Action plan – Cartagena de Indias, Colombia, 2026 – 2027

5th May 2026

Overview

At-a-Glance

Action PlanAction plans are at the core of a government’s participation in OGP. They are the product of a co-creation process in which government and civil society jointly develop commitments to open governmen...: Action plan – Cartagena de Indias, Colombia, 2026 – 2027

Action Plan Submission: 2026
Action Plan End: October 2027

Lead Institution: General Secretariat (institutional coordination and citizen services), Advisory Office of Information Technology (digital transformationGovernments are working to increase access to and quality of government services, improve transparency, and create opportunities for participation by using information and communications technologies.... More), District Planning Secretariat, Social Emergency Plan – PES, School of Government

Description

Duration

Dec 2027

Date Submitted

23rd April 2026

Foreword(s)

The District of Cartagena de Indias adopts open government as a way of governing centered on people, aimed at guaranteeing rights and solving public problems through evidence, dialogue, and shared responsibility. This approach practically integrates transparencyAccording to OGP’s Articles of Governance, transparency occurs when “government-held information (including on activities and decisions) is open, comprehensive, timely, freely available to the pub... More (clear, timely, and useful information), participation (real influence on decisions), and accountability (explanation of results, fulfillment of commitments, and continuous improvement), with the goal of strengthening public trust, improving the quality of services, and consolidating a closer, more legitimate, and effective relationship between the State and its citizens. Within the framework of the OGP Local Action Plan, the Mayor’s Office will promote collaborative governance with civil society organizations, academia, the private sectorGovernments are working to open private sector practices as well — including through beneficial ownership transparency, open contracting, and regulating environmental standards. Technical specificat... More, oversight bodies, and communities from neighborhoods and rural districts, fostering diverse and inclusive participation from the co-creation of solutions to the monitoring and evaluation of progress.

The Plan prioritizes commitments with a territorial focus, public innovation, and the strengthening of institutional capacities: to strengthen and facilitate digital channels for procedures, public services, and access to information through Catalina; to promote the formulation and agreement of the Territorial Land Use Plan (POT) with broad, informed, and meaningful participation; to consolidate spaces for decision-making and joint construction through neighborhood meetings that bring the administration closer to local realities; and to improve relationships among the public sector, private sector, and citizens to enhance shared solutions, partnerships, and social oversight. For its implementation, teams responsible for each commitmentOGP commitments are promises for reform co-created by governments and civil society and submitted as part of an action plan. Commitments typically include a description of the problem, concrete action... will be established, an inter-institutional coordination scheme with clear roles will be adopted, and a monitoring mechanism with the participation of non-governmental actors will be put in place.

Open Government Challenges, Opportunities and Strategic Vision

This subsection details the Open Government Strategic Vision in your local area that should guide the commitments for the action plan period.

What is the long-term vision for open government in your context and jurisdiction?

To consolidate in Cartagena an open government ecosystem that ensures:

timely and understandable access to information and services;
meaningful, place-based participation in key city decisions; and
evidence-based accountability.

By 2030, the city will have integrated digital and in-person channels, with an inclusive approach, enabling citizens to stay informed, participate, oversee, and co-create public solutions, thereby strengthening trust in institutions.

What are the achievements in open government to date (for example, recent open government reforms)?

Key achievements include:

Transparency and access to public information: institutional mechanisms have been strengthened to publish key management information, improve responses to citizen requests, and promote compliance with proactive transparency obligations, contributing to a more visible and traceable administration.
Open dataBy opening up data and making it sharable and reusable, governments can enable informed debate, better decision making, and the development of innovative new services. Technical specifications: Polici... and information reuse: the District has an open data portal that enables publication of datasets for consultation, analysis, and reuse by citizens, academia, and the private sector. This supports evidence-based public decisions and debates, and creates conditions for social oversight and innovation.
Citizen-oriented digital transformation: steps have been taken to improve access to procedures, services, and information, advancing toward simpler, more user-friendly digital channels with a service approach and reduced barriers.
Territorial participation and dialogue: engagement spaces with communities in neighborhoods and rural districts allow needs to be heard, challenges prioritized, and solutions built with a territorial focus, strengthening direct government–citizen relations and enabling co-creation and community monitoring.
Coordination with non-governmental actors: engagement with social organizations, oversight bodies, academia, and the private sector has been strengthened, enabling collaboration to address public challenges and improve decision legitimacy, especially in planning and social oversight.

What are the current challenges/areas for improvement in open government that the jurisdiction wishes to tackle?

Gaps persist in:

access to and tracking of procedures and requests, especially for populations facing digital barriers;
effective and representative participation in strategic decisions;
public–private–citizen coordination to address complex problems; and
proactive transparency and clear communication on progress and results.

There is also a need to institutionalize mechanisms for public monitoring of commitments and decisions.

What are the medium-term open government goals that the government wants to achieve?

Improve the citizen experience in accessing information, procedures, and tracking through integrated digital solutions.
Increase meaningful participation in territorial planning processes and decision-making, with a locality-based approach.
Strengthen coordination among the public sector, private sector, and citizens to generate public value and improve city indicators.
Establish a framework for periodic monitoring and accountability regarding the plan’s prioritized commitments.

How does this action plan contribute to achieve the Open Government Strategic Vision?

The plan’s commitments operationalize the strategic vision by:

facilitating access to services and information, as well as citizen monitoring;
opening and strengthening participation in a key city-wide planning instrument;
bringing decision-making to the territory through neighborhood meetings; and
creating public–private–citizen coordination spaces to co-manage solutions.

Together, these actions enhance transparency, participation, and trust through verifiable outputs and measurable milestones.

How does the open government strategic vision contribute to the accomplishment of the current administration’s overall policy goals?

The open government vision contributes to the administration’s objectives by improving the efficiency and quality of public management, strengthening the State–citizen relationship, promoting evidence-based decision-making, and increasing the legitimacy of policies. It also supports more sustainable and inclusive territorial planning, the strategic use of technology and public innovation, and collaborative work with development actors to enhance quality of life.

Engagement and Coordination in the Open Government Strategic Vision and OGP Action Plan

Please list the lead institutions responsible for the implementation of this OGP action plan.

General Secretariat (institutional coordination and citizen services)
Advisory Office of Information Technology (digital transformation)
District Planning Secretariat
Social Emergency Plan – PES
School of Government

What kind of institutional arrangements are in place to coordinate between government agencies and departments to implement the OGP action plan?

An inter-institutional OGP technical team (working group) will be established, led by the General Secretariat, with responsible leads for each commitment and focal points from each department. The team will meet periodically, develop a work plan, monitoring matrices, and milestones, and report progress for publication. Operational decisions will be made by consensus and documented in minutes; where appropriate, coordination will take place with existing participation and planning bodies.

What kind of spaces have you used or created to enable the collaboration between government and civil society in the co-creation and implementation of this action plan? Mention both offline and online spaces.

In-person and virtual spaces were and/or will be used for co-creation and implementation, such as thematic working groups with civil society and the private sector; workshops and local forums for the POT; neighborhood meetings in communities; outreach and feedback sessions; and institutional digital channels for consultation, dissemination, and receiving input.

What measures did you take to ensure diversity of representation (including vulnerable or marginalized populations) in these spaces?

A territorial approach by localities was applied, with open and targeted outreach to include community organizations, oversight groups, academia, business associations, and populations facing participation barriers. Participation of women, youthRecognizing that investing in youth means investing in a better future, OGP participating governments are creating meaningful opportunities for youth to participate in government processes. Technical ... More, persons with disabilities, Afro-descendant populations, victims, and migrants was promoted through accessibility adjustments (schedules, venues, plain language), support from local leaders, and hybrid options (virtual/in-person) where possible.

Who participated in these spaces?

Participating stakeholders included implementing district agencies, participation bodies (e.g., the Territorial Planning Council), community organizations and neighborhood action boards, citizen oversight groups, civil society organizations, business associations and the private sector, academia, and unaffiliated citizens from neighborhoods and rural districts.

How many groups participated in these spaces?

How many public-facing meetings were held in the co-creation processCollaboration between government, civil society and other stakeholders (e.g., citizens, academics, private sector) is at the heart of the OGP process. Participating governments must ensure that a dive...?

How will government and non-governmental stakeholders continue to collaborate through the implementation of the action plan?

During implementation, working groups will operate for each commitment, with quarterly meetings or as defined by the milestone schedule. Progress will be shared, interim outputs validated, and feedback gathered for adjustments. Responsible entities will publish periodic reports and enable channels for citizen consultation; civil society and other stakeholdersCivil society organizations (CSOs) are indispensable actors in the OGP process. Governments are required to engage with civil society toward a clear and open process of participation. Civil society ma... will contribute through social monitoring, proposals, and oversight.

Please describe the independent Monitoring Body you have identified for this plan.

An independent monitoring mechanism is proposed with participation from academia and civil society through a working group that gathers evidence of milestone compliance, compares progress against committed deliverables, and issues public recommendations. This mechanism will be supported by a follow-up committee with representatives from a multi-stakeholder forumRegular dialogue between government and civil society is a core element of OGP participation. It builds trust, promotes joint problem-solving, and empowers civil society to influence the design, imple..., composed of actors from different sectors, to help ensure fulfillment of the commitments.

Provide the contact details for the independent monitoring body.

What types of activities will you have in place to discuss progress on commitments with stakeholders?

Follow-up meetings for each commitment; sessions to share progress in local communities; publication of brief reports and progress dashboards; and dialogue spaces with citizens and sectoral stakeholders to validate results and adjust implementation.

How will you regularly check in on progress with implementing agencies?

Quarterly reports from responsible departments, a matrix of milestones and evidence, review by the OGP technical committee, and requests for information/updates through institutional focal points.

How will you share the results of your monitoring efforts with the public?

Results will be disseminated through an institutional Open Government microsite, publications on the transparency portal, institutional social media, newsletters, and in-person outreach sessions in neighborhoods. Minutes, outputs, and progress reports will also be made available in clear, accessible language formats.

Endorsement from Non-Governmental Stakeholders