Inception Report – Action plan – Montevideo, Uruguay, 2023 – 2025
- Action Plan: Action plan – Montevideo, Uruguay, 2023 – 2025
Overview
Name of Evaluator
Juan José Prada
Member Name
Montevideo, Uruguay
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... Title
Action plan – Montevideo, Uruguay, 2023 – 2025
Section 1.
Compliance with
co-creation requirements
1.1 Does a forum exist?
Unclear
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
Although the plan’s creation process involved civil society, a formal forum for monitoring its implementation was not established. Communication channels included the Montevideo Open Government Observatory and email. Additionally, the city’s participatory platform facilitated inquiries and discussions about the plan.
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
The progress of the commitments was updated here periodically, but this was only after the plan was created.
1.2 Is the forum multi-stakeholder?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
As explained in 1.1, there was no formal forum with those characteristics, although during the process, there were two calls for proposals with dissemination, open to civil society.
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
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:
Two participatory sessions were held in a conversational format: one in person and one virtual. The first took place in June 2023 at the MVDLab facilities. Participants worked in teams, engaging in a dynamic of ideation and design with the broadest, most open-ended prompts possible. The participants generated input that could later be transformed into actionable ideas. For the second session, the RGA (Open Government Network of Uruguay) requested a virtual format to allow for greater participation. While more people attended, some who had participated in the first session did not, resulting in significantly different potential commitments than those initially proposed. These ideas were not explored further. This session utilized a format of smaller breakout rooms, each with a different theme, allowing participants to join the room that most interested them.
1.4 Has the action plan been endorsed by the stakeholders of the forum or steering committeeThe Steering Committee is OGP’s executive decision-making body. Its role is to develop, promote and safeguard OGP’s values, principles and interests; establish OGP’s core ideas, policies, and ru.../group?
Unclear
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
There were no formal interactions with forum members, such as satisfaction surveys or polls. The plan was only submitted for public consultation after its creation.
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:
There is the Open Government Observatory of Montevideo, where the periodic progress of the goals of 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... was posted.
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
Montevideo’s Open Government Observatory
2.2 Did the government provide information to stakeholders in advance to facilitate informed and prepared participation 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...?
No
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
In both instances, a brief presentation of the plan’s purpose, OGP’s values, and the importance of strengthening these types of spaces to discuss and propose actions related to open government was given.
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
The presentations made by the team at each stage are attached.
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:
As the culmination of the process, a public consultation was held through the Montevideo Participa platform, in which the commitments to be integrated into the plan were submitted for citizen consideration. The feedback received was analyzed according to the parameters of relevanceAccording to the OGP Articles of Governance, OGP commitments should include a clear open government lens. Specifically, they should advance at least one of the OGP values: transparency, citizen partic..., feasibility, and priority.
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
Public consultation – Open Government Action Plan
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?
No
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
There were no formal communication channels with the participants of the discussions after they took place. The only recourse was the Public Consultation, where they could verify whether their contributions had been taken into account, but nothing more than that.
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?
No
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The commitment sheets were drafted by the Open Government and Digital Proximity team of the Montevideo Municipality, based on input generated during co-creation sessions, contributions received from participants, and in agreement with the government authorities who would be responsible for these commitments.
2.6 Would you consider the forum to be inclusive and diverse?
Somewhat
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
Since we did not have a formally constituted forum, we were guided by the participants in the discussions, where it was inclusive in all aspects, but not beyond that.
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
No information available
Section 3.
Initial evaluation
of commitments
1 Commitment :
Improve the flow of information with citizens regarding cleaning complaints
1.1 Is the commitment verifiable?
Unclear
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The original idea was to implement a system for differential response and citizen dialogue to address repeated complaints about overflowing containers, explaining the actions taken. This involved managing segmented communications, by zone and based on the characteristics of the citizen complaints.
Evidence:
Inputs and visualizations were generated for the public through the Montevideo Observatory (Environmental). There, various information can be observed regarding the situation of containers and their removal in the city.
1.2 Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify relevance to OGP values?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
With this information, the Intendencia level generates visualizations and makes them available to the public so that they can learn firsthand what is happening in their neighborhood regarding the re-election and the complaints received in this regard.
Evidence:
– Data on Cleaning and waste management
– A greener Montevideo online
1.3 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:
A new regulationGovernment reformers are developing regulations that enshrine values of transparency, participation, and accountability in government practices. Technical specifications: Act of creating or reforming ..., policy, practice or requirement.
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
While it is not a regulation as such, it promotes a different culture of cleanliness in the city, with citizen involvement and active participation in reporting problems with containers and cleanliness in general in Montevideo.
Evidence:
Together with the Motocarros program and Montevideo Más Verde, and in particular MVD Más Verde en línea, inputs are generated that can be viewed in the Environmental Observatory.
The actions carried out can be divided into three milestones :
– Identification of complaints, response times, type of information provided, etc.
– Implementation of the differentiated response system
– Evaluation of the implemented system
1.4 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:
While option 2 is more appropriate, part of option 3 is also correct, in the sense that it can promote a change in rules related to waste management and cleaning in the city, depending on the citizenry’s commitment to participating in these actions.
Evidence:
The practice was implemented as a pilot program in one area, and so far, no results have been released. It is hoped that now, with a new administration and government authorities, this input will be considered to foster a two-way dialogue with the public.
1.5 Are there any recommended changes to the design of the commitment to help improve its implementation?
The greatest challenge may lie in citizen participationAccording to OGP’s Articles of Governance, citizen participation occurs when “governments seek to mobilize citizens to engage in public debate, provide input, and make contributions that lead to m... More, which requires the commitment of the various areas of the city involved in the policy changes regarding waste collection. Regarding communication, it is crucial that the population of Montevideo effectively and proactively engages in this new waste management system.
2 Commitment :
Map of cultural spaces of Montevideo
2.1 Is the commitment verifiable?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The main objective was to create a centralized and easily accessible map showing locations where cultural activities take place in Montevideo, providing citizens with a single place to find different venues and their characteristics. Furthermore, it aimed to create spaces for citizens to use, including for presenting their own work.
Provide evidence:
Map of Cultural Spaces in Montevideo
2.2 Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify relevance to OGP values?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
With this information, the Intendency can easily and accessibly visualize where neighborhood spaces promoting culture are located, and thus see if there are areas of the city where culture has little penetration and where it is necessary to carry out activities that promote it.
Provide evidence:
The link Map of Cultural Spaces in Montevideo includes not only the points, but also the characteristics of the spaces: type of space, capacity, etc.
2.3 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:
A continuation of ongoing practice in line with existing legislationCreating and passing legislation is one of the most effective ways of ensuring open government reforms have long-lasting effects on government practices. Technical specifications: Act of creating or r..., policies or requirements.
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
We understand that this is a continuation of the policy of promoting culture throughout the territory, an aspect that was emphasized during the 2020-2025 administration to ensure that culture reached all parts of the city in various ways.
Provide evidence:
Within the Montevideo Observatory, a space was created offering a wealth of data and information related to culture: https://montevidata.montevideo.gub.uy/cultura. Likewise, several of the actions (plans and programs) promoted by the Municipality in this area can be found on the Department of Culture’s website..
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:
While it is positive, it does not require its use by the population, but rather gives more tools to both the Municipality and the citizens themselves, to know the spaces and then decide based on their interests
Provide Evidence
The links mentioned in section 2.1.3 could be cited, particularly the one on Culture and Leisure, which showcases several activities and examples of initiatives promoted during this period (in addition to a map of centers and spaces). This link highlights a project that began some time ago as a pilot program but has since become institutionalized. It even creates spaces where Montevideo residents can register to promote their talents.
2.5 Are there any recommended changes to the design of the commitment to help improve its implementation?
One challenge could be carrying out the survey of spaces in the city, but there was a team from the Department of Culture of the Municipality that took on the commitment and managed to overcome the difficulties inherent in any survey of spaces or areas in the city.
Leave a Reply