Inception Report – Action plan – Austin, United States, 2024 – 2028
- Action Plan: Action plan – Austin, United States, 2024 – 2028
Overview
Name of Evaluator
Bryan Port
Member Name
Austin, United States
Action PlanAction plans are at the core of a government’s participation in OGP. They are the product of a co-creation process in which government and civil society jointly develop commitments to open governmen... Title
Action plan – Austin, United States, 2024 – 2028
Section 1.
Compliance with
co-creation requirements
1.1 Does a forum exist?
Unclear
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The Monitoring Body has thus far seen the City express a clear commitmentOGP commitments are promises for reform co-created by governments and civil society and submitted as part of an action plan. Commitments typically include a description of the problem, concrete action... to transparencyAccording to OGP’s Articles of Governance, transparency occurs when “government-held information (including on activities and decisions) is open, comprehensive, timely, freely available to the pub... More, inclusivity and excellence. The Action Plan discusses advisory boards and community meetings. It is unclear whether this is equivalent to the forum as discussed in the inception assessment template. For example, it is unclear if advisory board members are elected or appointed. We as yet do not have details on process, remit, membership or governance structure that meets regularly.
1.2 Is the forum multi-stakeholder?
Unclear
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The Monitoring Body has thus far seen the City express a clear commitment to transparency, inclusivity and excellence. It is our assessment that throughout the execution of the action plan that the City will draw in participation from all sectors of civil society. This City has demonstrated this in multiple ways to include public meetings held to date at the Center for Government and Civic Service at Austin Community College.
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?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The assessment template really needs to clarify what is meant by a Forum. The City held multiple meetings with civil society & non-governmental stakeholders during the co-creation of the action plan.
Provide references here (e.g. interviews):
OGP Meeting: Final Agenda and Registration
1.4 Has the action plan been endorsed by the stakeholders of the forum or steering committeeThe Steering Committee is OGP’s executive decision-making body. Its role is to develop, promote and safeguard OGP’s values, principles and interests; establish OGP’s core ideas, policies, and ru.../group?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The Office of Innovation, City of Austin (the City’s OGP proponent) states on its ebsite that it developed the OGP Plan in collaboration with community-based organizations, academic institutional partners, City staff, and the OGP.
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?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The website is available and without barriers to access. The website design could be more user friendly, particularly in terms of specific sections that include documents, upcoming events or opportunities; and contact information. It may be wise to have a specific tab that links to “the forum” and explains who is on the forum and how it operates.
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 processCollaboration between government, civil society and other stakeholders (e.g., citizens, academics, private sector) is at the heart of the OGP process. Participating governments must ensure that a dive...?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
Prior to the establishment of the monitoring body, members of the body had been invited and then participated in the co-creation process.
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?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
Prior to the establishment of the monitoring body, members of the body had been invited and then participated in the co-creation process. Members from multiple sectors of civil society also attended and participated in this process. Additionally, all participants have access to decision-making documentation.
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?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The government has promptly posted information and documentation to its OGP blog and has been proactive in communicating with the monitoring body.
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?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The government has been very inclusive and open in its approach. It is not entirely clear if this extended to setting the agenda, but there are indications in the Action Plan that this was the case, though the monitoring body is not specifically aware of how this was done, when or by who.
2.6 Would you consider the forum to be inclusive and diverse?
Very
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
If by “Forum” we are referring to the monitoring body, public meetings and the like, then it is clear that the City is committed to involving any and all members of the community who wish to be involved and are likewise committed to directing the OGP efforts toward maximum benefits for all of the citizens of Austin.
Section 3.
Initial evaluation
of commitments
1. Commitment :
Create a future-focused process for adapting City operations to climate changes
1.1 Is the commitment verifiable?
Unclear
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The monitoring body’s assessment is that the action plan does include measures of effect, but also includes what might be more rightly considered measures of performance. More specificity to the objectives listed in the Action Plan would go a long way toward enabling the establishment of measures of effect that could be substantiated by both qualitative and quantitative measures. As it stands the Monitoring Body believes it is positioned to provide meaningful assessments at the end of the plan’s implementation, however, it may have to establish supplementary analytic measures in order to do so.
1.2 Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify relevanceAccording to the OGP Articles of Governance, OGP commitments should include a clear open government lens. Specifically, they should advance at least one of the OGP values: transparency, citizen partic... to OGP values?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
It is unquestionably clear that the City is committed to OGP values. In both written and oral communication the City has consistently tied all of its efforts to the OGP values. The City deserves to be commended for its transparency up to this point.
1.3 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:
A new regulationGovernment reformers are developing regulations that enshrine values of transparency, participation, and accountability in government practices. Technical specifications: Act of creating or reforming ..., policy, practice or requirement.
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The commitment is a new regulation, policy, practice or requirement.
The city’s approach to the OGP is to use the OGP as a platform for innovation and to tackle novel objectives and challenges. For example, with regards to commitment 1 “Create a Future-Focused Process for Adapting City Operations to Climate Changes” the city intends to develop foresight & scenario analysis tools to enable better planning and response to climate related or climate caused issues.
1.4 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:
It will result in a change of the rules, practices or policies that govern a policy area, public sector and/or relationship between citizens and is binding or institutionalized across government or specific institution(s).
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The Monitoring Body assesses that Commitment 1 “Create a Future-Focused Process for Adapting City Operations to Climate Changes” will result in a change of the rules, practices or policies that govern a policy area, public sector and/or relationship between citizens and is binding or institutionalized across government or specific institution(s).
The Commitment calls for the creation of infrastructure to build strategic foresight & anticipatory capacity that will generate actionable analysis, policy changes, and enduring practices.
1.5 Are there any recommended changes to the design of the commitment to help improve its implementation?
The Monitoring Body would like to see greater specificity in the articulation of objectives in each commitment area and recommends, in some instances, that first year ambitions be scaled down and a ‘way ahead’ section be added that addresses how progress in this current year will be carried forward. Much of what the City aims to do will not be concluded within a single year. Objectives that also account for transition and continuity will strengthen the plan.
2. Commitment :
Explore the creation of the Economic Resilience Action Team. This cross-departmental team would convene essential stakeholders to implement priority actions, influence policy, and harness data for better, more informed decision-making.
2.1 Is the commitment verifiable?
Unclear
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The monitoring body’s assessment is that the action plan does include measures of effect, but also includes what might be more rightly considered measures of performance. More specificity to the objectives listed in the Action Plan would go a long way toward enabling the establishment of measures of effect that could be substantiated by both qualitative and quantitative measures. As it stands the Monitoring Body believes it is positioned to provide meaningful assessments at the end of the plan’s implementation, however, it may have to establish supplementary analytic measures in order to do so.
2.2 Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify relevance to OGP values?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
It is unquestionably clear that the City is committed to OGP values. In both written and oral communication the City has consistently tied all of its efforts to the OGP values. The City deserves to be commended for its transparency up to this point.
2.3 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:
A new regulation, policy, practice or requirement.
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The city’s approach to the OGP is to use the OGP as a platform for innovation and to tackle novel objectives and challenges. For example, with regards to commitment 1 “Create a Future-Focused Process for Adapting City Operations to Climate Changes” the city intends to develop foresight & scenario analysis tools to enable better planning and response to climate related or climate caused issues.
2.4 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:
will result in a change of the rules, practices or policies that govern a policy area, public sector and/or relationship between citizens and is binding or institutionalized across government or specific institution(s).
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The Monitoring Body assesses that Commitment 2 “Explore the creation of the Economic Resilience Action Team. This cross-departmental team would convene essential stakeholders to implement priority actions, influence policy, and harness data for better, more informed decision-making” will result in a change of the rules, practices or policies that govern a policy area, public sector and/or relationship between citizens and is binding or institutionalized across government or specific institution(s).
The Commitment calls for the creation of of a team that we believe holds the potential to design and implement novel policies and practices that have the potential to enhance economic resilience.
2.5 Are there any recommended changes to the design of the commitment to help improve its implementation?
As is the case with all of the commitments, greater specificity and clarity in the formulation of objectives would go a long way toward enabling the assessment of implementation, and the implementation itself. There are also considerations of time and event horizons, as well as scope, sustainability, and scaleability that if better factored into the plan would again enhance implementation, impact, and assess ability.
3. Commitment :
Explore and establish a process for AI accountability in the City of Austin
3.1 Is the commitment verifiable?
Unclear
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The monitoring body’s assessment is that the action plan does include measures of effect, but also includes what might be more rightly considered measures of performance. More specificity to the objectives listed in the Action Plan would go a long way toward enabling the establishment of measures of effect that could be substantiated by both qualitative and quantitative measures. As it stands the Monitoring Body believes it is positioned to provide meaningful assessments at the end of the plan’s implementation, however, it may have to establish supplementary analytic measures in order to do so.
3.2 Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify relevance to OGP values?
Yes
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
It is unquestionably clear that the City is committed to OGP values. In both written and oral communication the City has consistently tied all of its efforts to the OGP values. The City deserves to be commended for its transparency up to this point.
3.3 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:
A new regulation, policy, practice or requirement.
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
The city’s approach to the OGP is to use the OGP as a platform for innovation and to tackle novel objectives and challenges. For example, with regards to commitment 3 the city’s intent to examine the matter of AI accountability in order to establish a process to realize accountability is highly significant and likely to render new processes that enable the city to better (efficacy & equity) utilize AI.
3.4 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:
Will result in a change of the rules, practices or policies that govern a policy area, public sector and/or relationship between citizens and is binding or institutionalized across government or specific institution(s).
Provide a brief explanation of your answer:
By definition the city approach will change rules and policies, and more importantly has the potential to create policies to handle emerging issues and the potential of a new area of technology.
3.5 Are there any recommended changes to the design of the commitment to help improve its implementation?
As is the case with all of the commitments, greater specificity and clarity in the formulation of objectives would go a long way toward enabling the assessment of implementation, and the implementation itself. There are also considerations of time and event horizons, as well as scope, sustainability, and scaleability that if better factored into the plan would again enhance implementation, impact, and assess ability.
Leave a Reply