This mission produced the final evaluation of a five year long EU-China Training Programme on Village Self Governance, a capacity building project with particular focus on economic development and good governance at all levels. Context: The evaluated Programme’s aim was threefold: improving the long term cooperation between the PRC and the EU, enhancing the understanding and observance of law by local beneficiaries in the village framework, promoting the development of village self governance. These aims were to be reached through the implementation of three distinct components: Institutional Strengthening, Training and Human Resource Development, and Applied Research. Description of activities: The project team, comprising four experts, visited the different stakeholders and beneficiaries of the Programme to assess its relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability. After interviews with the implementing contractor in Europe, the team of experts spend one month in China. The first week, in Beijing, was focused on interviews with the PMO, with the Delegations and with the Chinese counterparts. The following two weeks were dedicated to field trips during which local and grass roots beneficiaries were met. The last week, back in Beijing, was spent assessing the various data collected and producing the evaluation report. Findings and recommendations were presented to the delegation at the end of the mission. Objectives pursued and reached: The evaluation mission produced an in-depth analysis of the three components of the program in order to support recommendations and proposals to improve future cooperation program between the EU and the PRC. It produced a comprehensive assessment of the Programme along the five internationally recognised (DAC) criteria, and presented the results of this analysis to the Delegation of the European Commission to China. Detailed results of the projects: In particular, the program evaluated was found highly relevant but suffered from efficiency difficulties highlighted by the evaluation mission. Solutions to avoid such difficulties were formulated by the Evaluation team. Most of the programme’s activities were found effective but because of some delays in implementation, impact proved hard to assess precisely. Sustainability was deemed the most positive point of the programme, as it seemed certain that program activities would continue and be extended after the end of the EU support.