A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | PART A: NAP Implementation | Argentina | Colombia | Finland | France | Hungary | Israel | Liberia | Overall | |||||||||||||||||
2 | To what extent have OGP commitments been clearly published for a national audience? | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1.33 | ||||||||||||||||||
3 | To what extent did the government proactively and transparently communicate who the government agency leading on the implementation of the action plan was, including their name, position, department/ministry, and contact details? | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1.5 | ||||||||||||||||||
4 | To what extent are there regular progress updates published on the delivery of commitments? | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0.67 | ||||||||||||||||||
5 | To what extent was there there a joint process put in place to review the consultation and engagement process by government and civil society? | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1.83 | ||||||||||||||||||
6 | To what extent does government consult on the progress of commitments? | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1.5 | ||||||||||||||||||
7 | To what extent is there ongoing outreach to foster participation in OGP? | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||
8 | To what extent is there an ongoing multi-stakeholder forum / steering group to coordinate the OGP process? | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2.17 | ||||||||||||||||||
9 | To what extent is there an ongoing joint process in place to monitor the progress of the implementation of the action plan? | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||
10 | To what extent is there ongoing collaboration between government officials and civil society on the implementation of commitments? | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1.33 | ||||||||||||||||||
11 | In your opinion, how would you judge the ongoing strength of the partnership between key government officials and engaged civil society organisations? | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0.67 | ||||||||||||||||||
12 | PART A: Overall | 33% | 16% | 70% | 40% | 22% | 76% | 43% | ||||||||||||||||||
13 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
14 | PART B: NAP Creation | Argentina | Colombia | Finland | France | Hungary | Israel | Liberia | Overall | |||||||||||||||||
15 | To what extent did the government proactively and transparently communicate a timeline outlining the National Action Plan development process? | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | |||||||||||||||||
16 | To what extent did the government proactively and transparently communicate who the OGP point of contact for developing the action plan was, including their name, position, department/ministry, and contact details? | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1.86 | |||||||||||||||||
17 | To what extent did the government proactively and transparently communicate who the minister or senior official with accountability and final decision making responsibility for the action plan is? | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1.29 | |||||||||||||||||
18 | To what extent were all documents relating to the National Action Plan published? | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1.57 | |||||||||||||||||
19 | To what extent were all documents relating to the National Action Plan made available in the official national language(s)? | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | |||||||||||||||||
20 | To what extent were progress updates proactively and transparently published in a regular and timely fashion? | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 1.57 | |||||||||||||||||
21 | To what extent did the government proactively and transparently communicate opportunities to be involved in the development of the National Action Plan? | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2.14 | |||||||||||||||||
22 | To what extent was a public consultation of a suitable duration held on the action plan? | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1.57 | |||||||||||||||||
23 | To what extent was the information that the government made available prior to the start of the public consultation process sufficient to understand how it would work | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1.29 | |||||||||||||||||
24 | To what extent were inputs to the public consultation on the National Action Plan published? | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.71 | |||||||||||||||||
25 | To what extent was it communicated why inputs to the public consultation were or were not taken into account? | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0.71 | |||||||||||||||||
26 | To what extent were there frequent meetings between civil society organisations and the government on the action plan? | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 2.14 | |||||||||||||||||
27 | To what extent were the details of meetings (i.e. date, time, venue, topic) widely publicised? | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 1.43 | |||||||||||||||||
28 | To what extent were opportunities provided for remote participation in meetings? | 2 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1.43 | |||||||||||||||||
29 | To what extent were any meetings or events held outside of the capital? | 0 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1.57 | |||||||||||||||||
30 | To what extent were minutes of meetings between civil society organisations and government on the National Action Plan published in an accessible place and format appropriate to local context? | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0.86 | |||||||||||||||||
31 | To what extent did government make attempts to engage citizens and grassroots civil society groups in the National Action Plan consultation process? | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1.43 | |||||||||||||||||
32 | To what extent was civil society free to self-organise? | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2.71 | |||||||||||||||||
33 | To what extent were government officials open about the political feasibility of adopting a commitment? | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1.29 | |||||||||||||||||
34 | To what extent was the OGP Point of Contact and other lead government officials willing to push for internal change? | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 | |||||||||||||||||
35 | To what extent was it communicated why inputs were or were not taken into account regarding specific commitments? | 0 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | |||||||||||||||||
36 | To what extent did civil society organisations have a significant level of involvement and influence in the development of the framing and narrative for the action plan? | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 1.43 | |||||||||||||||||
37 | To what extent did civil society organisations have involvement in the development of commitments for the action plan? | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 1.29 | |||||||||||||||||
38 | To what extent did civil society organisations have influence over which commitments were included in the action plan? | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1.14 | |||||||||||||||||
39 | In your opinion, how would you judge the strength of the partnership between key government officials and engaged civil society organisations? | 0 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1.14 | |||||||||||||||||
40 | How would you rate the quality of the engagement process regarding the National Action Plan as compared to other experiences of civil society engagement by government? | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1.57 | |||||||||||||||||
41 | PART B: Overall | 38% | 65% | 68% | 65% | 26% | 14% | 77% | 50% | |||||||||||||||||
42 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
43 | PART C: NAP Quality | Argentina | Colombia | Finland | France | Hungary | Israel | Liberia | Overall | |||||||||||||||||
44 | To what extent does the commitment describe the specific activity that will be undertaken? | 2 | 2.6 | 2.4 | 2.6 | 2 | 2.2 | 2.8 | 2.37 | |||||||||||||||||
45 | To what extent does the commitment describe the problem it is trying to solve? | 2.4 | 0 | 2.4 | 2.8 | 1.4 | 2.4 | 2.8 | 2.03 | |||||||||||||||||
46 | To what extent does the commitment include a breakdown of interim milestones and final deadlines? | 2.4 | 2 | 2.2 | 1.4 | 0.6 | 2.2 | 2 | 1.83 | |||||||||||||||||
47 | To what extent does the commitment set out measurable and verifiable outputs and outcomes against which it can demonstrate fulfillment and improvement? | 1.8 | 1.6 | 1.6 | 2 | 1 | 0.2 | 2.6 | 1.54 | |||||||||||||||||
48 | To what extent does the commitment specify who has ownership and responsibility for its implementation? | 3 | 2.2 | 1.2 | 1 | 1 | 2.8 | 3 | 2.03 | |||||||||||||||||
49 | To what extent does the commitment specify all government, civil society, multilateral or private sector partners? | 2 | 1.4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1.2 | 2.2 | 1.69 | |||||||||||||||||
50 | To what extent do you consider the commitment to be sufficiently challenging? | 1.2 | 1.2 | 2.2 | 2 | 1.8 | 2.8 | 1.8 | 1.86 | |||||||||||||||||
51 | If the commitment is related to a commitment from a previous NAP, do you consider it to be a significant improvement? | 0.8 | 1.6 | 1.6 | 2 | 1.2 | 1 | 2.8 | 1.57 | |||||||||||||||||
52 | To what extent does the action plan match open government priorities identified by civil society? | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1.57 | |||||||||||||||||
53 | In your opinion, how would you judge the extent to which the government is sincere in its commitment to being an open government? | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1.43 | |||||||||||||||||
54 | To what extent are the broader plans and activities of government consistent with the principles of open government and contents of the action plan? | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0.86 | |||||||||||||||||
55 | PART C: Overall | 52% | 50% | 59% | 54% | 30% | 49% | 78% | 53% | |||||||||||||||||
56 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
57 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
58 | OVERALL | 41% | 44% | 66% | 60% | 32% | 28% | 77% | 50% | |||||||||||||||||
59 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
60 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
61 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
62 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
63 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
64 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
65 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
66 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
67 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
68 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
69 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
70 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
71 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
72 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
73 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
74 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
75 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
76 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
77 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
78 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
79 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
80 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
81 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
82 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
83 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
84 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
85 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
86 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
87 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
88 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
89 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
90 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
91 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
92 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
93 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
94 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
95 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
96 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
97 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
98 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
99 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
100 |