity/programme being evaluated 
(e.g., scheme for activity's participant to cascade the training to other colleagues, etc.)  and to gather 
suggestions on possible i mprovements . 
1.4.  By collecting from past participants (entire population or a representative sample thereof) 
evidence o n Behaviour change and Results  generated by the activity/programme evaluated, 
ex-post evaluations assess  whether the activity/programme achie ved its objectives and contributed 
to the desired impact.  
2  IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EVALUATION  
2.1.  Selection of an activity/programme to be evaluated:  Ex-post evaluations are time and 
resource intensive, which means that it is unreasonable to implement them for a single edition of a 
TA activity (most of which are of a short duration) . They will  cover  several editions of the activity 
selected ( e.g., ex-post evaluation of the Introduction Course for LDCs over 10 years).  Therefore, 
activities/programme s are sel ected based on their recurrence, features of special interest, turnover 
in topics to be covered, etc.  
2.2.  Desk -based scoping work and engagement of activity/programme's implementing 
team(s) : TAME carries out a preliminary review of information readily availabl e on the 
activity /programme  selected  to prepare  the evaluation ToRs, which are then  discussed with the team 
responsible for the activity/programme . They provide the background to the evaluation, define its  
scope  and methodology, the timeline and main sourc es of information . The methodology can differ 
depending on the activity/programme evaluated.  Most ex -post evaluation will involve a 
questionnaire -based survey of former participants and their supervisor.  Some ex -post evaluations 
may involve onsite observat ion by the evaluator of one edition of the activity, country visits, 
face-to-face interviews of stakeholders, focus group discussions, etc.  The stakeholders may differ WT/COMTD/W/261 /Rev.1  
 
- 37 - 
 
  from an activity /programme  to another (donor interviews, external partners, other instit utions for 
comparative analysis, etc.).  
2.3.  Develop the evaluation tools:  once the ToRs  have been finalized, tools (online 
questionnaires, interview questions, data collection sheets, etc.) will be elaborated and tested , 
samples of stakeholders will be defined, field visits will be planned, etc.  TAME will also collect all the 
documents requi red for triangulation.  These are usually requested from the team  responsible for the 
activity/programme . 
2.4.  Roll-out the evaluation: implementation of the methodology . 
2.5.  Analysis phase: TAME analyses the data gathered during the evaluation and triangulates 
them between their different sources to credibly relate the findings, conclusions and 
recommendations of the evaluation to reliable evidence . 
3  CONTENT OF THE EVALUATION  REPORT  
3.1.  There is no standard outline for the ex -post evaluation report.  The structure of the report and 
its thoroughness will depend on the size of the audience of the activity/programme and the amount  
of information collected.  The report  will address the OECD/DAC criteria: relevance, coherence, 
effectiveness, efficiency, impa ct and sustainability.1 The report could address:  
a. The background and purpose of the evaluation;  
b. A brief summary of the history of the activity/programme concerned , including any major 
evolution during the review period;  
c. TAME's analysis of the relevance of  the activity/programme to beneficiaries' needs 
(alignment with national priorities, harmonization and synergies with other TA received 
from other providers) and to other stakeholders involved;  
d. The effectiveness of the activity/programme, good practices id entified and any 
suggestions for improvement;  
e. The efficiency of the activity/programme  (including management costs, comparison with 
alternatives, etc.);  
f. Evidence of results for beneficiaries at individual level and of impact for their institutions 
and nati onal trade -related technical capacity as a whole;  
g. Evidence of contribution of the activity/programme to higher order objectives (impact on 
trading capacity);  
h. Evidence of a long-term sustainability of the results of the activity/programme ; 
i. Good practices im plemented by beneficiaries . 
__________  
 
1 See: www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/daccriteriaforevaluatingdevelopmentassistance.htm .