Skip Navigation
Aragón, Spain

Inception Report – Action plan – Aragón, Spain, 2024 – 2026

Overview

Name of Evaluator

Cesar N. Cruz-Rubio

Email

[email protected]

Member Name

Aragón, Spain

Action Plan Title

Action plan – Aragón, Spain, 2024 – 2026

Section 1.
Compliance with
co-creation requirements

1.1 Does a forum exist?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

As in the previous cycle, this is assessed in terms of functionality and results, and, based on what is described in the document “IRM in a Box,” it is affirmed that the Government of Aragón meets the minimum requirements associated with the space referred to as a “forum.”
For the Government of Aragón, articulating participatory processes through a regular space or forum meant leveraging (rather than creating or designing) the existing ecosystem of organizations, social platforms, and initiatives to structure the co-creation process—ecosystem hosted within the Aragón Open Government Lab (LAAAB).
According to a recent IRM reporting document on OGP Local programs,
“…there is no single approach to ensuring and maintaining multisector participation in OGP Local members. Where multi-stakeholder forums exist, they are structured and operate in diverse ways adapted to their local contexts” (IRM-OGP: 2025).
The steering group (“grupo motor”) met on 18 December 2023 with the purpose of reviewing the previous cycle and initiating the co-creation process for Aragón’s second Open Government Action Plan. According to the meeting minutes, the steering group consisted of:

  • Miguel Ángel Lafuente – Director General of Institutional Relations, External Action and Transparency, Government of Aragón
  • Eva Fortea Báguena – Director General for Family, Childhood, and Birthrate, Government of Aragón
  • Carlos Oliván – Head of Citizen Participation and Social Innovation Service, Government of Aragón
  • Susana Barriga – Technical Advisor, Government of Aragón
  • Mariana Cancela – OGP Aragón Technical Secretariat
  • Elisa Barrera – Plena Inclusión Aragón
  • Carlos Romero Piqueras – Fractal Strategy
  • Enrique Cebrián – University of Zaragoza
  • Juan David Gómez – University of Zaragoza
  • Alejandra – Aragonesa de Servicios Telemáticos

Members of the monitoring body from the previous cycle also participated.

1.2 Is the forum multi-stakeholder?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

Through the LAAAB, a collaborative network has been set up that brings together a set of key actors from diverse backgrounds: social organizations, platforms, private entities, and public entities.

The actor map includes 762 entities, of which 534 are Social Entities (70%); 62 Professional Associations (8%); 47 Consumer, Neighborhood and District Associations (6%); 41 Local Public Entities; 35 Participation Bodies; 18 University of Zaragoza entities; 15 public Institutions and Administrations; and 10 Economic and Social Agents.

The monitoring body assesses that the co-creation spaces enabled by the steering group effectively allowed participation from civil society and any other interested non-governmental actor.

1.3 Does the forum hold at least one meeting with civil society and non-governmental stakeholders during the co-creation of the action plan?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

During March, more than 700 actors received an invitation to participate in the participatory process for the second Action Plan. A virtual informational session associated with the process—open to civil society stakeholders—was held on 9 April 2024, during which the five proposals identified in the preceding “Phase Zero” session were introduced.

Then, as part of the co-creation process, a participatory workshop was held on 21 May 2024 with three working groups linked to the three commitments selected through the voting process. It brought together 47 participants, many of whom represented the CSOs involved in the activities and commitments.

As in the previous co-creation process, and due to the methodology associated with the LAAAB, there was no single event explicitly designed to convene government and civil society actors together. Nonetheless, it can be stated that there were continual interactions, spaces, and moments where civil society, stakeholders, and government met and collaborated during all phases of the action plan’s co-creation.

Provide references here (e.g. interviews):

A video of this virtual session is available

1.4 Has the action plan been endorsed by the stakeholders of the forum or steering committee/group?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The Second Aragón Open Government Action Plan has the support of key stakeholders, including:

  • Nieves Campillo, Deputy Director, AST
  • Cynthia Nale, Partner and Technical Advisor, Digital +60
  • Elisa Barrera, Technical Advisor, Plena Inclusión Aragón
  • Ángeles Cepero, Technical Advisor DFA, DFA – CERMI
  • Sara Cortes, Coordinator, Rural Youth Facilitators
  • Silvia Benedí, Technical Advisor for Rural Development, ADRI Jiloca – Gallocanta
  • Enrique Cebrián, Professor and Researcher, UNIZAR

Provide references here (e.g. interviews):

Information available on the OGP website

Section 2.
Recommended practices
in co-creation

2.1 Does the government maintain a Local OGP website or webpage on a government website where information on the OGP Local process (co-creation and implementation) is proactively published?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The information sources related to the OGP process are located in three virtual spaces. On the one hand, there is the Aragón Open Government platform, which hosts and manages all the participatory processes associated with the Government of Aragón and, in general, most of those embedded within the Second Action Plan and, specifically, all those driven directly by the LAAAB. Second, within this same open government portal, a dedicated space—just as in the previous cycle—was created specifically for the co-creation process of the Second Aragón Open Government Action Plan.

Regarding implementation, several sources of updated information exist, the main one being this same open government portal, which provides information on various milestones and initiatives related to the three commitments. Additionally, there is the LAAAB blog, which, although not updated as regularly as desired and not including all the activities carried out by the LAAAB, does contain a substantial amount of information on the progress of some calls and initiatives linked to the Second Action Plan. There is also a repository of files and folders hosted on Google Drive where documents and evidence related to the implementation of the commitments in the Second Plan are also added.

Provide references here (e.g. interviews):

Aragón Open Government platform 
A dedicated space in the platform 
LAAB
Google Drive repository

2.2 Did the government provide information to stakeholders in advance to facilitate informed and prepared participation in the co-creation process?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The Government of Aragón, through the LAAAB, provided from the outset all the information on the participatory process linked to the co-creation of the Second Action Plan, beginning with a feedback exercise related to the previous cycle, a methodological and chronological roadmap for that process, as well as information related to the selection of strategic areas and the participatory workshops. As previously mentioned, an online informational session related to this process was held on April 9, 2024, in which civil society actors were invited, and the five proposals identified in the earlier session of phase zero were presented. Later, within the co-creation process, on May 21, 2025, a participatory event was held with three working groups, each corresponding to one of the three commitments selected through the voting process, with 47 participants, many of them representatives of CSOs involved in the activities and commitments.

2.3 Did the government ensure that any interested member of the public could make inputs into the action plan and observe or have access to decision-making documentation?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

During the information session and commitment workshops, the Government of Aragón offered opportunities to improve or propose content for the Action Plan. These co-creation sessions were open to the public. Additionally, documentation generated during the process was made available on the dedicated website.
However, although initially planned—as in the previous cycle—the Citizen Editor tool was ultimately not activated. In the view of the monitoring body, this may have limited opportunities to collect public input.

Provide references here (e.g. interviews):

Aragon Open Government Platform 
The Citizen Editor is a web interface for sharing drafts or legislative proposals and allowing online comments and proposals (crowdlaw).

2.4 Did the government proactively report back or provide written feedback to stakeholders on how their contributions were considered during the creation of the action plan?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The Government of Aragón sent the draft action plan—reflecting the thematic priorities associated with this process—to the actors involved in the co-creation process. Additionally, as part of the co-creation methodology used by the LAAAB, a consolidation session was designed and held, during which proactive information was provided on the content of the contributions received and on those considered for inclusion in the Second Action Plan. This was carried out in three stages. The first involved voting on the axes to be included; the second was the workshop session where key aspects related to the three final axes were debated and proposed in a participatory manner, identifying—through a SWOT and CAME methodology—the opportunities, threats, challenges, and strengths, as well as the means and strategies to address or reinforce them. The final feedback session was combined with the presentation of the action plan, and it provided key information on the receipt of 28 contributions related to the three commitments, as well as the reasoned responses to each of them, as previously mentioned, with 13 of these contributions being accepted either fully or partially and 15 not accepted.

Provide references here (e.g. interviews):

Results of the vote 
Workshop minutes 
Google Drive Templates 

2.5 Was there an iterative dialogue and shared ownership between government and non-governmental stakeholders during the decision making process, including setting the agenda?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The methodology replicated the previous cycle and was structured in phases aimed at identifying priorities, developing commitments, and drafting them, designed to facilitate shared work between government and civil society. Interaction and dialogue were strongest during the working group phase, where commitments were developed.

2.6 Would you consider the forum to be inclusive and diverse?

Very

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The forum is inclusive and diverse, and the action plan’s content seeks to reduce social exclusion from multiple angles. However, as in the previous cycle, youth, migrants, and some gender-identity minorities were under-represented. Similarly, as in many OGP processes, attracting business groups and young entrepreneurs remains a challenge.

Section 3.
Initial evaluation
of commitments

1 Commitment :

Supporting older persons through participatory and innovative measures

1.1 Is the commitment verifiable?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

As presented in the Commitment document, the activities show a high level of verifiability. A minor observation relates to the milestones of the “Older People’s Lab,” as the text does not describe how projects for prototyping will be selected, nor how the laboratory will be structured.
According to conversations with the monitoring body, the PoC explained that the lab will operate through a double call:
call for project proposals; selection of five initiatives; second call for collaborators to help prototype the selected projects.

Teams will meet with collaborators for two and a half days to define and prototype the projects. This methodology differs from what the LAAAB has traditionally used.

1.2 Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify relevance to OGP values?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The milestones are clearly relevant to public participation. Together, they contribute to improving public services for older adults through a comprehensive strategy with an inclusive approach—particularly through participatory development of a new Law on Older Persons and a Strategy against Undesired Loneliness. The plan narrative links the commitment clearly to OGP values, including civic space and inclusion.

1.3 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:

a new regulation, policy, practice or requirement.

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

Except for the actions of La Compañía, which, while highly relevant, represent a continuation of an already existing agenda, the other activities and initiatives defined in the commitment will give rise to a new policy or practice.
Two reflections underpin this assessment.  First, it includes not only a participatory drafting of a new Law on Older Persons for Aragón, but also the definition of a strategy that takes into account older adults and their issues related to undesired loneliness, the creation of a laboratory, and the piloting of service-improvement projects affecting them—all under a single strategic umbrella, which is additionally linked to hundreds of specific, widespread, in-person training activities targeting these groups across the territory.
Therefore, in the assessment of the monitoring body, this represents the most ambitious commitment in this Second Action Plan.

1.4 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:

will result in a change of the rules, practices or policies that govern a policy area, public sector and/or relationship between citizens and is binding or institutionalized across government or specific institution(s).

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

If fully implemented, it could consolidate a new strategy or model of care in the region, led by the Directorate-General for Older Persons in collaboration with the LAAAB.
The new law will, of course, require approval by the regional parliament (Cortes de Aragón). Its impact will depend on the ambition behind both the law and the strategic framework.
Given Aragón’s strong institutional experience in this policy area, it is a feasible setting for transformative change addressing depopulation, loneliness, digital inclusion, and technological adaptation for older persons.

1.5 Are there any recommended changes to the design of the commitment to help improve its implementation?

A couple of issues are recommended to improve the design of the commitment:

  • It is recommended to work on strategically articulating the different actions within this commitment in order to explore ways to enhance its effectiveness—for example, leveraging in-person courses in the territory to promote participatory processes and gather inputs for the Strategy Against Loneliness, or to inform the draft Law, as well as to identify new relevant topics related to training activities, challenges, or issues that could be addressed in subsequent rounds in the Older Persons’ Lab.
  • Due to its ambition and complexity, it is also recommended to strengthen evaluation efforts for this commitment, and, if possible, to explore the possibility of designing and conducting a specific evaluation using methodologies associated with significant changes or success cases. This would go beyond the methodology and work of the monitoring body linked to the Second Action Plan and would assess the results and effects of implementing the entire strategy. Such an evaluation would not only document the commitment and its implementation across all initiatives but also provide insights and knowledge to answer key questions about which factors contributed to successful or unsuccessful implementation, and how this process generated changes in access to rights, public services, the use of technological advantages, the reduction of undesired loneliness, and the improvement of the quality of life for older adults and their environment.

2 Commitment :

Decentralization of LAAAB: boosting the relationship with the rural world and addressing depopulation

2.1 Is the commitment verifiable?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

This commitment outlines clearly identifiable and measurable activities to determine its fulfillment. However, achieving the commitment’s objective requires more detail in the narrative of two of the four initiatives. Specifically, in milestones 1 to 4 associated with the LAAAB + Made in Rural initiative, it is unclear how LAAAB will promote this project and generate added value through its partnership beyond financial and promotional support. A similar situation exists in the collaboration initiative and the Gloria Villalba Award (milestones 5 to 10). In discussions with the Proof of Concept (PoC), it was reported that LAAAB’s position prioritizes, above all, and rather than advancing specific routes or methodologies, facilitating LAAAB’s learning from the experience already accumulated by these rural groups and networks, as well as prioritizing the promotion of initiatives conceived and developed within the territory.

The initiative associated with Rural Pride Day proposes general support and promotional actions, the final quantification of which depends on collective decisions that have not yet been made. Even so, its narrative allows for verifiability at milestones 11 through 15.

Finally, the milestone related to support for on-demand initiatives (milestone 16) is verifiable because, in addition to being the initiative with the largest budget allocation, its implementation can be verified by monitoring these allocations, and the narrative defines an annual support range of between five and six projects.
Throughout the implementation process, and to achieve greater clarity and enhance verifiability, it is essential to provide more detailed information on the actions planned within these milestones (1 through 10), thereby providing a more detailed understanding of LAAAB’s specific contribution in terms of capacity building, support, funding, and assistance, where applicable.

Text of the commitment 

2.2 Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify relevance to OGP values?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The milestones included in this commitment are clearly relevant to participation, as supporting these initiatives aims to expand and enable spaces for innovation and participation by rural communities. In this context, the LAAAB’s decentralization strategy is clearly linked to protecting civic space and promoting inclusion.

Therefore, this commitment recognizes the fundamental role of rural areas, young people, and other groups in advocating for, building, and defending their rights through open and participatory spaces capable of generating and implementing highly relevant social innovation projects.

2.3 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:

a continuation of ongoing practice in line with existing legislation, policies or requirements.

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

This commitment is valued as a continuation of ongoing practices, in line with existing legislation, policies, and actions.

It should be noted that, of the initiatives promoted, only the Gloria Villalba Award is a new practice, and it will be advisable to assess not only the achievement and fulfillment of the milestones, but also their reception and sustainability in the short term. It will also be advisable to closely monitor the other initiatives throughout the cycle, to understand in detail the role of LAAAB in their implementation, and how LAAAB can generate synergies with other relevant cross-cutting and integrative actions. In particular, the monitoring body should assess, at the end of this Action Plan, how the fulfillment of the milestones included therein has contributed to greater inclusion and a stronger civic space for young students, the educational community, and the groups and platforms that promote and advocate for rights in rural Aragon. and how the extension of these projects to more regions has been able to impact improving the quality of life of their inhabitants, reducing inequalities and guaranteeing rights in the rural world, for which it will be necessary, beyond the information on achievement and compliance, information on the perception of changes, which also allows recovering success stories (if they are generated and identified) linked to supported projects and recognized initiatives.

2.4 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:

is a positive change to a process, practice or policy but will not generate a binding or institutionalized change across government or specific institution(s).

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The monitoring body values ​​the fact that the activities of this commitment, taken together, represent a positive change in a process, practice, or policy, although they will not generate binding or institutionalized changes in the government or specific institutions.

These are actions that operate based on existing regulations and tools, some of which have already made progress. Perhaps the novelty within this commitment is the Gloria Villalba Award initiative. The milestones do not propose binding changes or changes associated with profound institutional transformations, but rather strengthen existing practices and implementation instruments. Even so, another new development, understood here as the final value identified by the monitoring body, is that, if the activities of this commitment are fully implemented, conditions could be created to change the business-as-usual role of the Autonomous Community of Aragon in this policy area, redefining the role of LAAAB as a decentralized, necessary, and effective space that, together with other ongoing networks and initiatives, contributes to the fight for the empowerment of rural areas and against the effects of depopulation. This would generate institutional strengthening for existing networks and an improvement in the rules, practices, and opportunities associated with promoting social innovation based on participation and openness for rural Aragon. However, this change will require ambitious implementation and a clear strategy for exchange, collaboration, and coordinated work.

2.5 Are there any recommended changes to the design of the commitment to help improve its implementation?

No changes to the commitment’s design are recommended.

The monitoring body considers it relevant to make efforts to centralize information that allows the public, involved platforms, and citizens to provide integrated monitoring of the participation of LAAAB and the Government of Aragon as a whole in this agenda against depopulation and in the promotion of balanced territorial development. The action monitoring space within this plan could be a good platform for this, if it is accompanied by supplementary information beyond simply certifying compliance.

Additionally, there is a significant convergence between the actions proposed and included in the commitment and those integrated globally within the Young Rural Developers (JDR) project. Therefore, it is also recommended to ensure robust and effective coordination between LAAAB and JDR during implementation. This would allow for a more efficient, coherent, and complementary approach to connecting needs and thus enable the development of even more relevant and impactful actions.

3 Commitment :

Easy reading, clear communication, and citizens’ support service for marginalized groups

3.1 Is the commitment verifiable?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

This commitment and its seven milestones clearly describe actions that can be analyzed, assessed, and verified in terms of compliance.

The monitoring body only identifies some vagueness in the definition of the actions related to the information campaign on Easy Government, as the materials, target audiences, and objectives are not defined. Similarly, regarding the training course on clear communication, it does not define the minimum number of enrolled officials, the chosen teaching format, or the type of official profile that will be selected. It is worth noting that in the first Action Plan, training activities along these lines were carried out in conjunction with the Digital Services of Aragon (SDA), and it is unclear whether this area will have the support of this Service in this second plan, and what potential collaborative role it might play.

To consult the text of the commitment 

3.2 Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify relevance to OGP values?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

Yes, access to information and citizen participation.

The Second Local OGP Action Plan of Aragon has at its core mission the promotion of effective transparency, based on models of public participation and inclusion as its guiding principle. Therefore, in accordance with this model and vision, the monitoring body considers that these milestones and activities are appropriate to this mission component and are directed towards the intended objective of continuous improvement, in clear alignment with OGP values.

To consult the text of the commitment 

3.3 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:

a continuation of ongoing practice in line with existing legislation, policies or requirements.

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

This commitment is seen as a continuation of ongoing practices, in line with existing legislation, policies, and actions. This is because it comprises a set of key actions that, in one way or another, were already part of the previous work agenda of the Citizen Participation and Social Innovation Services and the Transparency Service.

The differentiating value, in any case, lies in advancing the Easy Government initiatives with a focus on accessibility, as well as improving the usability and navigability of the Transparency Portal based, among other things, on the perceptions and assessments made by members of vulnerable groups, which will be identified through the planned workshops.

3.4 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:

is a positive change to a process, practice or policy but will not generate a binding or institutionalized change across government or specific institution(s).

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

As with the previous commitment ESARG0005, the monitoring body considers that, as worded, the activities of commitment ESARG0006 represent a positive change in a process, practice, or policy, but will not generate a binding or institutionalized change in the government or specific institutions. These are actions that operate on the basis of existing regulations and tools, some of which have already made progress. Despite the aforementioned difference, it is understood that this commitment further consolidates and strengthens a public transparency strategy based on inclusive participation.

3.5 Are there any recommended changes to the design of the commitment to help improve its implementation?

Changes to the engagement design are not recommended.

Filed under: Europe Inception Report Local Local Monitoring Body Report

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *