Citizens' Satisfaction Survey (MN0041)
Overview
At-a-Glance
Action Plan: Mongolia Action Plan 2019-2021
Action Plan Cycle: 2019
Status:
Institutions
Lead Institution: The Cabinet ecretariat of the government of Mongolia
Support Institution(s): Ministries, Aimags, Mainstreaming Social Accountability in Mongolia Project, Research institutions/NGOs, National Academy of Governance, National Statistical Office.
Policy Areas
Capacity Building, Local Commitments, Public ParticipationIRM Review
IRM Report: Mongolia Transitional Results Report 2019-2021, Mongolia Design Report 2019-2021
Early Results: No IRM Data
Design i
Verifiable: Yes
Relevant to OGP Values: Yes
Ambition (see definition): Low
Implementation i
Description
Main objective:
Conducting a regular, scientific and independent itizens' satisfaction survey on annual basis provides an assessment on effectiveness, efficiency, quality of and accessibility of public services delivered to the citizens by government. The survey also evaluates the implementation of central and local government policies and government performance. Hence, it enables citizens' input/survey findings to be reflected in future policy planning and development and implementation of action plan for addressing citizens' needs. Therefore, it determines the voices of the citizens' effectively thus creating a conducive environment where citizens' can directly participate in policy planning, monitoring and evaluation. Moreover, in the long run, it will create Mongolia's citizens' satisfaction index.
Brief description of commitment:
To revise and approve citizens' satisfaction survey form and improve the research methodology. Undertake citizens' satisfaction survey and take measures in response to the survey results. Disseminate the survey findings through multiple channels.
Ambition:
- Citizens' satisfaction survey will have conducted annually and the action plan in response to the survey findings will have to be implemented at sectoral and local government levels.
- Mongolia will have developed "Citizens' Satisfaction Index"
Milestones:
1. Revise/modify the citizens' satisfaction survey form and research methodology on the basis of 2018 survey findings, conclusion and recommendations and have the revised documents approved
2. Develop relevant Terms of Reference and undertake procurement for selecting external organisations to conduct the survey.
3. Present the survey findings at the cabinet meeting and develop and deliver conclusions and recommendations to 21 aimags, the Municipality of Ulaanbaatar and the ministries.
4. Disseminate survey findings to the public
5. Record survey findings and results of action plan implementation in M&E system at the Cabinet Secretariat and make the system available for the public to access the data.
6. Carry out trainings on using survey findings in operational and policy planning for government organizations
IRM Midterm Status Summary
7. Citizens’ satisfaction survey
- To revise and approve citizens’ satisfaction survey form and improve the research methodology.
- Undertake citizens’ satisfaction survey and take measures in response to the survey results.
- Disseminate the survey findings through multiple channels.
Main Objective
Conducting a regular, scientific, and independent citizens’ satisfaction survey on annual basis provides an assessment on effectiveness, efficiency, quality of, and accessibility of public services delivered to the citizens by government. The survey also evaluates the implementation of central and local government policies and government performance. Hence, it enables citizens’ input/survey findings to be reflected in future policy planning and development and implementation of action plan for addressing citizens’ needs. Therefore, it determines the voices of the citizens effectively, thus creating a conducive environment where citizens can directly participate in policy planning, monitoring, and evaluation. Moreover, in the long run, it will create Mongolia’s citizens’ satisfaction index.
Milestones
- Revise/modify the citizens’ satisfaction survey form and research methodology on the basis of the 2018 survey findings, conclusion, and recommendations, and have the revised documents approved.
- Develop relevant terms of reference and undertake procurement for selecting external organizations to conduct the survey.
- Present the survey findings at the cabinet meeting and develop and deliver conclusions and recommendations to 21 aimags, the Municipality of Ulaanbaatar, and ministries.
- Disseminate survey findings to the public.
- Record survey findings and results of action plan implementation in M&E system at the Cabinet Secretariat and make the system available for the public to access the data.
- Carry out trainings on using survey findings in operational and policy planning for government organizations.
Editorial Note: For the complete text of this commitment, please see Mongolia’s action plan at https://www.opengovpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Mongolia_Action-Plan_2019-2021.pdf.
IRM Design Report Assessment | |
Verifiable: | Yes |
Relevant: | Access to Information, Civic Participation |
Potential Impact: | Minor |
Commitment analysis
This commitment aims to revamp and improve the annual survey of citizen satisfaction of government performance. The results of the survey will then be used to develop a citizen satisfaction index which can be used to inform the government on which areas of public services need to be improved to meet citizens’ needs. Mongolia’s Cabinet Secretariat is responsible for leading implementation of this commitment, along with the Mainstreaming Social Accountability in Mongolia (Masam) Project, [56] the National Academy of Governance, the National Statistics Office, and other research institutions and civil society groups.
Through this commitment, the government will develop an independent research mechanism to evaluate government policies and decisions, and ensure citizen engagement in the process of planning, implementing, and monitoring government policies. [57] The mechanism will then be used to conduct an annual, evidence-based, independent survey on the satisfaction level of citizens on the effectiveness, efficiency, accessibility, and quality of public service delivery through a public survey. [58]
An OECD report highlighting citizen satisfaction with public services notes that citizen satisfaction could be an important outcome indicator of overall government performance. [59] The measurement of citizen satisfaction regarding public service is theoretically a very important part of establishing a citizen-centric approach to public service delivery. While it may not reflect the actual levels of effectiveness and efficiency of public service delivery, the government could use the data on public perception of how they perform to identify key areas for improvement as well as where strong performance could expand and enlarge its impact on the welfare of the citizens.
Building on the results of the 2018 citizen satisfaction survey, the government aims to enhance the quality of the survey by developing new mechanisms as well as proactively disseminating the results to government at the aimag [60] level. The Cabinet Secretariat will take the lead in ensuring that the survey results are used across government in planning future policies through a series of trainings. Data analysis of the survey results would then be used to develop a citizen satisfaction index for the government to use in identifying their strengths and weaknesses in public service delivery.
This commitment is relevant to the OGP value of civic participation as it aims to involve citizens in policy and decision making around government service delivery through regular citizen surveys. It is also relevant to the value of access to information as it proposes to disclose and disseminate the survey findings.
If fully implemented as written, this commitment stands to have minor potential impact on the overall efficiency and effectiveness of public services and public service delivery. A well-designed and regular survey of citizen priorities will allow government to better identify gaps in service delivery and respond to citizen needs. However, in proposing to revamp the existing annual survey process, the primary activity under this commitment represents an incremental improvement in the status quo. The success of this commitment is also contingent on the government using the survey findings to design and implement programs to improve services and address gaps identified by citizens. While a commitment milestone proposes to carry out trainings on how to use the survey findings, the commitment does not specify whether citizens will be able to participate in this process, or outline any provision for the government to provide a reasoned response on how the survey findings informed related decisions.
Going forward, the government should ensure that citizens are included in other aspects of public service improvement, beyond surveys, to identify gaps. The government could, for instance, involve citizens in decision making around the design of programs and initiatives, and introduce mechanisms to facilitate citizen or civil society monitoring of implementation. The government could also further strengthen the scope and impact of citizen surveys and the identification of service gaps by engaging civil society, such as the Democracy Education Center (DEMO), whose Check My Service platform has carried out citizen audits of several public services. Collaboration with the Check My Service platform, and/or other partners, could help the government reach a wider audience, as well as tailor the survey individually for each service area.
IRM End of Term Status Summary
7. Citizens’ satisfaction survey
Limited:
Under this commitment, the Cabinet Secretariat reports that a citizen satisfaction survey was conducted in 2019, introducing an external evaluation organization, rather than continuing agencies’ evaluation of their own work. The survey covered quality and access to public services; relationships, attitudes, knowledge, and skills of civil servants; and proposals for the government. [30] It was not published on the government’s monitoring and evaluation website. [31] No information was publicly available on the survey results, respondent numbers, dissemination, or application to government service delivery.