OGP Local – Inception Assessment Form

- The Inception Assessment seeks to provide an appraisal of the co-creation process as well as the quality of the design of the commitments at their inception. This assessment must be finalized within two (2) months of the submission of the action plan.
  
  You can find more details about the Inception Assessment in the OGP Local Handbook, Section 3.5.1.
  
  General Instructions
  
  Please complete each field and provide the necessary evidence to back your responses. See Annex 5 of the OGP Local Handbook and the IRM-in-a-Box for a detailed explanation of what is considered as evidence for monitoring and evaluation purposes.
- Name of Evaluator(Required)
  Please write your name.
- Email(Required)
  Please provide your email.
- Select the jurisdiction and action plan assessed
  
  The commitments in the selected action plan will be automatically populated in Section 3 for assessment.
- Member
- Action Plan
- This field is hidden when viewing the form
  Member Name
- This field is hidden when viewing the form
  Action Plan Title
- Section 1.
  Compliance with
  co-creation requirements
- 1.1 Does a forum exist?(Required)
  It is a requirement that the OGP Local Process have a forum. For further reference see OGP Local Handbook section 3.3.1. and the IRM in a Box section 3.1.1.1.
  
  Click for a quick tip! The forum is a group represented by the government, civil society, and other stakeholders elected through a just and transparent process, with a clear remit, membership, and governance structure that meets regularly to oversee the OGP process.
- Provide a brief explanation of your answer:(Required)
- Provide evidence for your answer:
  Drop files here or
  
  Max. file size: 100 MB, Max. files: 3.
- Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
- 1.2 Is the forum multi-stakeholder?(Required)
  It is required that the forum must include both governmental and non-governmental representatives. For further reference see OGP Local Handbook section 3.3.1. and the IRM in a Box section 3.1.1.1.
  
  Click for a quick tip! The forum is multi-stakeholder when the space allows participation by civil society or any other interested non-government stakeholder in the development of the action plan.
- Provide a brief explanation of your answer:(Required)
- Provide evidence for your answer:
  Drop files here or
  
  Max. file size: 100 MB.
- Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
- 1.3 Does the forum hold at least one meeting with civil society and non-governmental stakeholders during the co-creation of the action plan?(Required)
  For further reference see OGP Local Handbook section 3.3.1. and the IRM in a Box section 3.1.1.1.
- Provide a brief explanation of your answer:(Required)
- Provide evidence for your answer:
  Drop files here or
  
  Max. file size: 100 MB.
- Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
- 1.4 Has the action plan been endorsed by the stakeholders of the forum or steering committee/group?(Required)
  Non-governmental stakeholders must endorse the final action plan. Please verify the list of individuals endorsed provided in the Strategic vision of the action plan. For further reference see OGP Local Handbook section 3.3.1. and the IRM in a Box section 3.1.1.2.
  
  Click for a quick tip! You can perform stakeholder interviews to verify whether non-government stakeholders endorsed or approved the action plan before its submission to OGP.
- Provide a brief explanation of your answer:(Required)
- Provide evidence for your answer:
  Drop files here or
  
  Max. file size: 100 MB.
- Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
- Section 2.
  Recommended practices
  in co-creation
- 2.1 Does the government maintain a Local OGP website or webpage on a government website where information on the OGP Local process (co-creation and implementation) is proactively published?(Required)
  For further reference see OGP Local Handbook section 3.3.2. and the IRM in a Box section 3.1.2.1.
  
  Click for a quick tip! You should determine that the website or webpage is available online and without barriers to access, it includes information on the OGP Local process and information is published regularly, at least every four months.
- Provide a brief explanation of your answer:(Required)
- Provide evidence for your answer:
  Drop files here or
  
  Max. file size: 100 MB.
- Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
- 2.2 Did the government provide information to stakeholders in advance to facilitate informed and prepared participation in the co-creation process?(Required)
  For further reference see OGP Local Handbook section 3.3.2 and the IRM in a Box section 3.1.2.2.
  
  Click for a quick tip! You should verify with evidence or through interviews whether, prior to the meeting(s) the government shared relevant information at least with government and civil society stakeholders who endorsed the action plan.
- Provide a brief explanation of your answer:(Required)
- Provide evidence for your answer:
  Drop files here or
  
  Max. file size: 100 MB.
- Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
- 2.3 Did the government ensure that any interested member of the public could make inputs into the action plan and observe or have access to decision-making documentation?(Required)
  For further reference see OGP Local Handbook section 3.3.2 and the IRM in a Box section 3.1.2.3.
  
  Click for a quick tip! You should assess whether the government created a space to receive input from non government stakeholders during co-creation or through public consultations held to gather input from civil society and the citizenry.
- Provide a brief explanation of your answer:(Required)
- Provide evidence for your answer:
  Drop files here or
  
  Max. file size: 100 MB.
- Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
- 2.4 Did the government proactively report back or provide written feedback to stakeholders on how their contributions were considered during the creation of the action plan?(Required)
  For further reference see OGP Local Handbook section 3.3.2 and the IRM in a Box section 3.1.2.4.
  
  Click for a quick tip! You should verify with evidence or stakeholder interviews whether the government informed stakeholders about how their input was considered during the creation of the action plan.
- Provide a brief explanation of your answer:(Required)
- Provide evidence for your answer:
  Drop files here or
  
  Max. file size: 100 MB.
- Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
- 2.5 Was there an iterative dialogue and shared ownership between government and non-governmental stakeholders during the decision making process, including setting the agenda?(Required)
  For further reference see OGP Local Handbook section 3.3.2 and the IRM in a Box section 3.1.2.5.
  
  Click for a quick tip! You should assess whether the government, civil society organizations, and/or other non-government stakeholders worked together to set an agenda (i.e., set priorities for commitments) and draft the final selection of commitments and their associated milestones.
- Provide a brief explanation of your answer:(Required)
- Provide evidence for your answer:
  Drop files here or
  
  Max. file size: 100 MB.
- Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
- 2.6 Would you consider the forum to be inclusive and diverse?(Required)
  Click for a quick tip! You could consider a forum highly inclusive and diverse if there are formal positions for groups representing diverse communities (e.g. women, LGBTQIA+, youth, persons with disabilities, or indigenous populations, etc.), strong representation in working groups or commitment areas, and specific consultation and outreach to underrepresented stakeholders throughout co-creation processes.
- Provide a brief explanation of your answer:(Required)
- Provide evidence for your answer:
  Drop files here or
  
  Max. file size: 100 MB.
- Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
Section 3.
Initial evaluation
of commitments
Section 3. Initial evaluation of commitments
Commitment :(Required)
Is the commitment verifiable?(Required)
The commitment language provides clearly identifiable activities and measurable deliverables for achievement of the commitment’s objective. For further guidance see IRM in a Box section 3.1.3.1. and the OGP Local Handbook section 3.2.1.2.
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
Provide evidence for your answer:
Max. file size: 8 MB.
Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify relevance to OGP values?(Required)
The commitment must clearly make a policy area, institution or decision-making process more transparent, participatory or accountable - according to the OGP values. For further guidance see the IRM in a Box section 3.1.3.2. and OGP Local Handbook section 3.2.1.1
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
Provide evidence for your answer:
Max. file size: 8 MB.
Please select one option that best describes the commitment:(Required)
For further guidance see the IRM in a Box section 3.1.3.3.
The commitment is...
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
Provide evidence for your answer:
Max. file size: 8 MB.
Please select one option that best describes the commitment:(Required)
For further guidance see the IRM in a Box section 3.1.3.3.
The commitment activities…
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
Provide evidence for your answer:
Max. file size: 8 MB.
Are there any recommended changes to the design of the commitment to help improve its implementation?(Required)
Provide a brief explanation of your answer, including any foreseeable challenges that may impact the implementation of this commitment:
This field is hidden when viewing the form
Send to gsheet

OGP Local – Inception Assessment Form

General Instructions

Select the jurisdiction and action plan assessed

Section 1. Compliance with co-creation requirements

Section 2. Recommended practices in co-creation

Section 3. Initial evaluation of commitments

This site uses cookies.

Section 1.
Compliance with
co-creation requirements

Section 2.
Recommended practices
in co-creation

Section 3.
Initial evaluation
of commitments