Skip Navigation

Republic of Moldova

  • Member Since 2011
  • Action Plan 4

ON THE PAGE


Current Action Plan

2018-2020

Action Plan 4

  • Number of Commitments: 6
  • Policy Area Focus: Budget and Procurement Transparency, Public Services Modernization, Public Administration Accountability

Republic of Moldova is currently implementing 6 commitments from their 2018-2020 action plan.

This action plan features commitments related to budget and public procurement transparency, public service reform and open data.


EaP High-Level Launch Event Page Banner

EU for Integrity Programme for the Eastern Partnership

Learn about this multi-year collaboration that aims strengthen the support and resources available to country reformers in the region to deepen reforms and advance bold, new ideas in areas like strengthening public service delivery, opening civic space, promoting a fair justice system and fighting corruption.

Georgia

A Decade Towards Open Governance: The Latest OGP Results from the Eastern Partnership Countries

Armenia, Georgia, the Republic of Moldova, and Ukraine - joined OGP in 2011. Though different in many ways, these countries shared a strong incentive to use their participation in OGP to address Soviet legacies of opaque and highly centralized governance.


Contact

Point of Contact

Natalia Cristian Senior Adviser, Policy Coordination and Priorities Department, State Chancellery natalia.cristian@gov.md

Commitments


Resources

  1. Case Study (2013): Realizing the Potential of Open Data in Moldova

    2013, Research Product, Web page

  2. IRM Regional Snapshot: Eastern Partnership

    2021, Resource, Web page

  3. Late Letter – November 2016 – Moldova

    2016, Letter, Web page

  4. Moldova Action Plan 2012-2013

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  5. Moldova IRM Progress Report 2012-2013

    2015, IRM Report, Web page

  6. Moldova IRM Special Accountability Report for the 2014 Action Plan

    2016, IRM Report, Web page

  7. Moldova Letter of Intent to Join OGP

    2017, Letter, Web page

  8. Moldova National Action Plan 2016-2018

    2017, Action Plan, Web page

  9. Moldova Second Action Plan 2014-2016

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  10. Moldova Self-Assessment Report 2013

    2015, Self Assessment, Web page

  11. OGP Letter to Moldova Regarding Late Action Plan: November 2016

    2017, Letter, Web page

  12. Republic of Moldova 2017 Late SAR Letter – February 2018

    2018, Letter, Web page

  13. Republic of Moldova Action Plan 2018-2020

    2018, Action Plan, Web page

  14. Republic of Moldova Design Report 2019-2020

    2020, IRM Report, Web page

  15. Republic of Moldova Design Report 2019-2020 – For Public Comment

    2020, Report Comments, Web page

  16. Republic of Moldova End-of-Term Report 2016-2018

    2019, IRM Report, Web page

  17. Republic of Moldova End-of-Term Report 2016-2018 – For Public Comment

    2019, Report Comments, Web page

  18. Republic of Moldova End-of-Term Self-Assessment 2019-2020

    2021, Self Assessment, Web page

  19. Republic of Moldova End-of-Term Self-Assessment Report 2016-2018

    2019, Self Assessment, Web page

  20. Republic of Moldova Mid-Term Report 2016-2018

    2018, IRM Report, Web page

  21. Republic of Moldova Mid-Term Report 2016-2018 – For Public Comment

    2018, Report Comments, Web page

  22. Republic of Moldova Mid-Term Self-Assessment Report 2016-2018

    2018, Self Assessment, Web page

  23. Republic of Moldova Transitional Results Report 2018-2020 – For Public Comment

    2021, Report Comments, Web page

  24. Republic of Moldova Transitional Results Report 2019-2020

    2021, IRM Report, Web page


Current Data

The following data 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
6
Action Plan 2
0
Action Plan 3
2
0
0
Action Plan 4
0

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

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
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.

Anti-Corruption

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

Civic Space

Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)

Open Policy Making

Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)

Access to Information

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

Fiscal Openness

Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)

Recent Posts

Diverse team of creative millennial coworkers in a startup brainstorming strategies

OGP’s Approach to Peer Exchange: The Example of Beneficial Ownership

Peer exchange is an essential component of the OGP model. Learn how it can inspire reformers, provide a safe space for discussing common challenges, serve as a platform of joint problem solving, and strengthen the sense of community among reformers.

Georgia

A Decade Towards Open Governance: The Latest OGP Results from the Eastern Partnership Countries

Armenia, Georgia, the Republic of Moldova, and Ukraine - joined OGP in 2011. Though different in many ways, these countries shared a strong incentive to use their participation in OGP to address Soviet legacies of opaque and highly centralized governance.

Show More
Open Government Partnership