Skip Navigation

Israel

  • Member Since 2011
  • Action Plan 4

ON THE PAGE

Current Action Plan

2023-2025

Action Plan 4

  • Number of Commitments: 7
  • Policy Area Focus: Not specified

The development of Israel’s fourth action plan restarted its OGP process after its last action plan ended in 2019. Political instability and a lack of high-level political support negatively affected the ambition of the action plan. The Israel–Gaza war disrupted implementation of the plan and led to its revision in August 2024. (More)

OpenStories for OGP site

OpenStories

Everyone has a story. Together we have a mission. Explore stories from across the open government community, and submit your own.

Contact

Point of Contact

Keren Katsir Stiebel Director of Sustainable Business Development and Corporate Responsibility, National Digital Agency of Israel [email protected]

Commitments

Resources

  1. Israel Action Plan Review 2023-2025

    2025, IRM Report, Web page

  2. Israel Action Plan Review 2023-2025 – For Public Comment

    2025, Report Comments, Web page

  3. Israel – Update to Status (August 2023)

    2023, Letter, Web page

  4. Israel Action Plan 2023-2025 (June)

    2023, Action Plan, Web page

  5. Israel – Inactivity Letter (February 2023)

    2023, Letter, Web page

  6. Israel – OGP Letter to OGP Participants and Stakeholders

    2023, Letter, Web page

  7. Israel – Response to Inactivity Recommendation (March 2022)

    2022, Letter, Web page

  8. Resolution of the OGP Steering Committee Regarding the Participation Status of Israel in OGP (2022)

    2022, Letter, Web page

  9. Israel – Letter Regarding Inactive Status Recommendation (March 2022)

    2022, Web page

  10. Israel – Letter Regarding Status (February 2022)

    2022, Letter, Web page

  11. Israel – Request to Postpone Submission of OGP Action Plan

    2022, Letter, Web page

  12. Israel Implementation Report 2017-2019

    2020, IRM Report, Web page

  13. Israel Implementation Report 2017-2019 – For Public Comment

    2020, Report Comments, Web page

  14. Israel – Under Review Letter – February 2020

    2020, Letter, Web page

  15. Israel Design Report 2017-2019

    2019, IRM Report, Web page

  16. Israel Design Report 2017-2019 – For Public Comment

    2019, Report Comments, Web page

  17. Israel End-of-Term Report 2015-2017

    2018, IRM Report, Web page

  18. Israel End-of-Term Report 2015-2017 – For Public Comment

    2018, Report Comments, Web page

  19. Israel 2017 Late SAR Letter – February 2018

    2018, Letter, Web page

  20. Israel End-of-Term Self-Assessment 2015-2017

    2018, Self Assessment, Web page

  21. Israel Action Plan 2017-2019

    2018, Action Plan, Web page

  22. OGP Letter – Israel – November 2017

    2017, Letter, Web page

  23. Israel Mid-Term Progress Report 2015-2017

    2017, IRM Report, Web page

  24. Israel Letter of Intent to Join OGP

    2017, Letter, Web page

  25. Israel Mid-Term Report 2015-2017 – For Public Comment

    2017, Report Comments, Web page

  26. Israel Mid-Term Self-Assessment Report 2015-2017

    2016, Self Assessment, Web page

  27. Case Study: Israel Budget Transparency

    2016, Case Study, Web page

  28. Israel Action Plan 2012-2014

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  29. Israel IRM Progress Report 2012-2013

    2015, IRM Report, Web page

  30. Israel Self Assessment Report 2013 (English)

    2015, Self Assessment, Web page

  31. Israel Self Assessment 2013 (Hebrew)

    2015, Self Assessment, Web page

  32. Israel Action Plan 2015-2017

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  33. Case Study (2014): Finding Creative Use for Public Data in Israel

    2014, Research Product, Web page

Historical Data

The data below represents historical data for this member’s commitments. It does not reflect current work.

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
0
Action Plan 2
3
1
0
Action Plan 3
1
0
0
Action Plan 4

Global

Most per action plan
4
7

Regional

Most per action plan
4
7

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 4

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
Action Plan 2
Action Plan 3
Action Plan 4
Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Implementation

Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2
Action Plan 3
Action Plan 4

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
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
0 Sources
Open Contracting
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.80 Sources

Civic Space

Freedom of Assembly
Action Implications
No data
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
No data
Freedom of Association
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.00 Sources
Defending Journalists and Activists
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.00 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)
2.50 Sources
Regulatory Governance
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.80 Sources

Access to Information

Right to Information
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.13 Sources
Open Data (Water / Sanitation)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
0 Sources
Open Data (Health)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.53 Sources
Open Data (Education)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.50 Sources

Fiscal Openness

Transparency
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
No data
Participation
Action Implications
No data
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
No data
Oversight
Action Implications
No data
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
No data

Recent Posts

Tech6
Portugal · Israel · Uruguay · United Kingdom · Republic of Korea

United for an Open Digital Future

Freedom of expression is an important sign of a thriving democracy, including across constantly emerging digital platforms and social media.

Israel

SO — What is Open Government?

This post was originally written in Hebrew and was published on the Public Knowledge Workshop (Hasadna) blog and on Medium. A couple of weeks ago, I wrote a blog post about Open Data and the Desert, in which I explained that there is…

Show More
Open Government Partnership