Citizens' Satisfaction Surveys for Public Services (MN0064)

What problem does the commitment aim to address? Conduct regular satisfaction surveys from clients or citizens, and legal entities regarding the quality, availability, transparency, and openness of public services, and create a flexible and continuous improvement system based on results and effectiveness.

What are the causes of the problem? Satisfaction surveys from citizens, customers, and users regarding state and its provided services are inadequate, unsuited, irregular, and invalid.

What has been done so far to solve the problem? Previously sponsor organizations used to order their own citizens' satisfaction surveys on the activities of ministries and state administrate organizations to the research institutions by selecting only a few functions and conducted once every 2 years. It was ineffective and had little significance in terms of follow-up and time manner.

What solution are you proposing? 1.Create a system to conduct satisfaction surveys right after public service was provided and not after a year, the results are used to improve state services. 2. Provide public services based on the citizen participation or service recipients' suggestions and requests.

What results do we want to achieve by implementing this commitment? Deliver public services based on citizen participation or service recipients' suggestions and requests, and create a system with regular improvement of public service quality and availability.

Milestones | Expected Outputs | Expected Completion Dates

8.1.Orderly evaluation of citizens' satisfaction and the improvement of public services is applied flexibly on time. | -Based on monthly, quarterly, biannual, and annual conclusions, create a state self-improving system; -Within the goal of increasing openness of the state administrative institution activities, participation of civil society organizations and NGOs, and the evaluation of citizens' satisfaction will be taken into consideration when evaluating the performance indicators of the state administrative or executive power institutions. | 2026

Action Plan Review

Commitment 8. Evaluating Citizen Satisfaction of Government

Commitment Cluster 8 and 9: Participatory Evaluation of Government Policies and Services

Authority of Government Supervisory.

For a complete description of the commitments, see Commitments 8 and 9 in https://www.opengovpartnership.org/documents/mongolia-action-plan-2023-2027-december.

Context and objectives

The commitments in this cluster intend for a participatory evaluation of government policies and services. They carry forward objectives from the third action plan, [68] but undertake a more ambitious scope. Commitment 8 plans to increase the frequency of a citizens’ satisfaction survey on the quality, transparency, and openness of public services. Surveys were every two years; Commitment 8 seeks surveys monthly, quarterly, biannually, and annually. Survey results will inform further evaluation through a new multistakeholder process under Commitment 9. Together, these two commitments could establish a formal civic engagement channel for making government policies and services more coherent, consistent, and responsive to public needs. Having proposed the commitments, the Authority of Government Supervisory (AGS) will lead implementation alongside the Mongolian Women's Labor Support Association, the Mongolian Women Lawyers Association, and the Center for Human Rights and Development. [69]

Potential for results: Modest

More frequent citizen satisfaction surveys could provide the AGS with timely input for institutions to address gaps in policy implementation and service delivery. Meanwhile, the multistakeholder process to filter the survey results and consider appropriate corrective measures could empower the public to participate in guiding these actions.

The practice of conducting citizen satisfaction surveys builds on an existing mandate from Government Resolution No. 206 of 2020. Leadership of the recently established AGS in the implementing these two commitments is an important factor. In doing so, AGS established a taskforce – composed of the State Secretaries of all 16 ministries and the Cabinet Secretariat as well as civil society stakeholders – which could ensure that the recommendations of the multistakeholder forum are taken up by relevant institutions. [70]

The inclusion of civil society, private sector, and public representatives in the multistakeholder dialogue, as well as the emphasis on the process of policy and service delivery, are positive steps forward compared to the current largely internal and result-oriented evaluation. This is an important distinction as it underlines the key strength of these commitments in allowing government institutions to be flexible and adaptive in adjusting policy implementation and service delivery. In the longer term, this could guarantee that citizens enjoy the full benefits of government policies and services.

Overall, the National Committee for Human Rights expects this cluster to improve the current practice of conducting citizen satisfaction surveys once every two years and address the absence of a formal procedure to consider and act upon survey results. [71] However, the commitments stand to have only modest potential for results because their milestones do not guarantee binding mechanisms to ensure uptake of the survey results or of the multistakeholder forum’s recommendations. The AGS did not reply to IRM requests for comment on this commitment. [72]

Opportunities, challenges, and recommendations during implementation

To strengthen this cluster’s potential for results, the AGS could introduce milestones to sustain the increased frequency of the survey and multistakeholder dialogue in the long-term. Implementers can reference Brazil’s policy council framework, which uses a government decree to establish its policy councils as permanent [73] and mandates that regulatory bodies consider stakeholder recommendations in the formation, execution, monitoring, and evaluation of programs and public policies. [74] For Mongolia, a strong legal framework linking the survey and ensuing multistakeholder dialogue to policymaking would represent significant improvement over current practices. The IRM recommends the following to ensure the cluster’s success: