Open Government Partnership Review

Welcome to the Open Government Partnership Review! – A civil society assessment of how governments are performing on OGP.

The OGP Review has been developed to enable civil society in OGP countries assess how open and ambitious their governments are being in developing their National Action Plans. It consists of fifty questions, divided across three sections, that evaluate 1) how the new action plan was developed, 2) the quality and ambition of its commitments, and 3) how the previous NAP was implemented.

Find out more >>

Country scores

In the map below, countries are colour coded based on their score in the review. Use the drop-down menu to filter results by section or sub-section. Detailed country results can be found via the menu on the right.


Country code
Country name
Year
Question ID
Weighted score
ALB Albania 2016 T.0 46.68
ALB Albania 2016 A.0 53.68
ALB Albania 2016 A.1 66.67
ALB Albania 2016 A.2 35.24
ALB Albania 2016 A.3 41.38
ALB Albania 2016 A.4 72.22
ALB Albania 2016 A.5 47.92
ALB Albania 2016 B.0 43.24
ALB Albania 2016 B.2.X 42.27
ALB Albania 2016 B.3 45.45
ALB Albania 2016 C.0 43.11
ALB Albania 2016 C.1 55.07
ALB Albania 2016 C.2 50
ALB Albania 2016 C.3 33.33
ALB Albania 2016 C.4 33.33
ALB Albania 2016 C.5 33.33
ARM Armenia 2016 T.0 65.04
ARM Armenia 2016 A.0 71.9
ARM Armenia 2016 A.1 89.17
ARM Armenia 2016 A.2 67.62
ARM Armenia 2016 A.3 66.67
ARM Armenia 2016 A.4 73.15
ARM Armenia 2016 A.5 58.33
ARM Armenia 2016 B.0 56.11
ARM Armenia 2016 B.2.X 55.47
ARM Armenia 2016 B.3 57.58
ARM Armenia 2016 C.0 67.11
ARM Armenia 2016 C.1 56.52
ARM Armenia 2016 C.2 66.67
ARM Armenia 2016 C.3 68.89
ARM Armenia 2016 C.4 82.22
ARM Armenia 2016 C.5 66.67
CAN Canada 2016 T.0 52.47
CAN Canada 2016 A.0 63.95
CAN Canada 2016 A.1 87.5
CAN Canada 2016 A.2 65.71
CAN Canada 2016 A.3 58.62
CAN Canada 2016 A.4 60.19
CAN Canada 2016 A.5 41.67
CAN Canada 2016 B.0 62.8
CAN Canada 2016 B.2.X 61.1
CAN Canada 2016 B.3 66.67
CAN Canada 2016 C.0 30.67
CAN Canada 2016 C.1 23.19
CAN Canada 2016 C.2 16.67
CAN Canada 2016 C.3 66.67
CAN Canada 2016 C.4 0
CAN Canada 2016 C.5 66.67
GRC Greece 2016 T.0 55.01
GRC Greece 2016 A.0 62.21
GRC Greece 2016 A.1 82.5
GRC Greece 2016 A.2 67.62
GRC Greece 2016 A.3 60.92
GRC Greece 2016 A.4 54.63
GRC Greece 2016 A.5 40.63
GRC Greece 2016 B.0 50.37
GRC Greece 2016 B.2.X 57.87
GRC Greece 2016 B.3 33.33
GRC Greece 2016 C.0 52.44
GRC Greece 2016 C.1 53.62
GRC Greece 2016 C.2 66.67
GRC Greece 2016 C.3 66.67
GRC Greece 2016 C.4 51.11
GRC Greece 2016 C.5 0
GTM Guatemala 2016 T.0 65.15
GTM Guatemala 2016 A.0 56.2
GTM Guatemala 2016 A.1 62.5
GTM Guatemala 2016 A.2 26.67
GTM Guatemala 2016 A.3 48.28
GTM Guatemala 2016 A.4 66.67
GTM Guatemala 2016 A.5 76.04
GTM Guatemala 2016 B.0 65.46
GTM Guatemala 2016 B.2.X 72.93
GTM Guatemala 2016 B.3 48.48
GTM Guatemala 2016 C.0 73.78
GTM Guatemala 2016 C.1 57.97
GTM Guatemala 2016 C.2 83.33
GTM Guatemala 2016 C.3 66.67
GTM Guatemala 2016 C.4 100
GTM Guatemala 2016 C.5 66.67
KEN Kenya 2016 T.0 49.27
KEN Kenya 2016 A.0 52.13
KEN Kenya 2016 A.1 64.17
KEN Kenya 2016 A.2 33.33
KEN Kenya 2016 A.3 48.28
KEN Kenya 2016 A.4 33.33
KEN Kenya 2016 A.5 82.29
KEN Kenya 2016 B.0 61.9
KEN Kenya 2016 B.2.X 65.13
KEN Kenya 2016 B.3 54.55
KEN Kenya 2016 C.0 33.78
KEN Kenya 2016 C.1 65.22
KEN Kenya 2016 C.2 0
KEN Kenya 2016 C.3 33.33
KEN Kenya 2016 C.4 0
KEN Kenya 2016 C.5 66.67
MKD Macedonia 2016 T.0 56.51
MKD Macedonia 2016 A.0 68.6
MKD Macedonia 2016 A.1 82.5
MKD Macedonia 2016 A.2 61.9
MKD Macedonia 2016 A.3 41.38
MKD Macedonia 2016 A.4 65.74
MKD Macedonia 2016 A.5 86.46
MKD Macedonia 2016 B.0 54.26
MKD Macedonia 2016 B.2.X 52.8
MKD Macedonia 2016 B.3 57.58
MKD Macedonia 2016 C.0 46.67
MKD Macedonia 2016 C.1 76.81
MKD Macedonia 2016 C.2 50
MKD Macedonia 2016 C.3 33.33
MKD Macedonia 2016 C.4 0
MKD Macedonia 2016 C.5 66.67
MWI Malawi 2016 T.0 46.55
MWI Malawi 2016 A.0 58.91
MWI Malawi 2016 A.1 45.83
MWI Malawi 2016 A.2 15.24
MWI Malawi 2016 A.3 65.52
MWI Malawi 2016 A.4 74.07
MWI Malawi 2016 A.5 100
MWI Malawi 2016 B.0 60.28
MWI Malawi 2016 B.2.X 66.8
MWI Malawi 2016 B.3 45.45
MWI Malawi 2016 C.0 20.44
MWI Malawi 2016 C.1 10.14
MWI Malawi 2016 C.2 0
MWI Malawi 2016 C.3 33.33
MWI Malawi 2016 C.4 0
MWI Malawi 2016 C.5 100
PRY Paraguay 2016 T.0 82.53
PRY Paraguay 2016 A.0 77.71
PRY Paraguay 2016 A.1 94.17
PRY Paraguay 2016 A.2 86.67
PRY Paraguay 2016 A.3 75.86
PRY Paraguay 2016 A.4 73.15
PRY Paraguay 2016 A.5 54.17
PRY Paraguay 2016 B.0 85.88
PRY Paraguay 2016 B.2.X 89
PRY Paraguay 2016 B.3 78.79
PRY Paraguay 2016 C.0 84
PRY Paraguay 2016 C.1 100
PRY Paraguay 2016 C.2 66.67
PRY Paraguay 2016 C.3 84.44
PRY Paraguay 2016 C.4 84.44
PRY Paraguay 2016 C.5 66.67
ROU Romania 2016 T.0 56.53
ROU Romania 2016 A.0 54.46
ROU Romania 2016 A.1 75
ROU Romania 2016 A.2 69.52
ROU Romania 2016 A.3 34.48
ROU Romania 2016 A.4 53.7
ROU Romania 2016 A.5 31.25
ROU Romania 2016 B.0 59.58
ROU Romania 2016 B.2.X 65.8
ROU Romania 2016 B.3 45.45
ROU Romania 2016 C.0 55.56
ROU Romania 2016 C.1 76.81
ROU Romania 2016 C.2 83.33
ROU Romania 2016 C.3 31.11
ROU Romania 2016 C.4 33.33
ROU Romania 2016 C.5 33.33
SLE Sierra Leone 2016 T.0 69.09
SLE Sierra Leone 2016 A.0 77.33
SLE Sierra Leone 2016 A.1 82.5
SLE Sierra Leone 2016 A.2 76.19
SLE Sierra Leone 2016 A.3 72.41
SLE Sierra Leone 2016 A.4 60.19
SLE Sierra Leone 2016 A.5 95.83
SLE Sierra Leone 2016 B.0 54.4
SLE Sierra Leone 2016 B.2.X 49
SLE Sierra Leone 2016 B.3 66.67
SLE Sierra Leone 2016 C.0 75.56
SLE Sierra Leone 2016 C.1 76.81
SLE Sierra Leone 2016 C.2 100
SLE Sierra Leone 2016 C.3 66.67
SLE Sierra Leone 2016 C.4 64.44
SLE Sierra Leone 2016 C.5 66.67
NLD The Netherlands 2016 T.0 52.65
NLD The Netherlands 2016 A.0 64.73
NLD The Netherlands 2016 A.1 82.5
NLD The Netherlands 2016 A.2 79.05
NLD The Netherlands 2016 A.3 40.23
NLD The Netherlands 2016 A.4 52.78
NLD The Netherlands 2016 A.5 62.5
NLD The Netherlands 2016 B.0 39.44
NLD The Netherlands 2016 B.2.X 42.13
NLD The Netherlands 2016 B.3 33.33
NLD The Netherlands 2016 C.0 53.78
NLD The Netherlands 2016 C.1 57.97
NLD The Netherlands 2016 C.2 66.67
NLD The Netherlands 2016 C.3 66.67
NLD The Netherlands 2016 C.4 33.33
NLD The Netherlands 2016 C.5 33.33
GBR United Kingdom 2016 T.0 72.23
GBR United Kingdom 2016 A.0 79.07
GBR United Kingdom 2016 A.1 75.83
GBR United Kingdom 2016 A.2 73.33
GBR United Kingdom 2016 A.3 73.56
GBR United Kingdom 2016 A.4 80.56
GBR United Kingdom 2016 A.5 92.71
GBR United Kingdom 2016 B.0 67.41
GBR United Kingdom 2016 B.2.X 71.73
GBR United Kingdom 2016 B.3 57.58
GBR United Kingdom 2016 C.0 70.22
GBR United Kingdom 2016 C.1 68.12
GBR United Kingdom 2016 C.2 100
GBR United Kingdom 2016 C.3 51.11
GBR United Kingdom 2016 C.4 66.67
GBR United Kingdom 2016 C.5 66.67
JOR Jordan 2016 T.0 38.43
JOR Jordan 2016 A.0 34.5
JOR Jordan 2016 A.1 33.33
JOR Jordan 2016 A.2 100
JOR Jordan 2016 A.3 0
JOR Jordan 2016 A.4 20.37
JOR Jordan 2016 A.5 11.46
JOR Jordan 2016 B.0 64.35
JOR Jordan 2016 B.2.X 78
JOR Jordan 2016 B.3 33.33
JOR Jordan 2016 C.0 16.44
JOR Jordan 2016 C.1 21.74
JOR Jordan 2016 C.2 16.67
JOR Jordan 2016 C.3 15.56
JOR Jordan 2016 C.4 0
JOR Jordan 2016 C.5 33.33
SRB Serbia 2016 T.0 60.61
SRB Serbia 2016 A.0 75.58
SRB Serbia 2016 A.1 77.5
SRB Serbia 2016 A.2 72.38
SRB Serbia 2016 A.3 73.56
SRB Serbia 2016 A.4 73.15
SRB Serbia 2016 A.5 81.25
SRB Serbia 2016 B.0 56.02
SRB Serbia 2016 B.2.X 60.67
SRB Serbia 2016 B.3 45.45
SRB Serbia 2016 C.0 50.22
SRB Serbia 2016 C.1 43.48
SRB Serbia 2016 C.2 33.33
SRB Serbia 2016 C.3 51.11
SRB Serbia 2016 C.4 66.67
SRB Serbia 2016 C.5 66.67
TUN Tunisia 2016 T.0 28.71
TUN Tunisia 2016 A.0 40.5
TUN Tunisia 2016 A.1 36.67
TUN Tunisia 2016 A.2 45.71
TUN Tunisia 2016 A.3 34.48
TUN Tunisia 2016 A.4 39.81
TUN Tunisia 2016 A.5 45.83
TUN Tunisia 2016 B.0 25.19
TUN Tunisia 2016 B.2.X 25.6
TUN Tunisia 2016 B.3 24.24
TUN Tunisia 2016 C.0 20.44
TUN Tunisia 2016 C.1 23.19
TUN Tunisia 2016 C.2 16.67
TUN Tunisia 2016 C.3 17.78
TUN Tunisia 2016 C.4 33.33
TUN Tunisia 2016 C.5 0
AUS Australia 2016 T.0 36.25
AUS Australia 2016 A.0 50.58
AUS Australia 2016 A.1 72.5
AUS Australia 2016 A.2 45.71
AUS Australia 2016 A.3 45.98
AUS Australia 2016 A.4 46.3
AUS Australia 2016 A.5 37.5
AUS Australia 2016 B.0 47.5
AUS Australia 2016 B.2.X 43.07
AUS Australia 2016 B.3 57.58
AUS Australia 2016 C.0 10.67
AUS Australia 2016 C.1 0
AUS Australia 2016 C.2 0
AUS Australia 2016 C.3 0
AUS Australia 2016 C.4 0
AUS Australia 2016 C.5 100
Question ID
Question Text
max Weighted score
A.0 National Action Plan Development (Section total) 79.07
A.1 National Action Plan Development: Inform 94.17
A.1.1 To what extent did the government proactively and transparently communicate a timeline outlining the National Action Plan development process? 5.25
A.1.2 To what extent did the government proactively and transparently communicate who the OGP point of contact for developing the action plan was, including their name, position, department/ministry, and contact details? 4.5
A.1.3 To what extent did the government proactively and transparently communicate who the minister or senior official with accountability and final decision making responsibility for the action plan is? 3.75
A.1.4 To what extent were all documents relating to the National Action Plan (e.g. draft National Action Plans, consultation documents, final National Action Plan) published? 6
A.1.5 To what extent were all documents relating to the National Action Plan (e.g. draft National Action Plans, consultation documents, final National Action Plan) made available in the official national language(s)? 5.25
A.1.6 To what extent were progress updates proactively and transparently published in a regular and timely fashion? 5.25
A.2 National Action Plan Development: Consult 100
A.2.1 To what extent did the government proactively and transparently communicate opportunities to be involved in the development of the National Action Plan? 6
A.2.2 To what extent was a public consultation (i.e. an open opportunity for any interested parties to respond to questions or a draft action plan) of a suitable duration held on the action plan? 5.25
A.2.3 To what extent was the information that the government made available prior to the start of the public consultation process sufficient to understand how it would work? 5.25
A.2.4 To what extent were inputs to the public consultation on the National Action Plan published? 4.5
A.2.5 To what extent was it communicated why inputs to the public consultation were or were not taken into account? 5.25
A.3 National Action Plan Development: Involve 75.86
A.3.1 To what extent were there frequent meetings between civil society organisations and the government on the action plan? 4.5
A.3.2 To what extent were the details of meetings (i.e. date, time, venue, topic) widely publicised? 4.5
A.3.3 To what extent were opportunities provided for remote participation in meetings? 4.5
A.3.4 To what extent were any meetings or events held outside of the capital? 3.75
A.3.5 To what extent were minutes of meetings between civil society organisations and government on the National Action Plan published in an accessible place and format appropriate to local context? 4.5
A.4 National Action Plan Development: Collaborate 80.56
A.4.1 To what extent did government make attempts to engage citizens and grassroots (i.e. community and local level) civil society groups in the National Action Plan consultation process? 5.25
A.4.2 To what extent was civil society free to self-organise? 5.25
A.4.3 To what extent were government officials open about the political feasibility of adopting a commitment? 5.25
A.4.4 To what extent was the OGP Point of Contact and other lead government officials willing to push for internal change? 6
A.4.5 To what extent was it communicated why inputs were or were not taken into account regarding specific commitments? 5.25
A.5 National Action Plan Development: Empower 100
A.5.1 To what extent did civil society organisations have a significant level of involvement and influence in the development of the framing and narrative (i.e. the story that connects the commitments and describes the country’s approach to open government) for the action plan? 4.5
A.5.2 To what extent did civil society organisations have involvement in the development of commitments for the action plan? 6
A.5.3 To what extent did civil society organisations have influence over which commitments were included in the action plan? 5.25
A.5.4 In your opinion, how would you judge the strength of the partnership between key government officials and engaged civil society organisations? 5.25
A.5.5 How would you rate the quality of the engagement process regarding the National Action Plan as compared to other experiences of civil society engagement by government? 3
A.6 Further Comments 0
A.6 Please use this space to record any further comments on the development of your country's National Action Plan. 0
B.0 Committments (Section total) 85.88
B.2.X Average commitment scores 89
B.2.X.1 To what extent does the commitment describe the specific activity that will be undertaken? 5.25
B.2.X.2 To what extent does the commitment describe the problem it is trying to solve? 5.25
B.2.X.3 To what extent does the commitment include a breakdown of interim milestones and final deadlines? 5.25
B.2.X.4 To what extent does the commitment set out measurable and verifiable outputs and outcomes against which it can demonstrate fulfillment and improvement? 3.8500000000000005
B.2.X.5 To what extent does the commitment specify who has ownership and responsibility for its implementation? 5.25
B.2.X.6 To what extent does the commitment specify all government, civil society, multilateral or private sector partners? 3
B.2.X.7 To what extent do you consider the commitment to be sufficiently challenging? 4.125
B.2.X.8 If the commitment is related to a commitment from a previous NAP, do you consider it to be a significant improvement? 3.75
B.3 Committments – general 78.79
B.3.1 To what extent does the action plan match open government priorities identified by civil society? 6
B.3.2 In your opinion, how would you judge the extent to which the government is sincere in its commitment to being an open government? 4
B.3.3 To what extent are the broader plans and activities of government consistent with the principles of open government and contents of the action plan? 3
B.4.1 Please use this space to record any further comments on the quality and ambition of your country's National Action Plan. 0
C.0 Implementation (Section total) 84
C.1 Implementation: Inform 100
C.1.1 To what extent have OGP commitments been clearly published for a national audience? 6
C.1.2 To what extent did the government proactively and transparently communicate who the government agency leading on the implementation of the action plan was, including their name, position, department/ministry, and contact details? 5.25
C.1.3 To what extent are there regular progress updates published on the delivery of commitments? 6
C.2 Implementation: Consult 100
C.2.1 To what extent was there there a joint process put in place to review the consultation and engagement process by government and civil society? 5.25
C.2.3 To what extent does government consult on the progress of commitments? 5.25
C.3 Implementation: Involve 84.44
C.3.1 To what extent is there ongoing outreach to foster participation in OGP? 3.5
C.3.2 To what extent is there an ongoing multi-stakeholder forum / steering group to coordinate the OGP process? 6
C.4 Implementation: Collaborate 100
C.4.1 To what extent is there an ongoing joint process in place to monitor the progress of the implementation of the action plan? 6
C.4.2 To what extent is there ongoing collaboration between government officials and civil society on the implementation of commitments? 5.25
C.5 Implementation: Empower 100
C.5.1 In your opinion, how would you judge the ongoing strength of the partnership between key government officials and engaged civil society organisations? 6
C.6 Further Comments 0
C.6.1 Please use this space to record any further comments on implementation of your country's National Action Plan. 0
T.0 Total Score 82.53

See the detailed country results >>

Overall scores

The averages below indicate areas of strength and weakness across all OGP countries reviewed.

Question ID
Question Text
avg Weighted score
A.0 National Action Plan Development (Section total) 61.29647058823531
A.1 National Action Plan Development: Inform 71.22588235294118
A.2 National Action Plan Development: Consult 60.11117647058824
A.3 National Action Plan Development: Involve 51.859411764705875
A.4 National Action Plan Development: Collaborate 58.82411764705881
A.5 National Action Plan Development: Empower 61.52000000000001
B.0 Committments (Section total) 56.12882352941177
B.2.X Average commitment scores 58.7864705882353
B.3 Committments – general 50.08882352941177
C.0 Implementation (Section total) 47.3464705882353
C.1 Implementation: Inform 50.98000000000001
C.2 Implementation: Consult 48.03999999999999
C.3 Implementation: Involve 46.27470588235293
C.4 Implementation: Collaborate 38.16882352941176
C.5 Implementation: Empower 54.90294117647059
T.0 Total Score 54.92411764705883