2023-2025
Action Plan 6
The UK’s sixth action plan includes promising commitments on open contracting and aid transparency, building on efforts from previous action plans. Improvements in civil society-government relations helped restore the OGP process in the UK. Stakeholders could build on this momentum in the next action plan by addressing priority policy areas not covered in the sixth action plan, such as digital governance, freedom of information, beneficial ownership, open justice, and government transparency. (More)
Learn more about the UK government's mandate for public sector departments to disclose their use of algorithmic tools, promoting greater transparency and increasing public trust in automated decision-making.
Help co-create OGP's new strategy. This page is your go-to resource for all the materials you need to host and join conversations and share your views on how OGP can tackle the challenges of today and tomorrow.
Human rights algorithmic impact assessments have emerged as an accountability tool to identify potential harms, mitigate unintended impacts, and inform policy decisions on the use of algorithms across key policy areas including health, and education.
El uso cada vez mayor de los algoritmos para los procesos de toma de decisiones puede representar riesgos y afectar la privacidad y los derechos humanos. Recientemente, se han desarrollado evaluaciones de impacto de los algoritmos en los derechos humanos…
2024, IRM Report, Web page
2024, Report Comments, Web page
2024, Letter, Web page
2024, Letter, Web page
2024, IRM Report, Web page
2024, Report Comments, Web page
2023, Action Plan, Web page
2023, Web page
2023, Letter, Web page
2023, Inception Report, Web page
2023, IRM Report, Web page
2022, Web page
2022, Inception Report, Web page
2022, Letter, Web page
2022, Letter, Web page
2022, Letter, Web page
2022, IRM Report, Web page
2022, Report Comments, Web page
2022, IRM Report, Web page
2022, Report Comments, Web page
2021, Action Plan, Web page
2021, Action Plan, Web page
2021, Action Plan, Web page
2021, Action Plan, Web page
2021, Research Product, Web page
2021, Letter, Web page
2021, Letter, Web page
2021, Letter, Web page
2021, Letter, Web page
2021, IRM Report, Web page
2021, Report Comments, Web page
2019, IRM Report, Web page
2019, Report Comments, Web page
2019, Action Plan, Web page
2019, IRM Report, Web page
2019, Letter, Web page
2019, Report Comments, Web page
2019, Letter, Web page
2019, IRM Report, Web page
2018, Action Plan, Web page
2018, Research Product, Web page
2018, Report Comments, Web page
2018, IRM Report, Web page
2018, Report Comments, Web page
2018, Self Assessment, Web page
2017, Report Comments, Web page
2017, Research Product, Web page
2017, IRM Report, Web page
2017, IRM Report, Web page
2016, Self Assessment, Web page
2016, Action Plan, Web page
2016, Self Assessment, Web page
2016, Action Plan, Web page
2016, Letter, Web page
2016, IRM Report, Web page
2016, IRM Report, Web page
2016, IRM Report, Web page
2015, Web page
2015, Self Assessment, Web page
2014, Letter, Web page
2014, IRM Report, Web page
2013, Action Plan, Web page
2013, Self Assessment, Web page
2011, Action Plan, Web page
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.
No IRM data
Pending IRM Review
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.
Stars (Global average 7%)
Focus on implementation
Focus on design
Pending IRM review
No IRM data
Focus on objectives and impact (ambition/potential impact)
Focus on relevance to open government
Focus on verifiability
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.
Participation was closed
Participation was open to any interested party
No IRM data
Forum
Pending IRM review
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
The data below is drawn from the 2019 OGP Global Report. You can view and learn more about the report here.
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.
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.
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.
Reflect “real-world” performance, i.e., performance outside of the OGP framework. Scores are comprised of various indicators collected by respected organizations.
IRM-Based Findings
IRM-Based Findings
IRM-Based Findings
IRM-Based Findings
IRM-Based Findings
This blog post was originally posted on Open Ownership’s website. Read the original post here. The International Anti-Corruption Conference (IACC), hosted by the Government of Lithuania in June 2024, gathered practitioners from around the globe to discuss and advance action…
Launched in 2019, the Beneficial Ownership Leadership Group (or the Leadership Group) set out to advance global policy toward open beneficial ownership (BO) data, and achieve concrete progress by 2023. This summary examines the group's achievements, lessons learned by Open Ownership and the Open Government Partnership from co-convening the group, and future directions to advance BO reform.
As the UK shapes its sixth OGP action plan, a spotlight remains on key areas like beneficial ownership and lobbying transparency for heightened reform.
A key part of democracy at the local level is providing citizens with the opportunity to take action on the issues that are important to them. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the area of urban planning. When planning…
Una parte clave de la democracia a nivel local es brindar a las y los ciudadanos la oportunidad de tomar medidas sobre los temas que son importantes para ellos. En ninguna parte es esto más evidente que en el área…
As a co-founder of OGP, the United Kingdom has been a global leader on open government and anti-corruption efforts, implementing four open government action plans to date. However, the Independent Reporting Mechanism (IRM) has completed its review of the UK’s most recent action plan, finding that it has failed to meet minimum standards that are required when developing an OGP action plan.
Click here for more information about the Open Government Partnership's terms of use.
Terms & Conditions Close