Skip Navigation

Burkina Faso

  • Member Since 2016
  • Action Plan 1

Current Action Plan

2017-2019

Action Plan 1

  • Number of Commitments: 13
  • Policy Area Focus: Access to Justice, Land Management, Participation in National and Local Budgets

Burkina Faso is currently implementing 13 commitments from their 2017-2019 action plan.

This action plan features commitments related to access to justice, public service delivery, asset disclosure, fiscal transparency, anti-corruption, land management, open data and access to information.

Point of Contact

Jacques Sosthene Dingara dijaso@yahoo.fr

Commitments

  1. Sign Protocols of Operations Where Competence Shall Be Transferred to Municipalities and Regions

    BF0001, 2017, Capacity Building

  2. Respect Time Limit Required for Issuing Legal Acts

    BF0002, 2017, Capacity Building

  3. Vulnerable Persons Access to Legal Aid Funds

    BF0003, 2017, Justice

  4. Online Registration for Post-Baccalaureate and Baccalaureate Competitions

    BF0004, 2017, Capacity Building

  5. Registration and Complaints Handling Mechanism

    BF0005, 2017, Capacity Building

  6. Specialized Judicial Areas for Conomic Crimes

    BF0006, 2017, Anti-Corruption Institutions

  7. Citizen Committees to Control Racket in Public Administration

    BF0007, 2017, Anti-Corruption Institutions

  8. Capacities of Disciplinary Committees

    BF0008, 2017, Capacity Building

  9. Virtual Window of Public Administration

    BF0009, 2017, Capacity Building

  10. Right of Access to Public Information and to Administrative Documents

    BF0010, 2017, Legislation & Regulation

  11. Ministry and Public Institution Data in Open Format

    BF0011, 2017, E-Government

  12. Access Information and Citizen Involvement in State Budget

    BF0012, 2017, Capacity Building

  13. Community Dialogue on Local Budget (EDIC)

    BF0013, 2017, Capacity Building

Current Data

The data below is updated periodically, most often after large numbers of new action plans and IRM reports.

Commitment Performance

The following variables answer the question “Did this commitment open government?“, and focus on how government practices have changed as a result of the commitment’s implementation.

Key

No IRM data

Pending IRM Review

Download
Major
Outstanding
Starred Commitments
Action Plan 1

Global

Most per action plan
4
7

Regional

Most per action plan
0
2

How to Get More Starred Commitments

Starred commitments in OGP are one of the ways the IRM designates promising reforms. The graph below shows where the major areas for improvement in action plan design and implementation should take place based on past action plans.

Key

Stars (Global average 7%)

Focus on implementation

Focus on design

Pending IRM review

No IRM data

Focus on design

Focus on objectives and impact (ambition/potential impact)

Focus on relevance to open government

Focus on verifiability

Download
Action Plan 1

Public Participation

This table shows: 1) the level of public influence during the development and implementation of OGP action plans, 2) whether consultations were open to any member of the public or only to those invited; and 3) whether a forum existed that met regularly.

Key

Participation was closed

Participation was open to any interested party

No IRM data

Forum

Pending IRM review

Definitions

Collaborate: Iterative dialogue and public helped set agenda

 

Involve: Government gave feedback on public inputs

 

Consult: Public gave input

 

Inform: Government provided public with information on plan

Download
Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Development

Action Plan 1
Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Implementation

Action Plan 1

OGP Global Report Data

The data below is drawn from the 2019 OGP Global Report. You can view and learn more about the report here.

Selected Dimensions of Open Government

This section captures how each OGP member can play a leadership role, based on IRM-based findings and third-party scores. This list does not cover all of open government and OGP members are not required to take any action.

Action implications

These are recommendations on the role that each OGP member might play in each policy area. The recommendations are derived from a combination of the IRM-based findings and third-party scores.

IRM-based findings

Reflect the performance of commitments in a particular policy area, as assessed by the IRM.

 

(NC) No Commitments
(CA) Commitment(s) in the policy area.
(IR) IRM-Reviewed: At least one IRM-assessed commitment.
(C) Was Complete: At least one commitment was substantially or fully completed.
(A) Was Ambitious: At least one commitment with moderate or transformative potential impact.
(ER) Showed Early Results: At least one commitment opened government in a “Major” or “Outstanding” way.

Third-party scores

Reflect “real-world” performance, i.e., performance outside of the OGP framework. Scores are comprised of various indicators collected by respected organizations.

Download

Anti-Corruption

Beneficial Ownership
Action Implications
No data
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
No data
Open Contracting
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
0.83 Sources

Civic Space

Freedom of Assembly
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.66 Sources
Freedom of Association
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.07 Sources
Defending Journalists and Activists
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.61 Sources

Open Policy Making

Participation in Lawmaking
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.87 Sources
Open Regulations
Action Implications
New Initiative
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
0.80 Sources

Access to Information

Right to Information
Action Implications
New Initiative
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.92 Sources
Open Data (Water / Sanitation)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.00 Sources
Open Data (Health)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.73 Sources
Open Data (Education)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.60 Sources

Fiscal Openness

Transparency
Action Implications
New Initiative
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
0.96 Sources
Participation
Action Implications
New Initiative
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
No data
Oversight
Action Implications
New Initiative
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.48 Sources

Resources

  1. Burkina Faso Action Plan 2017-2019

    2017, Documents, Web Page

  2. Burkina Faso Action Plan 2017-2019

    2017, Action Plan, Web page

  3. Burkina Faso Letter of Intent to Join OGP

    2017, Letter, Web page

Recent Posts

Pakistan · Brazil · Colombia · Burkina Faso

Open Data in Focus

“Youth Power... Youth Power... Youth Power...”, the group chanted, the voices of youth participants resonating around the conference room. The organizing team enthusiastically joined in, while I focused the camera to record the zeal on their faces, the enthusiasm in…

Show More