Please help us improve our website by taking this brief survey
Skip Navigation

Inception Report – Action plan – Žabljak, Montenegro, 2025 – 2026

Overview

Name of Evaluator

Miloš Marković

Email

[email protected]

Member Name

Žabljak, Montenegro

Action Plan Title

Action plan – Žabljak, Montenegro, 2025 – 2026

Section 1.
Compliance with
co-creation requirements

1.1 Does a forum exist?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The multi-sector forum, composed of representatives from the local administration, and civil society organizations, actively participated in defining priorities and activities of the LAP. Through a series of meetings and consultations, from the first boot-camp to MSF meetings afterwards, key areas for enhancing openness and transparency in local governance were identified.

1.2 Is the forum multi-stakeholder?

No

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

Despite the fact that platform for participation was open and encouraging for broader community to participate, effects were very limited. There was only one representative from local CSOs that was initially interested for participation in multi-sector forum, but even he attended only its initial meetings. Therefore, as the process of adoption and implementation went on participation of local CSOs was practically non-existent.

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 was only one representative from local CSOs that was initially interested for participation in multi-sector forum, but even he attended only its initial meetings.

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:

Plan was endorsed by Veljko Grbović, representative of NGO Ecological organization „Durmitor“

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?

No

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

There is no website or webpage designated specifically to OGP Local

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

No

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

Government provided relevant information on the meetings, not prior to them.

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:

Efforts were made in order to make the LAP adoption process as thorough and inclusive as possible. Public debate about LAP was organized by Zabljak municipality, but there was no interest for participation in it from the local community.

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?

Unclear

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

There were no written proposals from other stakeholders to the government during the creation of LAP, so there was no possibility to provide written feedback

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:

Representative of local CSO was present during the boot camp and first MSF meeting in which commitment priorities were set.

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

Somewhat

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

MSF is comprised of mostly women and there also youth members, but there are no representatives of organizations that represent those communities.

Section 3.
Initial evaluation
of commitments

1 Commitment :

Conducting an extensive analysis of the offer of e-services of the Municipality of Zabljak

1.1 Is the commitment verifiable?

Yes

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

Yes

1.3 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:

a new regulation, policy, practice or requirement.

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).

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

There are no recommended changes to the design of this commitment.

2 Commitment :

Conducting a gender analysis of investments to evaluate their impact, sustainability, and the challenges women face, particularly in male-dominated industries

2.1 Is the commitment verifiable?

Yes

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

Yes

2.3 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:

a new regulation, policy, practice or requirement.

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).

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

There are no recommended changes to the design of this commitment.

3 Commitment :

Strengthening whistleblower protection system

3.1 Is the commitment verifiable?

Yes

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

Yes

3.3 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:

a new regulation, policy, practice or requirement.

3.4 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).

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

There are no recommended changes to the design of this commitment.

4 Commitment :

Census of illegal buildings in Zabljak

4.1 Is the commitment verifiable?

Yes

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

Yes

4.3 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:

a new regulation, policy, practice or requirement.

4.4 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).

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

There are no recommended changes to the design of this commitment.
This commitment is financially most challenging to fulfill which may delay its implementation.

5 Commitment :

Participation of citizens in the creation of public policies

5.1 Is the commitment verifiable?

Yes

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

Yes

5.3 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:

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

5.4 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).

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

There are no recommended changes to the design of this commitment.

Filed under: Inception Report

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

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

Open Government Partnership