Inception Report – Action plan – Navarra, Spain, 2025 – 2027
- Action Plan: Action plan – Navarra, Spain, 2025 – 2027
Overview
Name of Evaluator
César N. Cruz-Rubio
Member Name
Navarra, Spain
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 – Navarra, Spain, 2025 – 2027
Section 1.
Compliance with
co-creation requirements
1.1 Does a forum exist?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
Based on the description in the document known as “IRM in a Box,” the monitoring body assesses that the Government of Navarra meets the minimum requirementsAll OGP participating countries are expected to adhere to the Participation and Co-Creation Standards. Each Standard includes clear and measurable minimum requirements that all OGP participating count... associated with the space referred to as 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...” or “forum.” In the process associated with the First Action Plan, this forum has taken the form of the Steering Group. In that document, a forum is defined as “… a group of government, civil society, and other stakeholders selected through a fair and transparent process, with a clear mandate, membership, and governance structure, that meets regularly to oversee the OGP process.” [30]
It should be noted that, according to a very recent report on OGP Local Programs around the world, [31] the report highlights the wide variety of approaches and mechanisms for the design, operation, and rules of so-called multi-stakeholder forums, as “… there is no single approach to ensuring and sustaining multisectoral participation among OGP’s local members.” “Where multi-stakeholder forums exist, they are structured and operate in varied ways adapted to their local contexts” (IRM-OGP: 2025).
Provide evidence for your answer:
Local-Inception-Assessment-Navarra-CoCreationProcess-ENG
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
[30] IRM Guide (IRM in a Box): Tools for Local Monitoring Entities Local OIGP Program. Open Government PartnershipThe Open Government Partnership (OGP) is a multi-stakeholder initiative focused on improving government transparency, ensuring opportunities for citizen participation in public matters, and strengthen... More (2021). Page 10.
[31] See also IRM-OGP (2025) Independent Reporting Mechanism 2025 Report on Local Action Plans. Open Government Partnership (draft version accessed: June 25, 2025)
1.2 Is the forum multi-stakeholder?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
Through the Open Government and Citizen Services Department, the Government of Navarra coordinates a collaborative network comprising a range of key stakeholders from diverse backgrounds, including social organizations, platforms, private entities, and public entities. Some of them play a key role in several of the activities and milestones included in the current Action Plan. Based on accumulated experience and that gained from the design and implementation of the previous 2021–2023 Open Government Plan, the Government of Navarra has been able to build a critical mass of entities, platforms, and CSOs with which to collaborate and develop participatory processes.
Provide evidence for your answer:
Local-Inception-Assessment-Navarra-CoCreationProcess-ENG
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:
As previously noted in the review of 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..., on October 15, 2024, the steering group held thematic roundtables on the three most-voted themes, attended by 28 participants representing up to 11 CSOs and organizations. [32] The document containing the minutes of the thematic working groups, [33], describes in detail the contributions made to each of the three thematic areas.
Provide evidence for your answer:
Local-Inception-Assessment-Navarra-CoCreationProcess-ENG
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
[32] The complete list of panel participants can be found at this link.
[33] Available at this link.
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?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The First OGP Local Action Plan for Open Government in Navarra has the support of stakeholders, including:
Edurne Barrenechea. Vice Rector for Digital Development at the Public University of Navarra (UPNA)
Maider Gabilondo. Coordinator of the UNICEF Committee of Navarra
Juan Jesús Echaide. FNMyC Technician.
Carlos Sarasibar. Secretary General of the Ombudsman
Mari Luz Sanz. President of CERMIN
Carlos Romero. Director of Fractal
Carmen Burgui. Technical Director, CERMIN
Concha Fernández. Member of the Navarra Council for Equality
Cristina García. Head of Projects and Communications, Ideas Foundation
Mónica Iñigo. Social Action Specialist, CERMIN
Paola García. Technical Coordinator, Migrant People’s Forum
Sonia Ganuza. Specialist and Trainer, ANFAS
Toya Bernard. Director of Innovation, Communication, and Citizen Services at Nasertic
Provide evidence for your answer:
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:
Information sources related to the OGP process are located in various online spaces. On one hand, there is the Open Government Navarra platform, which hosts and manages information on 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 and active publicity, 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, accountability, 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 Navarra’s role in initiatives such as OGP and the OGP Local program.
On the other hand, a specific space for the co-creation process of this First Action Plan was set up on the participation portal .
There is also a repositoryAccess to relevant information is essential for enabling participation and ensuring accountability throughout the OGP process. An OGP repository is an online centralized website, webpage, platform or ... of files and folders hosted on Google Drive where documents, evidence, and photos related to the co-creation and implementation of some of the milestones and activities included in the Action Plan are added.
Navarra’s open government platform includes a general roadmap for the co-creation process and a section dedicated to providing information on actions related to the plan’s progress, which serves as a specific space for reporting on the progress and monitoring of the First Action Plan. However, as of the date of this report, this section has not yet been updated with information on actions completed during the first year of implementation.
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
Open Government Navarra platform
Government of Navarra participation portal
Participation process
Repository folder
The URL for the OGP Local Action Plan information and progress.
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 co-creation process, designed and implemented, allowed for the provision of information about the process in these spaces, from the initial stages associated with the thematic areas, up to the point at which contributions could be made to the draft of the First Action Plan. This information was provided:
in the aforementioned participatory spaces
At the steering group’s public meetings, advance notice was also provided regarding the next steps and the resulting information related to the steering group’s meetings and the working groups.
Provide evidence for your answer:
Local-Inception-Assessment-Navarra-CoCreationProcess-ENG
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
See this link.
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 sessions and engagement workshops, the Government of Navarra ensured that opportunities were provided to improve or propose content within the First Action Plan. The aforementioned co-creation sessions were open to the public. Additionally, the Government provided access to the documentation generated in connection with the proposals and the content of the action plan.
Provide evidence for your answer:
Local-Inception-Assessment-Navarra-CoCreationProcess-ENG
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
Available at this link.
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:
This occurred on two occasions. During the definition and refinement of the thematic areas, specific information regarding these was submitted to the Navarra Council for Citizen Participation, with the aim of obtaining feedback and an assessment of the proposals included in the thematic areas—information useful for defining the co-creation process—and for which a feedback document is available. [35]
It should also be noted that the 156 contributions generated in the working groups, and 2 specific contributions to the final draft of the Action Plan, were put in writing, communicated, and incorporated into each of the 3 final themes in the summary document of the participatory process associated with the co-creation of this First Action Plan. [36]
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
References
[35] Available in this document.
[36] The document containing these contributions can be found at this link.
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:
This occurred primarily during the steering group’s preliminary meetings, in the reflection on and assessment of the thematic pillars, and during the working group sessions. The proposed co-creation methodology and the dynamics associated with the steering group’s work encouraged participation in setting its work agenda. This methodology focused on creating spaces for dialogue and offering an assessment and proposals for improvement related to these themes. It was ultimately designed to facilitate collaboration within an open and dialogic environment. Thus, it was specifically during this final phase of the co-creation process that greater in-person interaction and dialogue could take place during the decision-making process.
2.6 Would you consider the forum to be inclusive and diverse?
Moderately
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
Understood as the driving force, the forum’s members from the Government of Navarra are individuals with strong technical expertise within the Navarrese public administration, highly motivated, and possessing extensive networks and contacts within Navarra’s associative fabric. Meanwhile, the non-governmental members of the forum come from key organizations with which the Government of Navarra has long collaborated. In many ways, this forum has sought to establish itself as an operational hub that ensures efficiency in design and implementation, and as a space for greater access to more groups and key civil society actors. For all these reasons, it is an inclusive space, albeit to a moderate degree.
As a multi-stakeholder space, the work, impact, and 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... of the steering group could be enhanced by more actively involving additional members of Navarra’s civil society network, including other civil society groups or platforms from rural areas, as well as younger people, LGBTI groups, neighborhood associations, student organizations, relevant trade associations, young entrepreneurs, and others. This would undoubtedly enhance this space and make it more open and diverse, a key factor for advancing co-design and implementation processes.
Section 3.
Initial evaluation
of commitments
1 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... :
Participatory Processes to Improve Public Services and the User Experience
1.1 Is the commitment verifiable?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
As presented in the Commitments document, we assess the overall level of verifiabilityOGP commitments should be clear and specific enough to enable measurement of their progress. Verifiable commitments include specific activities that can be monitored. Following an action plan’s subm... as high. This commitment aims to create spaces and opportunities to improve Navarra’s public services and enhance the user experience through more active and inclusive citizen participation and by involving service recipients in their design. The thirteen defined milestones are considered verifiable.
To view the text of the commitment, visit this link.
To review the description provided by the Government of Navarra, see the Action Plan document: (pp. 17–28)
1.2 Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify relevance to OGP values?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
Yes, in citizen participation.
The milestones included in this commitment are clearly relevant to citizen participation. This is because, thanks to an ambitious and inclusive participation strategy, achieving them collectively can contribute to improvements in public services and the user experience. Under coordinated implementation, the outlined initiatives can positively reinforce one another, generating synergies and fostering service redesign processes that are more relevant and focused on citizens’ needs, especially those of the most disadvantaged groups, as intended. If carried out properly, the outreach efforts could provide greater visibility and transparency for this strategy and its progress. Milestone 12, described as accountability, appears to be more of a feedback mechanism associated with the participatively redesigned services, which reinforces the ambitionAccording to OGP’s Articles of Governance, OGP commitments should “stretch government practice beyond its current baseline with respect to key areas of open government.” Ambition captures the po... and participatory approach of this commitment.
To view the text of the commitment, visit this link.
To review the descriptive text provided by the Government of Navarra, see the Action Plan document (pp. 17–28)
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:
The commitment is a new policy or practice. Two considerations underpin this assessment. The first is that this is the first time an integrated approach is being pursued through a strategy that includes several initiatives, all aimed at achieving greater citizen involvement in a more inclusive services redesign. The second is that, although according to the narrative, “there are positive experiences of participation in the redesign of services, such as in the Citizen Service Offices and the VidAAs project,” (…) it is also true that for now “these are initial cases and have not been replicated in other areas of the Government of Navarra.” [38] This implies a broad understanding and the need for thematic prioritization, lessons that have also helped expand the scope toward more ambitious working guidelines, such as those in this commitment.
[38] See the draft version of the document (pp. 2–7). Regarding previous projects, the participatory design of the new citizen service office can be reviewed at this link: the collaborative design project for the Citizen Services department, launched in partnership with Fractal between 2021 and 2022. This was included as a commitment in the First Open Government Plan. Commitment 3.5—to promote pilot initiatives so that citizens can collaborate more actively in the design, management, and evaluation of public services—applied to the entire cycle and not specifically to user-experience-based design. See final report at this link, p. 61 ff.
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:
If fully achieved, this commitment represents a positive and very important change in a process, practice, or policy, which may generate significant changes, but will not necessarily result in a binding or institutionalized change across government or specific institutions. This does not, of course, detract from the value and ambition of this commitment.
The monitory body assesses that the institutionalization of the changes will come not only from meeting the milestones included in this commitment but also from maintaining this participatory approach as the standard for the configuration and redesign of public services from an open and inclusive perspective. Maybe this institutionalization requires a binding legal mandate and effective implementation of the changes, which can be established within the Navarra administration with guarantees of continuity and relevance. The monitoring body considers that both issues fall outside the scope of this commitment and its milestones.
1.5 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.
Undoubtedly, the burden, responsibility, and momentum of this commitment will largely fall on the working group that is to be formed; therefore, we believe it is very important that this working group not only be composed of the right stakeholders (based on their expertise, an inclusive group with technical and decision-making capabilities) and possess strong leadership and strategic vision, but also ensure that it has the necessary resources to operate effectively.
Additionally, this working group should document and provide transparency regarding the topics discussed in its sessions and the decisions made, and report on the findings related to monitoring the progress of the agreed-upon activities.
2 Commitment :
Improving Clear Communication through Plain and Direct Language
2.1 Is the commitment verifiable?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
Overall, commitment describes clearly identifiable activities that can be measured to determine whether their objectives have been achieved. The milestones associated with conducting studies and adapting documents and regulations to plain language are verifiable, as they identify the objective and purpose of what needs to be converted—namely, the most frequently used documents that are relevant for conversion. Finally, milestone 12 in this commitment is commendable as it is appropriately worded in a conditional manner: “Draft the new Health Law in plain language and easy-to-read format (should it be approved),” thereby maintaining the government’s ambition in this critical area while acknowledging its dependence on the regional legislative branch regarding the parliamentary process and Law approval.
To view the text of the commitment, visit this link:
To review the descriptive text provided by the Government of Navarra, see the Action Plan document (pp. 29–40)
2.2 Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify relevance to OGP values?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
Yes, in transparency and access to information.
Milestones included in this commitment are clearly relevant to transparency and access to information, and strategies for plain language and easy-to-read text enable progress on a more inclusive transparency. This is because transparency and access to public information are necessary and key principles of openness, but they are not sufficient to know, grasp, and comprehend the decisions and actions of the government and its administration; thus, the key issue is not only the right to know and access information, but also the right to understand, as a fundamental factor in more effective public transparency. This issue is particularly important when referring to disadvantaged or habitually excluded groups. Despite this and although thematically related, other milestones outlined in the training and awareness-raising initiative for public officials are not strictly linked to the value of transparency and access to information, although the need for training and awareness-raising is recognized as an indispensable means to improve internal processes, raise awareness of the need for a paradigm shift in public transparency based on clarity and accessibility, and facilitate the implementation of reforms. Therefore, this commitment recognizes the fundamental role of promoting plain language and easy-to-read text as an indisputable contributor to public transparency and as a driver of broader social inclusionOGP participating governments are working to create governments that truly serve all people. Commitments in this area may address persons with disabilities, women and girls, lesbian, gay, bisexual, tr... More.
To view the text of the commitment, visit this link:
To review the description provided by the Government of Navarra, see the Action Plan document (pp. 29–40)
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:
This commitment is viewed as a continuation of existing practices, in line with current legislation, policies, or actions.
It will be advisable to closely monitor commitment implementation throughout the cycle, since this determines whether they constitute cross-cutting and inclusive actions. At the conclusion of this Action Plan, the monitory body must specifically assess how the achievement of the milestones included in the Plan has contributed to greater inclusion and public transparency under this expanded approach associated with plain language and easy-to-read text strategies, for which information on the use and reception of the converted materials will be necessary, as well as the collection of success stories (if identified) linked to this strategy and information regarding the achievements and scope of implemented information campaigns and public assistance programs.
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 assesses that the activities under the commitment collectively represent a positive change in a process, practice, or policy, but will not generate a binding or institutionalized change across government or within specific institutions. Although they seek to define a new vision and a new standard in their entirety, these are actions that operate based on existing regulations and tools, some of which may have already made progress. The milestones do not propose binding changes or changes associated with far-reaching institutional transformations but rather focus on existing practices and implementation tools. The monitoring body also notes that, if fully implemented and effectively coordinated by this group, the activities under this commitment could change business as usual in this critical sector, potentially leading to changes in rules and practices to improve public services and streamline administrative processes.
2.5 Are there any recommended changes to the design of the commitment to help improve its implementation?
No changes to the initiative’s design are recommended.
As with the previous commitment – given that the burden and momentum of this commitment will largely fall on the working group that is to be formed – it is very important that this group not only be composed of the appropriate stakeholders (based on their expertise, an inclusive group with technical and decision-making capacities with high quality leadership and strategic vision) but also to ensure that it has the necessary resources to operate effectively.
Additionally, this working group should document and make transparent the discussions held during its sessions, the decisions made, and report on the findings related to monitoring the progress of the committed activities.
3 Commitment :
Greater Direct Civic Participation and More Inclusive Participatory Processes
3.1 Is the commitment verifiable?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
This commitment and its 25 milestones clearly describe actions that can be analyzed, assessed, and verified. Their set of initiatives aims to involve particularly marginalized groups such as children, people with disabilitiesA government is not open unless it is accessible to all, and governments are working to ensure people with disabilities are afforded equitable services and opportunities to participate. Technical spec..., the migrant population, 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, the elderly, and people in rural areas to move beyond the legal mandate toward a more ambitious strategy for citizen participation, through awareness-raising, promotion, and the creation of spaces and opportunities for participation under a cross-cutting and inclusive scope.
To view the text of the commitment, visit this link.
To review the description provided by the Government of Navarra, see the Action Plan document (pp. 40–54)
3.2 Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify relevance to OGP values?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
Yes, citizen participation.
The First OGP Local Action Plan of Navarra has at its core the mission of promoting more meaningful and relevant public participationGiving citizens opportunities to provide input into government decision-making leads to more effective governance, improved public service delivery, and more equitable outcomes. Technical specificatio..., incorporating inclusion as a guiding principle. The diagnostic report places particular emphasis on addressing this issue through a framework of continuous improvement. As stated in the draft commitments document of the First Action Plan: “The long-term vision of Open Government in Navarra is grounded in a model of inclusive governance that involves all social and economic actors. This approach aligns with the commitment to foster more direct and inclusive citizen participation, incorporating all groups, especially those that are often marginalized.” Thus, in accordance with this model and vision, the monitory body assesses that these milestones and activities are commensurate with such relevance and are appropriately directed toward the intended goal of continuous improvement.
To view the text of the commitment, visit this link.
To review the descriptive text provided by the Government of Navarr, see the Action Plan document (pp. 40–54)
3.3 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:
a new regulation, policy, practice, or requirement.
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
Although, in principle, this commitment includes some actions previously implemented in the past, other key activities reflect distinct and innovative priorities that form part of the core mission of this commitment, focusing on inclusion, such as: 8) Analysis of groups that do not typically participate actively, and identification and mapping of different channels for accessing these groups; 9) Strengthening partnerships with the Migrant People’s Forum and the Volunteer Network through the promotion of joint actions; 10) Development of the Guide to Inclusive Participatory Processes; 11) Establishment of a protocol for spatial and management requirements to ensure the inclusion and diversity of processes. Along with these, the Navarra network of citizen laboratories is of particular interest as spaces for fostering more inclusive citizen participation.
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 defined, the monitoring body assesses that the activities of the commitment collectively represent a positive change in a process, practice, or policy, but will not generate a binding or institutionalized change within the government or specific institutions. These are actions that operate based on existing regulations and tools, some of which may have already made progress. The milestones do not propose binding changes or changes associated with far-reaching institutional transformations but rather focus on existing practices and implementation tools. However, if the initiative associated with the Navarrese system of innovation laboratories is consolidated, it could make a significant difference and lead to changes in the rules, practices, or policies governing citizen participation in Navarra. We also understand that if the activities of this commitment are fully implemented, under the effective coordination of the working group to be formed, they could change the status quo in this critical sector, potentially leading to changes in rules and practices to improve public services and streamline administrative processes.
3.5 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.
Undoubtedly, the scope, responsibility, and driving force behind this commitment will largely fall on the working group that is to be formed; therefore, we believe it is very important that this working group not only be composed of the right stakeholders (based on their expertise, an inclusive group with technical and decision-making capacity) and possess strong leadership and strategic vision, but also ensure that it has the necessary resources to operate effectively.
Additionally, this working group should document and make transparent the discussions held during its sessions, the decisions made, and report on the findings related to monitoring the progress of the committed activities.
Leave a Reply