4. The WGPSS is the body responsible for defining the indicators that should be included in the reports by the States Parties; its tasks include lending technical cooperation and analyzing and monitoring compliance with the obligations set forth in the Protocol of San Salvador. It does this using the “progress indicators for measuring rights under the Protocol of San Salvador,” 43 useful for measuring compliance with the rights set forth in the protocol and thus track the principle of progressive development of economic, social and cultural rights. In the words of the WGPSS: The main objectives of the [...] indicators [is] to help states parties by providing them with useful tools to review the status of the rights contained in the Protocol, identify outstanding issues and agendas based on a participatory dialogue with civil society, and devise strategies for the progressive realization of the rights contained in the Protocol. The aim is to encourage states to undertake a process of evaluating and measuring fulfillment of social rights that goes beyond mere reporting to become a useful instrument for the design and continuous evaluation of public policies within states, with a view to ensuring comprehensive fulfillment of economic, social, and cultural rights. As the standards say, they “[a]re not intended to record complaints but progress.” 44 5. The WGPSS model examines three types of indicators for assessing progress: (i) structural, 45 (ii) process, 46 and (iii) outcome, 47 organized into three conceptual categories: (i) incorporation of the right, 48 (ii) financial context and budgetary commitment, 49 and (iii) state capabilities; 50 it adds three crosscutting principles: (a) equality and nondiscrimination, (b) access to justice, and (c) access to Information and participation. 51 In this framework, the WGPSS stresses: States can meet their obligations by choosing from a broad range of courses of action and policies. It is not for the international monitoring system to judge those options that each Cf. Progress indicators for measuring rights under the Protocol of San Salvador. OEA/Ser.D/XXVI.11 2015. 44 Cf. Progress indicators for measuring rights under the Protocol of San Salvador. OEA/Ser.L/XXV.2.1 and GT/PSS/doc.2/11 rev.2, December 16, 2011, para. 9. 45 Structural indicators reflect the ratification/adoption of international legal instruments essential for facilitating the realization of a fundamental human right. Cf. Progress indicators for measuring rights under the Protocol of San Salvador. OEA/Ser.L/XXV.2.1 and GT/PSS/doc.2/11 rev.2, December 16, 2011, para. 33. 46 Process indicators seek to measure the quality and extent of the state's efforts to implement rights by tracking the scope, coverage, and content of strategies, plans, programs, or policies, or other specific activities and interventions designed to accomplish the goals necessary for the realization of a given right. Cf. Progress indicators for measuring rights under the Protocol of San Salvador. OEA/Ser.L/XXV.2.1 and GT/PSS/doc.2/11 rev.2, December 16, 2011, para. 34. 47 Outcome indicators capture attainments, individual and collective, that reflect the status of realization of human rights in a given context. Cf. Progress indicators for measuring rights under the Protocol of San Salvador. OEA/Ser.L/XXV.2.1 and GT/PSS/doc.2/11 rev.2, December 16, 2011, para. 35. 48 The idea of the category for incorporation of the right into the legal system, the institutional apparatus and public policies is to collect relevant information on how the right recognized in the Protocol is incorporated in the domestic law books and in public policy and practice. Cf. Progress indicators for measuring rights under the Protocol of San Salvador. OEA/Ser.L/XXV.2.1 and GT/PSS/doc.2/11 rev.2, December 16, 2011, para. 37. 49 The purpose of the category for the basic financial context and budgetary commitment is to assess the effective availability of state funds for public social spending and how they are distributed, whether it be measured in the usual manner (as a percentage of gross domestic product for each social sector) or by other indicators, and the budgetary commitments, which make it possible to assess the importance that the State ascribes to a given right. Cf. Progress indicators for measuring rights under the Protocol of San Salvador. OEA/Ser.L/XXV.2.1 and GT/PSS/doc.2/11 rev.2, December 16, 2011, para. 39. 50 The category on state or institutional capabilities entails a review of how and according to what parameters government (and its various branches and departments) deals with different socially problematized issues. In particular, the question is how it establishes its development strategies and goals, and under what parameters the implementation of the rights contained in the Protocol is inscribed therein. Cf. Progress indicators for measuring rights under the Protocol of San Salvador. OEA/Ser.L/XXV.2.1 and GT/PSS/doc.2/11 rev.2, December 16, 2011, para. 40. 51 Cf. Progress indicators for measuring rights under the Protocol of San Salvador. OEA/Ser.L/XXV.2.1 and GT/PSS/doc.2/11 rev.2, December 16, 2011, para. 15. 43