Skip Navigation
Glasgow, United Kingdom · United Kingdom

Inception Report – Action plan – Glasgow, United Kingdom, 2021 – 2023

Overview

Name of Evaluator

Des McNulty and Professor Bridgette Wessels, University of Glasgow

Email

des.mcnulty@glasgow.ac.uk, bridgette.wessels@glasgow.ac.uk

Member Name

Glasgow, United Kingdom

Action Plan Title

Action plan – Glasgow, United Kingdom, 2021 – 2023

Section 1.
Compliance with
co-creation requirements

1.1 Does a forum exist?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

Glasgow Open Government Steering Group
Glasgow has established a Glasgow OGP Local Team (now known as the Glasgow Open Government Steering Group), which has been critical to the development of the Open Government Action Plan – this is a Core Team identified by the Glasgow Community Planning Partnership Executive Group to take forward the planning and implementation of Glasgow’s Open Government process, with the key skills required. This core team is drawn from Glasgow City Council (Chief Executive’s Department), Glasgow Chamber of Commerce, Glasgow Third Sector Interface Network, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, and Police Scotland – and has provided the time, commitment, and resources to drive forward the OGP process in Glasgow. This OGP Local Team has now been expanded to include the Lead Officers and key stakeholders for each of Glasgow’s Open Government Commitments – allowing regular progress reports on each commitment to be reviewed by the OGP Local Team and reported to the GCPP Executive Group.

Glasgow Community Planning Partnership provides strategic oversight of the Open Government Plan – regular updates will allow city partners to undertake program monitoring and assess progress on implementation, ensuring improvement activity and capacity and resources are identified across strategic partners to achieve commitment outcomes.

Provide references here (e.g. interviews):

1.2 Is the forum multi-stakeholder?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The Glasgow OGP Local Team is drawn from the Glasgow City Council (Chief Executive’s Department), Glasgow Chamber of Commerce, Glasgow Third Sector Interface Network, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, and Police Scotland.

The membership is currently:

  • Michelle McGinty, Head of Corporate Policy and Governance, Chief Executive’s Department, Glasgow City Council (Chair)
  • Nichola Brown, Health Improvement Manager, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde
  • Kathleen Caskie, Manager, Glasgow Third Sector Interface Network
  • Cheryl McCulloch, Senior Project Manager, Glasgow Chamber of Commerce
  • Gary I’Anson, Superintendent, Police Scotland
  • Colin Birchenall, Chief Digital Officer, Glasgow City Council
  • Kimberley Hose, Head of Business Intelligence, Glasgow City Council
  • Clare Holland, Public Relations Officer, Glasgow City Council
  • Shaw Anderson, Community Empowerment Services, Chief Executive’s Department, Glasgow City Council
  • Pamela Rennie, Duncan Booker and Alan Speirs, Corporate Policy, Chief Executive’s Department, Glasgow City Council

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?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

Glasgow City Council, Glasgow Chamber of Commerce, Glasgow Third Sector Interface Network, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, and Police Scotland have collaborated on the development of the first Open Government Action Plan for Glasgow and have continued to work together to coordinate its implementation.

Glasgow’s co-creation process was designed in March 2021, building on established co-creation activity due to the COVID-19 pandemic conducted online. There were 3 key stages in the co-creation process; evidence review (scoping exercise undertaken by OGP Local Team members to identify activity relevant to the Open Government Action Plan); stakeholder conversations (follow-up sessions with key stakeholders and officers to further explore the activity and inform potential themes for the Action Plan); and Third Sector and Stakeholder workshops (conversations and engagement on the topic of Open Government, contributing ideas and changes they would like to see, and agreeing themes or broad commitment areas).

This work was overseen by the OGP Local Team as the core team taking forward the planning and implementation of Glasgow’s Open Government process. During the development of this Action Plan, the OGP Local Team hosted 7 meetings from March – September 2021.

Provide references here (e.g. interviews):

1.4 Has the action plan been endorsed by the stakeholders of the forum or steering committee/group?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

Key stakeholders, who participated in the co-creation process, have endorsed the first Open Government Action Plan for Glasgow, they were:

  • Cheryl McCulloch, Senior Project Manager, Glasgow Chamber of Commerce
  • Kathleen Caskie, Manager, Glasgow Third Sector Interface Network
  • Nichola Brown, Health Improvement Manager, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde
  • Lynn Ratcliff, Superintendent, Police Scotland

In addition, the Glasgow Community Planning Partnership Strategic Board approved the Glasgow Open Government Action Plan 2021-23 on 7 September 2021. Glasgow Community Planning Partnership (GCPP) was the space identified within Glasgow’s Expression of Interest for Local Government and non-governmental stakeholder participation in the development, implementation, and review of the Open Government Action Plan. GCPP is well placed to provide strategic oversight of the Open Government Plan – as an existing partnership that brings together key city partners including voluntary and community sector representatives, and is essential in driving the community and citizen empowerment agenda in the city.
The Glasgow Open Government Action Plan 2021-23 was also approved by Glasgow City Council’s City Administration Committee on 16 September 2021.

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:

We have discussed the website requirements with Colin Birchenall who leads on that commitment. He has provided an update for the open data commitment and is aware of the need for regular updates on this and the other commitments to be provided.

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?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

We have spoken with several of the government and stakeholder partners to assure ourselves that relevant information was shared at the appropriate time and evidence is provided below in the form of minutes of relevant meetings.

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?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

Third Sector and Stakeholder Workshops – 4 virtual engagement workshops were held to involve the public in conversations on the topic of Open Government, contributing ideas and changes they would like to see, and agreeing on themes or broad commitment areas.
Third Sector and Stakeholder workshop sessions were held in April 2021 with representation from community groups, the third sector, and Local Government – with participation from community groups, Community Councils, voluntary organisations, advice charities, and Elected Members. In advance of the sessions, participants were issued with an information pack that provided: background and context to open government in Glasgow and the OGP; an outline of their role and involvement in the process; a description of the aims of the engagement sessions; and potential open government themes. Participants represented the three Community Planning Partnership Localities (North West, North East, and South) and the third sector (facilitated by Glasgow’s Third Sector Interface Network).

The workshop sessions were structured to allow participants to discuss their open government priorities, decision-making, and experiences of involvement in service change.
sector

Provide references here (e.g. interviews):

  • Open Government Third Sector and Stakeholder Workshops – Participation Pack

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:

Des McNulty attends meetings of the Community Planning partnership strategic board at which progress is reported and members have the opportunity to question the OGP Local team. However, more could be done via the website to give stakeholders regular updates and opportunities to contribute ideas and have them properly considered.

Provide references here (e.g. interviews):

  • Open Government Third Sector and Stakeholder Workshops Findings Note

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 document setting out the action plan commitments is very clear about what is being promised and who is responsible, reflecting the extent to which different stakeholders worked together to develop the final set of commitments and the milestones along the way. The notes on the consultation sessions provide further assurance that the Council worked together with a wide range of stakeholders to develop its vision and priorities/commitments.

Provide references here (e.g. interviews):

2.6 Would you consider the forum to be inclusive and diverse?

Very

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

It is very inclusive of protected groups and diverse populations, reflecting the choice of the Community Planning Partnership – a mechanism intended to reflect diverse needs and groups – as the key accountability body. There is a need to consider how best to bring different voices into the conversation from the business sector.

To ensure diversity of citizen representation in our co-creation spaces, the OGP Local Team has focused information, engagement, and open invitations to participate through existing stakeholders:

  • Glasgow Community Planning Partnership – the 23 Community Planning Area Partnerships which cover three geographical localities of the city – North West, North East and South. These Area Partnerships provide opportunities for communities to engage with the local community planning progress, and review and influence progress towards implementing strategic priorities and investment at an electoral ward level. This approach ensured geographical representation across the city; and
  • Glasgow Third Sector Interface Network – the network provides and coordinates third-sector representation on relevant partnerships, groups and committees, and is an established point of liaison between the third sector and public bodies. Glasgow Third Sector Interface Network has delivered a critical role in reaching a diverse range of third sector organisations in the City, with members representing disabled people, BAME communities, and other communities with protected characteristics. The network provided information, collated views, and issued invitations to participate to its membership.

To maximise representation our stakeholder workshops were offered on a number of days, at different times of day and evening, to accommodate the different availability of potential participants.

Future public conversations on Open Government will add value to our co-creation process and hopefully provide a further opportunity to increase participation and representation.

Provide references here (e.g. interviews):

  • Open Government Third Sector and Stakeholder Workshops: Participation List

Section 3.
Initial evaluation
of commitments

1. Commitment :

Increasing Participatory Democracy – Developing Citizens’ Panels across Glasgow

1.1 Is the commitment verifiable?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The Action Plan sets out a clear set of goals, based on a systematic review of existing structures and arrangements. The proposed actions, especially the commitment to co-creation, are appropriate and the Council is in the process of identifying both hard and soft performance measures which will facilitate evaluation.

1.2 Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify relevance to OGP values?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The focus is clearly on improved transparency and participation. Some more work is required on accountability arrangements, particularly given the review of Thriving Places and learning from how the system responded during the pandemic

1.3 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:

a continuation of ongoing practice in line with existing legislation, policies or requirements.

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

To reshape existing practices by testing out new approaches to participatory democracy through consultative processes that involved citizens alongside council officials and representatives of voluntary and public sector partners.

In late March and early April 2023, a series of workshops were held with a range of stakeholders, namely:

  1. local citizens in pilot areas of Calton and Greater Pollok;
  2. the Calton and Greater Pollok Area Partnerships and local partners;
  3. council family partners (Glasgow Life, Community Empowerment Services, NRS, Health, and Social Care Partnership) and other citywide partners.

The purpose of these workshops was to test the emerging engagement to better understand what would work for citizens, the Area Partnerships, and partners with a role or interest in engaging communities. Specifically, to understand how best to engage with citizens in terms of the type of materials used, the methods of engagement, where and when is best to engage, a format and language that is accessible and easy to understand. For Area Partnerships, the purpose was to understand how information (options, proposals, etc) should be presented to allow informed decision-making in a format that is accessible to all members.
The citizen engagement system that is being developed should be capable of being adapted for use on a range of issues by partners across the Community Planning Partnership so it is important to understand from the partners what would work for them; how partners can work together in a productive way, sharing resources, which is necessary to ensure the system can be adequately supported.

Provide evidence for your answer:

1.4 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 Council is adopting an inclusive, citizen-focused approach to devolved decision-making, which it anticipates will make local service provision, system design, resource use, and local decision-making a truly participatory process.

For example, involves co-designing a system that allows Area Partnerships to make decisions on how the Neighbourhood Infrastructure Improvement Fund is spent based on the opinions of as many local citizens as possible.

Evidence:

1.5 Are there any recommended changes to the design of the commitment to help improve its implementation?

The Council has responded to some concerns about introducing citizen panels across the city by now engaging in a piloting process which will lead to more informed design and enable testing out of alternatives. There have been significant improvements in responsiveness to local third-sector organisations through the Community Planning partnership which is bringing greater coherence to the participation and responsiveness agendas. Our recommendation is to carefully consider what comes out of the pilot processes and take appropriate steps.

2 Commitment :

Exploring an Open Digital Engagement Platform

2.1 Is the commitment verifiable?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The outcome is the production of a business case for an online digital engagement platform that would allow community groups and the third sector to source ideas, access and share local information and collaborate (and vote) on local proposals. The process for preparing the business case involves an assessment of the utility of the open-source platform CONSUL to meet requirements in Glasgow.

2.2 Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify relevance to OGP values?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The Council and its partners have identified a deficiency in access to information amongst citizens and community groups and are seeking to rectify this through the creation of an open digital engagement platform. This approach is in line with the broader Council commitment to open government and citizen empowerment and the values that underpin the OGP. It builds on earlier work e.g. the Future City Demonstrator which boosted the quality and breadth of data available to the Council and enabled significant innovations e.g. in the field of community safety.

However much of the data generated has not so far been made fully open – some of it is internally generated and restricted to council employees (and those of partner organisations) while other data information on the website is not interactive. Work on the use of CONSUL has been delayed and its capabilities relative to other online engagement tools have not yet been tested – 2 programs to pilot/test CONSUL have now been identified.

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:

To provide an easy-to-use and accessible digital platform that would both serve citizens’ needs for information in usable formats and provide a vehicle to improve interaction and participation.

While not entirely novel in global terms, the approach that the Council is taking in its commitment to open data and how data might be used by citizens is ambitious and has great potential to deliver greater empowerment of citizens. Using existing systems such as CONSUL makes sense but only if they match the needs and the circumstances of the city. There is a need to make progress in decision-making about platforms and also in integrating the open data aspirations with the Council’s efforts to engage citizens and in particular to be more responsive to the needs of those who are disadvantaged or face barriers to participation (which might include lack of digital literacy or access to technology and support).

Provide evidence for your answer:

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 commitment activities will result in a change of the rules, practices, or policies that govern relationships between citizens and if successfully pursued will have a long-term impact that will be binding or institutionalized across government, public, and voluntary sector partners and empower citizens.

There is no doubt that creating a successful digital platform co-created with citizens will have many positive effects, not just in terms of facilitating improved participation but altering the way the Council and its partners can respond to needs and engage with citizens. Glasgow’s past experience in developing data templates and building searchable databases stands it in good stead but there needs to be a coordinated push both on testing online engagement tools and implementing those that prove most useful. A key requirement, as noted in the action plan, is to consider how best to resource the running of any platform in conjunction with the third sector, business, and other partners.

2.5 Are there any recommended changes to the design of the commitment to help improve its implementation?

Resource constraints are a critical issue, both financial and human. Councils in the UK struggle to recruit highly qualified data analysts and systems designers Reliance on consultants can be expensive and often it is difficult to identify the most appropriate support, which means that it is better in the medium and longer term to build capacity internally within the Council and amongst partners. Equally important is ensuring that citizens have opportunities to input the process of developing the platform to ensure that the data is prioritized to put on the platform is that which the public would find most useful.

3 Commitment :

Co-creating an Open Data Hub

3.1 Is the commitment verifiable?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

Glasgow City Council established an Open Data Working Group with city partners from across the public, academic and third sectors to adopt a city-wide approach to developing and implementing open data in the city. This commitment delivered a co-created Open Data Hub where citizens can access, and interact with, a broad range of datasets from Glasgow City Council and partner organisations. This open data platform provides access to not just raw datasets for communities but provides interactive maps, dashboards, and data stories that will help communities to understand what the data means. See: https://data.glasgow.gov.uk/

3.2 Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify relevance to OGP values?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The Open Data Hub commitment aligns with OGP values by delivering a city-wide repository of open data that contains a broad range of relevant datasets, visualisations, data stories, and an engagement hub. It provides an easily accessible set of neighborhood and citywide dashboards shaped by the needs of communities and enables informed community debate and decision-making.

3.3 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:

a continuation of ongoing practice in line with existing legislation, policies or requirements.

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The commitment builds on inclusive and participatory processes and strengthens those by assessing the impact that open data may have on transparency, freedom of Information, community empowerment, service design, and innovation.

Provide evidence for your answer:

3.4 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:

is a positive change to a process, practice or policy but will not generate a binding or institutionalized change across government or specific institution(s).

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The commitment activities are a positive change to a process, practice, or policy but will not generate a binding or institutionalized change across government or specific institution(s) unless it is properly and sustainably resourced and gets full institutional commitment.

The commitment to open data in its fullest sense – data that is available to everyone to use, subject to appropriate safeguards- needs to be embraced, not just by those most closely concerned with website design and delivery but across the Council. The Council has made significant strides in data sharing between departments and increasingly between partners in the public and voluntary sectors and this work is ongoing. But progress in providing citizens with access to data (as opposed to statistics or analysis using data) has been slower and this needs to be acknowledged and progress accelerated if the objectives are to be achieved.

3.5 Are there any recommended changes to the design of the commitment to help improve its implementation?

We have worked with the OGP Local Team on developing their Open Data Plan and pointed them to best practices via the Council’s link with the Metrolab network in the USA. In particular, the Seattle Open Data Plan with its maturity model is a good example of how local government can respond to the demands of communities that have significant expertise and knowledge of data use. The Council is developing its own maturity model which marks a significant advance.

4 Commitment :

Building Awareness and Communication on Open Government

4.1 Is the commitment verifiable?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The Action Plan and the commitment template set out the communication and awareness-building process that was undertaken at the start of the process. This was a workshop based and the range of stakeholders engaged and participating was appropriate to what might reasonably have been expected.

4.2 Does the commitment language/activities clearly justify relevance to OGP values?

Yes

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

There is a good understanding of the need for greater transparency and the role of open government in achieving that. Early steps have been taken. However, some of the barriers identified in the commitment template remain – while stakeholders have been consulted about the open government commitment, we do not have evidence at this stage that communities’ or citizens’ awareness levels have been greatly increased. The action plan states that there have been limited opportunities to build capacity within communities – this limitation and the associated barriers need to be addressed if the programme is to successfully move forward.

4.3 Please select one option that best describes the commitment:

a continuation of ongoing practice in line with existing legislation, policies or requirements.

Provide a brief explanation of your answer:

The culture of local government is one where professionals have been accustomed to managing services, with policy decisions being based on recommendations put before elected members. The shift towards open government requires that practices are altered in the light of commitments to increase participation, empower citizens by giving them much-improved access to information, preferably in interactive formats that they can use themselves, and reach out to under-represented and more diverse stakeholders for future engagement and co-creation processes. There is a lot of activity in the Council that is making progress on these matters within existing legislation, policies, and requirements, but this needs to be drawn together and linked to the open government commitment so that the Council and its key stakeholders fully understand all that is being done and are better able to communicate it to the public.

4.4 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 commitment activities will result in a change of the rules, practices, or policies that govern a policy area, public sector, and/or relationship between citizens. If fully implemented, it will have a significant impact on how the Council operates, its relationships with stakeholders, and the shared understandings that underpin relationships with citizens.

Part of the commitment, noted in the action plan is developing suitable tools to improve public awareness and rethinking how the Council shares progress and results with the public. Only part of this is looking at communication channels (digital and non-digital) and how best to make information available. Ideally, some demonstration projects that show how things are changing in specific areas of activity, or a local pilot to see how local people respond to different types of engagement approaches and information provision are needed.

4.5 Are there any recommended changes to the design of the commitment to help improve its implementation?

The primary recommendation would be the development of a comprehensive Open Government Communications Plan. There is an agreed Open Government Communication Plan but this had struggled to get traction (due to resource constraints and the cross-cutting policy nature) – the lesson would be around the development of a further iteration of the Communications Plan which links and relates more directly to the Third Sector and that would draw together the different strands of engagement and communications activity across all the commitments and link them to the overall objectives of the OGP. This would not require a change in the design of the commitment but would necessitate a greater focus on making faster progress.
A secondary recommendation is greater engagement with those people in the city who have a particular expertise or interest in open government and would be willing to engage with the Council in developing an open government plan for the city as opposed to focusing solely on the Council and Council services. Open government will require a good deal of experimentation and shared learning in order to navigate change and the Council should not be too defensive in its approach. If some things don’t work, or don’t work at first, there needs to be a willingness to recognise that and either move on to another approach or remove the barriers to success. Communicating this is a challenge for an institution that is accountable to elected members and ultimately to the electorate but it is important that a flexible, adaptable approach is employed.

Filed under: Europe Inception Report Local Official OGP Documents OGP Community OGP Member Information Report

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open Government Partnership