Skip Navigation
Independent Reporting Mechanism

Overview

Introduction

Since 2011, the IRM has provided independent, evidence-based, and objective reporting to hold OGP members accountable and support their open government efforts.

Based on OGP community feedback, in 2020 the IRM refreshed its approach to be simpler and more collaborative to help increase participation and improve commitment implementation.

It now provides more targeted and timely recommendations, and shares knowledge and international know-how, at moments when country members identified they need it most.

The new IRM process includes:

1. Co-Creation Brief

Sharing lessons and recommendations on the co-creation process and action plan design, before you begin co- creating your action plan.

2. Action Plan Review

Early in the implementation of the action plan the IRM provides targeted recommendations on how to achieve good and effective results.

3. Results Report

An evidence-based analysis of the level of completion and early results of action plan commitments and lessons for reflection and accountability.

 

The Value of the IRM

Evidence

IRM processes start with desk research and reviewing information available online or in government OGP repositories. The IRM, aided by a network of researchers, conducts interviews with in-country stakeholders and do further research to verify and deepen the analysis. Governments, civil society and the public can give feedback on draft reviews or reports.

Independence

The IRM’s independence is safeguarded by the International Experts Panel (IEP). The IEP members are renowned experts in the open government field that guide the development and implementation of the IRM research method and the highest quality of reports. The global network of IRM researchers also plays an important role to ensure regional, country, and thematic expertise. IRM researchers are vetted for conflict of interest and trained to conduct IRM research.

How the IRM can make a difference

The IRM is a valuable resource to OGP members. It contributes to building the credibility of the partnership and enables learning across countries and local members of the open government community.

“[the] IRM is more than a ‘control-check’ – it is a resource that evidences the factors that can strengthen or hinder policies.”

The IRM process pathway explains the stages and steps of the new approach.

Explore the IRM process pathway »

How Has the IRM Changed?

THE IRM BEFORE 2021
THE IRM FROM 2021 ONWARDS
Purpose

Focus on accountability

Focus on learning, reflection and accountability

Products

Two products:

  • A Design Report assessing the co-creation process, action plan scope and commitment design.
  • An Implementation Report focused on the progress and results achieved during the two year implementation period of the action plan.

Three products:

  • The Co-Creation Brief shares lessons and recommendations on the co-creation process and action plan design.
  • The Action Plan Review assesses the action plan contents, identifies promising commitments, and provides targeted recommendations for effective implementation and results.
  • The Results Report analyzes the level of completion for action plan commitments, the results obtained, and the level of engagement with in-country stakeholders.
Style

Long and descriptive reports

Shorter reports with more emphasis on analysis, synthesis, useable insights and recommendations

Timing

Research for the Design Report started at the end of action plan co-creation and the end of implementation for Implementation Report.

Research, drafting and review took 8-12 months for each report.

Faster turn arounds with reports timed to moments in the OGP cycle when governments and civil society can use the insights and recommendations.

  • The Co-Creation Brief is shared during the co-creation process.
  • The Action Plan Review is shared four months after action plan submission.
  • The Results Report research starts after one year of implementation and is finalised four months after action plan implementation ends.
Process

In country researchers primarily conducted interviews and evaluations.

The IRM team leads the process and draws on a network of researchers and collaborators.

Focus on closer to real time feedback and reporting, based on national stakeholder input.

Co-creation Brief is based on existing lessons.

Action Plan Review is a technical analysis of the characteristics of the action plan and its potential for results.

Results Report analyzes results and how they came about through periodic engagement with in country stakeholders.

 

 

More About the IRM

Open Government Partnership