Inception Report – Action plan – Timișoara, Romania, 2022 – 2024
- Action Plan: Action plan – Timișoara, Romania, 2022 – 2024
Overview
Name of Evaluator
Calin Rus
Member Name
Timișoara, Romania
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 – Timișoara, Romania, 2022 – 2024
Section 1.
Compliance with
co-creation requirements
1.1 Does a forum exist?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The forum is operating as an informal body, a committee, with an equal number of representatives from the public administration and civil society. This group was formed after the local administration applied to the OGP Local Program in 2020 and was accepted. Members of this group among the civil society organizations that pushed the local administration to participate in this program and adopt OGP values in the past years:
- AID-ONG – Mihai Lisețchi
- Smart City Association – Dan Bugariu
- BanatIT – Costin Bleotu (initially he signed the application letter as representative of Code for Romania)
The other members, representatives from the local administration joined the group based on their main role in the administration:
- Valentin Muresan – personal counselor of the Mayor on digitalisation
- Ovidiu Simonetti and Despina Ungureanu – are responsible for participatory governance within the new structure Service for Participatory Governance and Neighborhood Management.
The above-mentioned members acted as a working group sharing tasks for developing the local OGP methodology, identifying and prioritizing commitments for the first local action plan, engaging the community in this process, and taking all necessary administrative steps.
Preparations for the formalization of the forum are started, but not yet finished.
Provide evidence for your answer:
Full Application for OGP Local 2020 scrisoare semnata de toti
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
Group members:
https://decidem.primariatm.ro/assemblies/ogp/members
1.2 Is the forum multi-stakeholder?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The forum was constituted by Local Council Decision no. 321 of 07.09.2021 regarding the approval of the Protocol of collaboration between the Municipality of Timișoara and the Banat IT Association, the Smart City Association, respectively the AID-NGO Foundation.
The forum has a balanced number of local administration representatives and civil society organizations’ representatives, three persons from each side. The three civil society organizations acts in three different domains: IT, public administration’ support, and resource center for NGOs. Among the representatives of civil society organizations, there is also one person who is active in the academic environment, being a professor at the West Univerity, Mihai Lisetchi.
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
https://decidem.primariatm.ro/assemblies/ogp/members
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:
There were two types of meetings:
- Regular weekly meetings of the working group to prepare the local OGP methodology and the Action Plan. The results were then officialy adopted by the Local Council.
- Two public debates as required by the law for decisions taken by the Local Councils. Public debate on the methodology held on Nov 5, 2021. Public debate on the Local Action Plan for open government help on April 15, 2022
- One meeting to validate with civil society the local vision for OGP and the commitments proposed by the working group held on Nov 26, 2021
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
- Public debate on the methodology held on Nov 5, 2021 – here you can find the online transmission https://www.facebook.com/primariatm/videos/3091337991184305/
- Informal meeting for feedback on the vision and commitment of the Local Action Plan – held on Nov 26, 2021 – here you can find the presentation for this meeting and the Menti report for the brainstorming done: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1KH7hxcgqf49hEEtaQAVLji5E18NWMOJr?usp=sharing
- Public debate on the Local Action Plan for open government help on April 15, 2022 – here you can find the online transmission https://www.facebook.com/primariatm/videos/2164868550356269
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:
In November 2021, the initiative group started working on building the vision and identifying the commitments for the Local Action Plan (PLA), and on 26.11.2021 there was a public debate to validate the vision and prioritize actions, a meeting at which 15 representatives of the community participated. Invitations were sent to around 70 persons who showed interest in the OGP topic when Timisoara Municipality launched the 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... portal during OGP week in May 2021. This was a diverse group of representatives from civil society, active citizens, and academia. The action plan was then co-created with the initiative group/forum and at the end, it was made public for consultation before the Local Council approved it.
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
Here you can find https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1KH7hxcgqf49hEEtaQAVLji5E18NWMOJr?usp=sharing :
– the presentation used in the meeting
– the Menti report with the questions addressed and the answers received
– two screenshots with the participant’s list
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 a participatory process dedicated to OGP on a local instance of Decidim, decidem.primariatm.ro
The information is available to any user, without authentication and there are regular updates there.
Plus there is a Google Drive folder as 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 ... for our documents. Some are also posted on decidem.primariatm.ro. There is a plan to plan to create an online platform to monitor Local Action Plan implementation.
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
The participatory process
https://decidem.primariatm.ro/processes/procesul-open-government-partnership
The workgroup:
https://decidem.primariatm.ro/assemblies/ogp
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...?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
All materials were made available on both decidem.primariatm.ro and in our local administration website as required by the law. Plus emails were sent to a number of around 60-70 people who showed interest in the topic of open governance during OGP week in 2021.
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
Step by step what was done until the local action plan was approved by the Local Council: https://decidem.primariatm.ro/processes/procesul-open-government-partnership/steps
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:
The Local Action Plan was in the public consultation for 30 days. Citizens could send their input by email or register for the public debate and make their contributions verbally. All feedback received was analyzed and integrated into the final version. In the link below you can see:
– The Local Action Plan published for public consultation
– The feedback received in writing and the answers provided by our local workgroup
– The video recording of the public debate
– The final Action Plan
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1N_I9EOoMm9H2sctqbniij6gRcJZH79np5QspQ3lwU0s/edit
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:
All questions and remarks received in writing were answered and published on decidem.primariatm.ro. Plus, every citizen received the answers via email as well. The questions addressed in the public debate were answered on the spot.
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1N_I9EOoMm9H2sctqbniij6gRcJZH79np5QspQ3lwU0s/edit
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 process is documented here:
https://decidem.primariatm.ro/processes/procesul-open-government-partnership/steps
It took 1 year to finalize it and there were 3 different public decisions on this topic and each one requires 2 months. During this period of time, there were around 25 weekly meetings. For each meeting, public administration and civil society members took the decision together and co-created the meeting and process agenda.
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
Weekly meetings:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AXFPfOXF1QMSkExnAsbXSmFvh3ePvRY7tcaGh9bsA1Q/edit
1-year process:
https://decidem.primariatm.ro/processes/procesul-open-government-partnership/steps
2.6 Would you consider the forum to be inclusive and diverse?
Somewhat
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
As mentioned before, the forum is not yet formalized, but preparations are on the way in this direction.
However, for the public debate on the Local Action Plan the public administration sent invitations to ONGs representing diverse communities but as this is a new and less understood topic the presence and engagement were low. The feedback regarding 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 civic engagement was included in one of the commitments.
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
Public debate on the Local Action Plan for open government help on April 15, 2022 – here you can find the online transmission: https://www.facebook.com/primariatm/videos/2164868550356269
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...:
Increase citizens participation
1.1 Is the commitment verifiable?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
There are seven measurable targets set for this commitment:
– Develop and adopt a 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... strategy with concrete actions to be implemented in the next 5 years
– Training of at least 50 public servants regarding the engagement of citizens in public policies
– Formation of a working group on 3 themes different interests for the community
– Launch of the platform for public participation and attracting at least 3% of the population as active users
– Launch of portal for submission and view complaints/petitions
– Mapping at least 3 city resources (organizations, projects, funds) according to Smart City Strategy
– Selection and financing of at least 5 projects from community per year
Provide evidence for your answer:
1.2 Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify 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... to OGP values?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
These are the OGP values that this commitment aims to achieve:
– Civic Participation: This commitment creates the strategy, capacity, tools, projects and budgets which will encourage and accelerate civic participation.
– Access to information: Decidem, city resources mapping and the portal for complaints’ tracking.
– Technology and Innovation for 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 Accountability: These 3 tools planned to be build are tech tools The platform for public participation (Decidim instance) is measuring working groups and public participation processes. City resources measure the city portfolio. The portal for complaints tracking is measuring local administration’s activity.
Provide evidence for your answer:
1.3 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 based on the local existing legislation regarding transparency, participation in public decision-making, and complaints/petitions management but it provides new solutions for enhanced results that could become best practice for other local administrations through digitalisation, training of public servants, and the development of a local strategy with concrete actions to be taken and targets to be achieved short to medium term.
Provide evidence for your answer:
o Law no. 52/2003 regarding public administration decision-making transparency
o ORDINANCE no. 27/2002 regarding the regulationGovernment reformers are developing regulations that enshrine values of transparency, participation, and accountability in government practices. Technical specifications: Act of creating or reforming ... of the petition resolution activity
o Law 544/2001 regarding access to public information
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:
The commitment’s activities go beyond the legal requirements to provide solutions that are more inline with both current technologies and citizens expectations regarding public participation. For example, the law requires public administration to answer complaints/petitions in a timeframe of maximum 30 days, but there is no legal requirement to make all complaints/petitions received public and show them on a map with their status. Another example, the law requires public administrations to organize public consultations for decisions taken by the Local Council put it doesn’t set clear standards or actions regarding a communication plan to reach a higher general or directly affected public. In addition, the law requires local administration to register each contribution and answer the citizen who sent it but it doesn’t say anything about publishing all contributions received and what was included and what was not in the final decision.
Provide evidence for your answer:
o Law no. 52/2003 regarding public administration decision-making transparency
o ORDINANCE no. 27/2002 regarding the regulation of the petition resolution activity
o Law 544/2001 regarding access to public information
1.5 Are there any recommended changes to the design of the commitment to help improve its implementation?
No recommendation at this moment.
2. Commitment:
Operationalization of participatory budgeting
2.1 Is the commitment verifiable?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
These are the activities and the targets proposed for this commitment:
– Comparative study of at least 3 others models from other cities both in the country and from foreign countries
– Elaboration and approval in the Local Council the regulation of the participatory budget campaign
– Attracting 4 civil society representatives in the Participatory Budget Campaign Commission
– Attracting a maximum of 4 local partners, NGOs to support the dissemination of the Campaign
– Launching an adapted digital platform the local participatory budgeting model
– Identify and implement at least 7 projects proposed and voted by citizens in the first edition of the Campaign
– Attracting a percentage of approximately 1% of the population of the city in the first edition of the campaign participatory budget (initiators, contributors to the proposals of others and/or voters)
Provide evidence for your answer:
2.2 Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify relevance to OGP values?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
These are the OGP values that this commitment aims to achieve:
– Civic Participation: The participatory budget is an instrument used to increase civic participation by engaging citizens in setting priorities for a predefined amount of the local budget.
– Technology and Innovation for Transparency and Accountability: There will be an online platform created for this initiative where citizens can follow the process step by step and engage by either registering a proposal, comment on others’ proposals, or vote for those projects they support and want to be implemented.
– Access to information: About the public budget, citizens’ priorities, results/impact generated by the selected and implemented projects
Provide evidence for your answer:
2.3 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:
a new regulation, policy, practice or requirement.
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The participatory budget it’s not a new initiative, it has been implemented in other cities in Romania (and of course abroad), but even so, there is no national regulation or policy regarding this area. For the local administration, this is a new practice and it aims to become a recurring activity.
Provide evidence for your answer:
This is the first time the Local Council approved a participatory budget campaign
https://www.primariatm.ro/administratie/consiliul-local/hotarari-ale-consiliului-local/?uid=0AD65E7078889E54C2258791002CFF0A
2.4 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:
This commitment resulted in a local policy that will change the relationship between citizens and the local administration by engaging them in deciding how to spend a part of the local budget.
Provide evidence for your answer:
2.5 Are there any recommended changes to the design of the commitment to help improve its implementation?
No recommendation at the moment.
3. Commitment:
Increasing the quality and quantity of available open data
3.1 Is the commitment verifiable?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
There are five measurable targets set for this commitment:
– Study at least 3 other models from national and international examples.
– 1 census of public data that public institutions and other stakeholders have.
– Identify and publish 10 high value open data sets, the new available datasets will be present on the city’s DataPortal.
– Develop 1 guide to periodic identification of high value data, publication and maintenance for published data.
– At least two partnerships with the tech community, academia or private companies to use the data in order to create city applications.
Provide evidence for your answer:
3.2 Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify relevance to OGP values?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
As Open Data is one of the most important layers of transparency the forum considers this commitment very relevant for the improvement of their community and the way decisions are taken at the local level.
These are the OGP values that this commitment aims to achieve:
– Access to information: open data provide access to structured information.
– Civic Participation: by involving IT community (together with universities and companies) to create solutions based on provided open data.
– Technology and Innovation for Transparency and Accountability: CKAN open data portal upgrade, city solutions creation, and involvement of IT community.
Provide evidence for your answer:
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:
There are already 30 datasets present in the DataPortal now and the plan is to continuously bring new ones.
Provide evidence for your answer:
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:
Making more datasets available to the public creates a positive change in how institutions communicate with the community. Making data available in an automatic manner may decrease direct requests from citizens to some public departments to provide the information they need.
3.5 Are there any recommended changes to the design of the commitment to help improve its implementation?
No recommendation at the moment.
4. Commitment:
Develop the capacity on open governance for the relevant stakeholders
4.1 Is the commitment verifiable?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
Action:4.1 Better local – national – international synchronization
Outcome: Share learning lessons at national level
KPIs: Organize event at national level and promote lessons learned (yes/no, evidence)
Action: 4.2 PLA implementation evaluation mechanism and risk management methodology
Outcome: 1 evaluation methodology, 1 risk management methodology
KPIs: Evaluation Methodology published on Decidem (yes/no, link), Risk Management Methodology published on Decidem (yes/no, link)
Action: 4.3 Increasing the capacity for implementation and continuous improvement of open governance
Outcome: Train at least 30 civil servants on the topic of open governance
KPIs: Number of civil servants trained on open governance (number, evidence)
Action: 4.4 Identifying stakeholders and their roles in implementing action plans
Outcome: Identify at least two stakeholders who can undertake and implement OG commitments
KPIs: Number of stakeholders involved in OG commitments implementation (number, evidence)
Action: 4.5 Identifying the right funding sources for the implementation of the action plans
Outcome: Identify at least two non-refundable funding sources
KPIs: Number of funding sources for OG projects/actions (number, evidence)
Action: 4.6 Local OGP repository and website
Outcome: Create a dedicated webpage for OGP local
KPIs: Repository of Local OG activity (yes/no, link), Webpage on Decidem for OG activity (yes/no, link)
Action: 4.7 Report on relation between open governance and quality of life
Outcome: Identify OG metrics that impact quality of life
KPIs: Report received from OGP Global or OECD (yes/no, link)
Provide evidence for your answer:
Capacity = resources + competencies related to open governance (knowledge, accepted methodology, weekly meetings, plan, KPIs, platforms/digital tools, network, previous results)
Specific to this commitment the capacity development goals are:
4.1 Event organized in May 2023 – better synchronization between local approach – national approach – international approach
4.2.1 International evaluation methodology adapted to local context, published on Decidem instance
4.2.1 Risk evaluation and mitigation în the middle of LAP implementation (december 2022), published on Decidem
4.3 Trainings for clerks and activists
– Open Budgeting, december 2022
– Open ContractingA transparent procurement process, known as open contracting, increases competition, improves public service delivery, and ensures governments better value for their money. Technical specifications: C... More, december 2022
4.4 New partners which are participating in the weekly meetings which decide to involve in OGP commitments implementation
– at least 3 new partners (NGOs, Academia, public institution)
– one for Open Budgeting
– one for Open Contracting
– one for evaluation mechanism
4.5 Funding resources în order to support LAP commitments implementation
4.6 Local OGP Repository, on Google Drive and OGP website on Decidem instance
4.7 Identify the relevant metrics for OGP impact evaluation
Relevant stakeholders:
1. Public administration
a. City Hall clerks
b. Center of Projects clerks
2. NGOs
a. Timisoara European Capital of Culture Association
b. Timisoara Community Foundation
c. Other associations which involved in projects or programs relevant for city development
3. Academia
a. West University researchers
b. Politehnica University researchers
4.2 Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify relevance to OGP values?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
This commitment goal is to develop the capacity of local stakeholders to use open governance principles, methodologies, and tools in order to better serve the citizens. The capacity is, probably, the most important variable which influences the success of OG principles and project implementation.
Information principle:
– repository and website action
– sharing events at national level
Participation principle:
– civic society will train civil servants
– stakeholders for LAP implementations
Accountability
– monitoring and reporting methodologies
– report on the relation between OG and quality of life, in order to better understand the real value of OG commitments implementation
Technologies usage:
– Decidem for website
– Google Drive for repository
Provide evidence for your answer:
4.3 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:
It is not the first time the local public administration is allocating resources in this direction, but the first time when it does it based on a public decision, with allocated human resources and budget.
Provide evidence for your answer:
For example, there is Local Council decision from 2014 no 71 from February 25, 2014 for approving a partnership for Open Data publication.
https://www.primariatm.ro/administratie/consiliul-local/hotarari-ale-consiliului-local/?uid=DE20AB6CB4E0A82EC2257C8200461A32
4.4 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:
Capacity Development will lead to better results regarding citizens trust, available resources and obtained results.
4.5 Are there any recommended changes to the design of the commitment to help improve its implementation?
Improve the clarity of the expected results.
English
French
Spanish
Leave a Reply