Skip Navigation

Madrid, Spain

  • Member Since 2016
  • Action Plan 2

Current Action Plan

2018-2020

Action Plan 2

  • Number of Commitments: 5
  • Policy Area Focus: Civic Participation, Data Visualization, Waste Management Transparency

Madrid is currently implementing 5 commitments from their 2018-2020 action plan.

This action plan features commitments related to anti-corruption, open data/mapping, waste management, access to information, and citizen participation.


Point of Contact

Victoria Anderica Director of the Transparency Project, City of Madrid andericacv@madrid.es
Miguel Arana Director of Citizen Participation, Madrid City Council aranacm@madrid.es

Commitments

  1. Creación de un buzón anónimo de denuncias

    MAD0006, 2018, E-Government

  2. Madrid en Datos

    MAD0007, 2018, E-Government

  3. Panel de control de los Compromisos de Gobierno

    MAD0008, 2018, E-Government

  4. Transparencia en la gestión de residuos de la Ciudad de Madrid y creación de una plataforma de información de residuos de Madrid

    MAD0009, 2018, Capacity Building

  5. Creación del observatorio de la ciudad

    MAD0010, 2018, Public Participation

  6. Starred commitment Creation of a mandatory lobby registry

    MAD0001, 2016, Lobbying

  7. Developing a new transparency portal for Madrid City Council

    MAD0002, 2016, Asset Disclosure

  8. Development of participatory budgeting.

    MAD0003, 2016, E-Government

  9. Citizen participation policy extension.

    MAD0004, 2016, Capacity Building

  10. Developing efficient collaborative legislation mechanisms.

    MAD0005, 2016, Legislature


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

Major
Outstanding
Starred Commitments
Action Plan 1
4
0
1
Action Plan 2

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

Action Plan 2

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

Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Development

Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2
Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Implementation

Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2

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.

Anti-Corruption

IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER

Civic Space

IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER

Open Policy Making

IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER

Access to Information

IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER

Fiscal Openness

IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER

Recent Posts

OGP en Madrid: Reflexiones de un año piloto

Sobre la Evaluación del I Plan de Acción de Gobierno Abierto del Ayuntamiento de Madrid Acaba de completarse el ciclo del I Plan de Acción de Gobierno Abierto del Ayuntamiento de Madrid de la Alianza para el Gobierno Abierto (OGP…