Metodología del Índice Nacional de Transparencia y Acceso a la Información (INTAI) 2021 en inglés
Técnicas
Methodology of the National Index of Transparency and Access to Information - INTAI
1. Background
The National Index of Transparency and Access to Information (INTAI, for its acronym in Spanish) is the result of a commitment made by the Access to Public Information Unit (UAIP, for its acronym in Spanish) in the framework of Uruguay’s 4th Open Government National Action Plan 2018-2020.
A first draft of the methodology was developed by the UAIP, and validated by the Executive Committee of the Unit. Subsequently, the proposal was collaboratively improved in two roundtables held in September 2019, with the participation of Civil Society organizations, Academia and different Government actors.
The design includes a set of attributes weighted in conjunction with civil society in the context of the Open Government Dialogue Roundtables.
The UAIP conducted a pilot test in the first semester of 2020 on a group of 25 public institutions from all administrative levels of government. Access the results of the pilot
2. Methodological aspects
The Index analyzes three dimensions: institutional, active transparency and passive transparency, and is based on two sources of information:
a) information provided by the institutions through the online self-assessment form.
b) information sent by the regulated parties in the report on the status of compliance with obligations (Article 7 of Law No. 18,381). This information was considered only for those institutions that participated by completing the self-assessment form.
All the information obtained has been provided by the institutions during the period from October 2021 to May 2022, and they are responsible for ensuring that such information is complete, available and updated.
This version of the INTAI was applied to a total of 228 public institutions, whether state-owned or not. Those institutions who failed to respond to the self-assessment form were assigned a score of zero (0) in the 3 dimensions.
The self-assessment form was completed online and consisted of a series of simple yes/no questions, and requested, when appropriate, to complete the information with links to the contents. It contains information regarding compliance with the requirements related to Law No. 18.381 of October 17, 2008, and its regulatory decree No. 232/010, as well as the processes and infrastructure necessary for the implementation of these obligations. It also addresses issues related to the obligations arising from Law No. 18,220 of December 20, 2007 on the National Archive System, and other related regulations.
The form was made available between October and November of the year 2021 and was to be completed by the Executing Unit where applicable.
During the process, training was provided on how to complete this form and instructions were also provided.
Once the data had been analyzed and processed, a first report was prepared and sent to the institutions between April and May 2022 to complete, rectify or ratify the information sent in due time.
3. Dimensions and their weighting
Each dimension was evaluated by different indicators that correspond to different questions, details of which can be found in section 4 "Details of Indicators" of this document.
The index awards 1 (one) point for each affirmative answer and 0 (zero) points for each different answer ("No or "In process of"). In the case of Passive Transparency data, the index considers the result of the quotient between Requests answered over Requests received.
The points obtained for each indicator are weighted so that the maximum INTAI score is 1 (one) and 0 (zero) is the minimum.
Institutional dimension
The institutional dimension evaluates the internal tools and procedures used by the institution to preserve, produce, publish and disseminate information, in order to generate visibility of its activities and performance, thus achieving greater knowledge, contact and citizen outreach. It has a score of 25% of INTAI's total.
Items comprising the institutional dimension:
| Institutional Dimension (25%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Item Document and Archive Management (DAM) (45%) | Item Internal tools and procedures (30%) | Item Open Data (15%) | Item Training (10%) |
| DAM: Questions Law 18.220 and its regulatory decree No. 355/012 of 10/31/012 (15% questions 2.2, 3.1.8 and 3.1.9 each, remaining questions 5.5% each | 3.2.1: Internal tools and procedures used by the institution to produce information (50%)
3.2.2: Internal tools and procedures used by the institution to publish and disseminate information (50%) | 3.3.1: Procedures for Data publication (40%)
3.3.2: Publication of specific information on active transparency in reusable formats on the website (60%) | 3.4.1: Training policy for personnel on topics such as Open Government, Transparency, Access to Information, Open Data, Document management or other related topics (40%) 3.4.1.2: Training of personnel in Participation, Transparency, and Access to Information (60%) |
The item Document and Archive Management represents 45% of the institutional dimension. The questions regarding the implementation of Law 18.220 and its regulatory decree No. 355/012 of 10/31/012 each represent 15% of the score obtained for the document and archive management item, while questions 2.2, 3.1.8 and 3.1.9 each represent 5.5% of this score.
The item Internal tools and procedures represents 30% of the institutional dimension. In this case, question 3.2.1: Internal tools and procedures used by the institution to produce information represents 50% of the item, while the remaining 50% corresponds to question 3.2.2.: Internal tools and procedures used by the institution to publish and disseminate information.
The item Open Data represents 15% of the institutional dimension. In this case, question 3.3.1.: Procedures for Open Data publication represents 40% of the item, while question 3.3.2 Publication of specific information on active transparency in reusable formats on the website represents 60% of the item.
Finally, the item Training represents 10% of the dimension. Question 3.4.1: Training policy for personnel on topics such as Open Government, Transparency, Access to Information, Open Data, Document management or other related topics represents 40% of the item, while the remaining 60% corresponds to question 3.4.1.2: Training of personnel in Participation, Transparency, and Access to Information.
Passive transparency dimension
The passive transparency dimension evaluates the ability of the institution to process requests for access to information in a timely manner, as well as the organizational procedures and conditions to promote channels or points of access to information. This dimension has a score of 40% of INTAI's total.
In the case of institutions that submit the report on compliance with obligations centrally (by item), the same percentage of compliance was computed for each executing unit.
In those cases in which the evaluated institution reported that no access requests had been received, the full compliance score was awarded in the corresponding item.
Those institutions that did not report the status of compliance with obligations in accordance with Article 7 of Law No. 18,381 were awarded 0 points in the corresponding item.
This dimension is comprised of the following items:
Item Information requests with timely responses (70%): | Item Organizational procedures and conditions to promote information access points or channels (30%) |
| % of Information requests with timely responses: 100%. | 2.1. Existence of a face-to-face procedure for access requests (50%) 2.2: Existence of an electronic procedure or web form for access requests (50%) |
The item Information requests with timely responses represents 70% of the passive transparency dimension. In this case, “% of access to information requests with responses within 40 days (20 days plus extension)” represents 100% of the item’s score. In order to be considered as answered within the deadline, those requests answered within 20 days and those answered within the extension are considered.
On the other hand, the item Organizational procedures and conditions to promote information access points or channels represents 30% of the dimension. Question 2.1.: Existence of face-to-face procedure for access requests represents 50% of the item, while the remaining 50% corresponds to question 2.2.: Existence of an electronic procedure or web form for access requests.
Active transparency dimension
The Active transparency dimension evaluates the level of compliance of the institutions with their obligations established in Article 5 of Law on Access and its Regulatory Decree No. 232/010. It has a score of 35% of INTAI’s total.
Item Indicators Art. 5 Law (80%) | Item Indicators Decree 232 (20%) |
4.1: Organizational Structure (10%) 4.2: Duties (10%) 4.3: Compensations (20%) 4.5: Procurement(20%) 4.6: Statistics (10%) 4.7: Participation (10%) | 4.8 and 4.8_2: Personnel (40%) 4.9: Applications (40%) 4.10: DPP and TU (20%)
|
The item Indicators of Art. 5 Law 18.381 represents 80% of the active transparency dimension. In this case, the item is composed as follows: 4.1.: Organizational Structure (10% of the item), 4.2.: Duties (10% of the item), 4.3.: Compensations (20% of the item), 4.4.: Budget (20% of the item), 4.5: Procurement (20% of the item), 4.6: Statistics (10% of the item), 4.7 Participation (10% of the item).
The item Indicators of Decree 232 represents 20% of the dimension. This item is composed as follows: 4.8 and 4.8_2: Personnel (40% of the item), 4.9: Applications (40% of the item), 4.10: Data Protection Policy and Terms of Use (20% of the item).
4. Survey Instrument
Below are the questions included in the information survey form:
2.1 Does the institution have a documented and public procedure for submitting requests for access to information in person? *:
2.2 Does the institution have a documented and public procedure for the digital submission of requests for access to information? *:
3.1.1 Are there documentary resources and/or collections identified and organized by archives, regardless of the medium in which the information is contained? *:
3.1.2 Are there professional archivists in the Administrative and Historical Archives, or in the Document Management Units? *:
3.1.2.a Is the professional position of archivist regularized or in the process of being created in the professional hierarchy system?
3.1.3 Are there physical spaces equipped for the operation of the Archives with the necessary logistics and infrastructure to develop archive processes? *:6
3.1.4 Is there a digital space equipped for the operation of the digital archives, and the logistics and infrastructure necessary for the archive processes? *:
3.1.5 Are there security systems for physical documents (analog, paper) with a defined and implemented risk management? *:
3.1.6 Are there security systems for digital documents (backup, access, confidentiality, authenticity and traceability) together with a defined and implemented risk management? *:
3.1.7 Are document reproduction processes standardized (microfilming and digitization protocols) and digital preservation systems defined? *:
3.1.8 Is the Institutional Documentary Evaluation Committee established in the regulations? *:
3.1.8.1 Does this committee have a referent before the National Documentary Evaluation Committee of the General Archive of the Nation?
3.1.9 Are the document series identified and the Chart of Precautionary Terms elaborated? *:
3.2.1 Has the institution defined and documented internal instruments and/or procedures to produce information according to its duties? *:
3.2.2 Has the institution defined and documented internal instruments and/or procedures to publish and disseminate information related to its duties? *:
3.3.1 Does the institution have procedures for the provision and publication of Active Transparency information in Open Data format? *:
3.3.2 Does the institution publish Active Transparency information in Open Data format? *:
3.4.1 Does the institution have a training policy for its personnel on topics such as Open Government, Transparency, Access to Information, Open Data, Document Management or other related topics? *:
3.4.1.2 Has the institution provided training to its personnel on Open Government, Transparency, Access to Information, Open Data, Document Management or other related topics? *:
4.0 Are the name and contact details of those responsible for Active and Passive Transparency published on the institution's website?
4.1 Is the organizational chart published on the website?
4.2 Does the institution publish basic information on roles, powers and duties of the institution and of each administrative unit?
4.3 Does the institution publish basic information on its compensation structure?
4.4 Does the institution publish information on budget allocation and execution?
4.5 Does the institution publish information on its procurement?
4.6 Does the institution publish information on data and statistics of general interest?
4.7 Is the institution's contact information published on the website (telephone, address, e-mail, contact form)?
4.8 Does the institution publish a list of its personnel, from the head of department, manager, director or equivalent up to the highest level, including name, contact information and curriculum vitae?
4.8_2 Does the institution publish the list of personnel who do not belong to the institution but who perform functions in it, either because they are hired or on secondment from another institution?
4.9 Does the institution publish information on calls for applications for positions and their results?
4.10 Does the institution publish information on its Data Protection Policy and Terms of Use?