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:
|
Three products:
|
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.
|
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. |
English
French
Spanish