The Seventh National Action Plan for Open Government (NAP7): Analysis of initial evidence gathering (HTML)
Updated 4 August 2026
© Crown copyright 2026
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/calls-for-evidence/seventh-uk-national-action-plan-for-open-government-call-for-evidence/outcome/the-seventh-national-action-plan-for-open-government-nap7-analysis-of-initial-evidence-gathering-html
Executive Summary
The outreach phase for the development of the Seventh National Action Plan for Open Government (NAP7) was launched after the February 2026 UK Multi-Stakeholder Forum for Open Government (MSF) and concluded at the end of May 2026.
The outreach phase included gathering inputs from government and civil society, coordinated by the Cabinet Office Civil Service Strategy Unit (CSSU), in collaboration with the steering committee of the UK Open Government Civil Society Network (UK OGN).
Inputs were assessed collectively by CSSU for potential to progress to the co-creation stage.
- Two themes on ‘maximising the impact of public participation’ and ‘public participation in rule of law’ could move to immediate co-creation.
- Two themes on ‘open justice’ and ‘open contracting’ have strong potential but need to further build capability before entering co-creation at a later date.
- Five themes around anti-corruption and illicit finance, aid transparency, democratic participation, access to information and digital governance, and local transparency have some potential but need to be explored further.
- Seven other themes are not currently recommended for moving towards co-creation due to insufficient evidence of government and/or civil society capability for co-creation at this time.
The more flexible approach to NAP7 means that themes not yet recommended for co-creation could proceed once they are ready. This approach supports genuine government and civil society collaboration, co-creation of commitments, and subsequent implementation.
Annex I and II contains lessons learned as well as the full analysis of all submissions.
Note: A recommendation for a particular theme to be taken forward does not imply CSSU endorsement of any particular submissions or proposal, but is based on an analysis of the potential to co-create.
Introduction
As a member of the international Open Government Partnership (OGP), the UK is committed to co-creating and implementing NAP7 in partnership with civil society and other relevant stakeholders. The NAP provides a mechanism for collaborating to advance the open government principles of transparency, accountability, and participation in government. Implementation of the Sixth National Action Plan for Open Government (NAP6) concluded at the end of 2025, achieving notable success in procurement reform, anti-corruption and aid transparency. The UK will become the government co-chair of the international Open Government Partnership alongside civil society co-chair Laura Neuman from the Carter Centre in October 2026, and domestic effort will contribute to our wider international leadership.
Previous plans have had a fixed period for government and civil society to co-create commitments, followed by a fixed period in which they are implemented. The UK government has co-chaired a review of the Open Government Partnership Action Framework, which sets the standards and expectations for National Action Plans across the international partnership.
As a result of this review, the UK has chosen to adopt a more flexible approach for NAP7. The new approach will allow for rolling co-creation and adoption of individual commitments at an appropriate time during the life of the current Parliament. They will then be implemented over between 1 and 5 years. This also opens up the possibility of working more closely with the devolved governments, local government, Crown Dependencies, British Overseas Territories, as well as other countries on shared challenges through joint or parallel commitments.
A commitment develops through 4 stages:
- Building capability for co-creation
- Co-create a commitment
- Implement a commitment
- Determine what comes next
The co-creation stage is comprised of 5 phases:
- Gather and analyse evidence
- Define the problem
- Develop solutions
- Draft the commitment
- Secure final government approval
More information on participating in NAP7 can be found on GOV.UK.
As part of determining initial capability, The UK Government launched a public call for evidence on 25th March 2026 inviting ideas for what could be included in the Seventh National Action Plan for Open Government (NAP7). The call for evidence closed on 25th May 2026, with a short extension provided into the morning of 26th May for a late submission, resulting in 78 submissions in total. In parallel to the public call for evidence, CSSU conducted internal government outreach to explore the initial potential scope of government involvement in the NAP.
This document details the analysis of the public call for evidence and internal government outreach which has been completed to assess the potential for government and civil society to collaborate in developing suitably ambitious open government commitments as part of NAP7. This analysis will be the focal point for discussion at the next MSF, and further assessment of this information will be undertaken during the early stages of co-creation by the relevant government and civil society stakeholders.
Methodology
NAP7 outreach was coordinated jointly by CSSU and the UK OGN. The gathering of ideas from the public was led by CSSU through GOV.UK Forms which provides free, easy-to-use, accessible and secure forms. UK OGN held information sessions, supported by CSSU, for civil society to provide information on the NAP and guidance on how to make a good submission. Alongside this, CSSU undertook internal government outreach to both advertise the opportunity provided by the NAP, and to explore likely priority policy areas of interest. CSSU also considered additional context, such as the NAP6 co-creation self-assessment and final implementation status updates.
Categorisation and analysis
For the call for evidence, CSSU assessed each idea and assigned one or more categories to it depending on the nature of the idea. Following initial categorisation, ideas were grouped into themes and sub-themes. Each sub-theme was initially summarised depending on the topic of the idea, counted and then reviewed to assess the potential for co-creation. It is recognised that this process is non-exhaustive and entails an element of human subjectivity, although the responsible team cross-checked each other’s work.
The scope of the ideas received was also broad, and the depth of analysis was consequentially limited by time and resource. In some cases where there were a low number of ideas submitted for a sub-theme they may not yet have been tested with the relevant government team. Nevertheless, the approach is considered to be sufficient as an initial step in developing NAP7.
The following criteria were used to assess if ideas met the threshold for successful co-creation:
- Relevant to open government by advancing one or more principles: transparency, accountability and participation in government;
- Promote ambitious open government reforms that stretch the government beyond its current state of practice, significantly improving the status quo;
- Government and civil society capability - both the ability and capacity - to undertake co-creation and implementation of a commitment, including the necessary resources. Identification of these attributes ensures there is sufficient demand and support to drive an idea forward.
RAGG status
CSSU’s consideration of these criteria resulted in a series of recommendations for each theme, classified using a Red-Amber-Green-Grey (RAGG) status
| RAGG status | Recommendation | Explanation |
|---|---|---|
| Red | Explore further | There is possibly some potential for co-creation, but not enough evidence to justify building capability or co-creating at this time, and needs to be considered further |
| Amber | Build capability | Government and civil society should work together to get ready for co-creation, but aren’t ready yet |
| Green | Ready for co-creation | Government and civil society are ready to co-create a commitment |
| Grey | No further action | There is little or no potential for co-creation at this time |
Scoring
CSSU have considered the relevance and ambition of ideas alongside government and civil society capability to engage in co-creation for NAP7. This does not reflect wider government or civil society capability with respect to these themes, or pre-existing engagement. It is also recognised that the assessment will not be exhaustive.
| Theme (: sub-theme) | Relevant | Ambition | Evidence of government capability for NAP co-creation? | Evidence of civil society capability for NAP co-creation? | Recommendation | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equitable access: Maximising the impact of public participation | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Ready for co-creation (Green) | New theme for the UK NAP |
| Equitable access: Public participation in rule of law | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Ready for co-creation (Green) | New theme for the UK NAP |
| Procurement: Open contracting | Yes | Yes | Maybe | Yes | Build capability (Amber) | Currently implementing an existing commitment, but plan to co-create at a later date |
| Justice: Open justice | Yes | Yes | Maybe | Yes | Build capability (Amber) | Awaiting clarification from government on potential scope |
| Anti-corruption and illicit finance | Yes | Yes | Maybe | Yes | Explore further (Red) | Current focus is on implementing the Anti-Corruption Strategy |
| Fiscal: Aid transparency | Yes | Yes | Maybe | Yes | Explore further (Red) | Review in October |
| Democratic participation | Yes | Yes | Maybe | Yes | Explore further (Red) | Review in October |
| Access to information and digital governance | Yes | Yes | Maybe | Yes | Explore further (Red) | The potential for co-creation in this complex policy space needs to be tested |
| Local transparency | Yes | Yes | Maybe | Yes | Explore further (Red) | There is interest, but potential unclear |
| Representative Democracy: Public participation in Parliament | Yes | Yes | n/a | Yes | No further action (Grey) | This is a matter for Parliament |
| Drowning | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No further action (Grey) | Subject to future review |
| Environmental | Yes | Yes | No | Maybe | No further action (Grey) | Subject to future review |
| Fiscal (other than aid transparency) | Yes | Yes | No | Maybe | No further action (Grey) | Subject to future review |
| Ethics and integrity | Yes | Yes | No | Maybe | No further action (Grey) | Subject to future review |
| Health | Yes | Yes | No | Maybe | No further action (Grey) | Subject to future review |
| Planning | Yes | Yes | No | Maybe | No further action (Grey) | Subject to future review |
Note: These recommendations are based on inputs at the time of writing this analysis and are subject to subsequent reversion.
Recommendations
CSSU makes the following recommendations:
- Two themes around public participation should proceed to immediate co-creation due to evidenced strengths;
- The open justice theme should build capability for co-creation at a later date, when the potential scope of government involvement is clearer;
- Open contracting should build capability for co-creation at a later date, coinciding with the end of implementing the existing Open Gov Challenge commitment;
- Five themes covering anti-corruption and illicit finance, aid transparency, democratic participation, access to information and digital governance, and local transparency should explore potential further, each with their own individual considerations mainly linked to existing ongoing activity;
- Seven themes are not currently being considered for further action at this time.
The changes to the OGP Action Framework that enable the UK to take a more flexible approach to NAP7 mean that rather than missing a single window of opportunity to be involved, those themes not yet recommended for co-creation could proceed once they are ready. This approach supports genuine government and civil society collaboration, co-creation of commitments, and subsequent implementation.
Next steps
The recommendations of this report will be considered at the meeting of the MSF on Wednesday 8th July.
Themes that are agreed to be taken forward into co-creation can begin co-creation from July onwards. Co-creation should last an appropriate amount of time depending on the focus and scale of the commitment, which will typically be between 3-12 months. Themes that need to build capability or need to be explored further will be progressed alongside active co-creation. The MSFs will happen on a quarterly basis, and act as a gateway for further co-creation and building capability.
The next MSF on Wednesday 8th July will likely be in three parts. Part 1 will review progress with the open contacting Open Gov Challenge commitment currently being implemented. Part 2 will consider the recommendations in this report about which themes are ready to move to co-creation or otherwise. Part 3 will update the MSF on progress in developing the agenda for the UK Government’s period as co-chair of the international Open Government Partnership (OGP) alongside the civil society co-chair Laura Neuman of the Carter Centre.
Results
The theme categorisation for the NAP7 call for evidence marks a shift toward an organic, grounded approach, where overarching themes and sub-themes emerge directly from the submissions. This contrasts with NAP6 analysis, where categories were predetermined by submitters based on Open Government Partnership (OGP) policy areas
Summary of ideas
There were a total of 78 individual submissions comprising 139 ideas. Of these, 111 were supplied on behalf of organisations or networks, and 28 from individual members of civil society. The following table illustrates the categorisation of ideas by themes, with many ideas being categorised with more than one theme:
| Theme | Sub-theme | Sub-theme total | Theme total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Access to information and digital governance | Digital governance | 9 | 107 |
| Access to information and digital governance | Algorithmic transparency | 19 | 107 |
| Access to information and digital governance | Data management | 1 | 107 |
| Access to information and digital governance | Information integrity | 1 | 107 |
| Access to information and digital governance | Public record | 4 | 107 |
| Access to information and digital governance | Copyright | 1 | 107 |
| Access to information and digital governance | EIR (Environmental Information Regulations) | 2 | 107 |
| Access to information and digital governance | Data asset | 7 | 107 |
| Access to information and digital governance | Open data | 32 | 107 |
| Access to information and digital governance | Readability | 1 | 107 |
| Access to information and digital governance | Artificial intelligence | 2 | 107 |
| Access to information and digital governance | Open standard | 12 | 107 |
| Access to information and digital governance | Proactive disclosure | 1 | 107 |
| Access to information and digital governance | FOI (Freedom of Information) | 14 | 107 |
| Equitable access | Public participation | 33 | 56 |
| Equitable access | Civic participation | 1 | 56 |
| Equitable access | Lobbying | 3 | 56 |
| Equitable access | Consultation | 3 | 56 |
| Equitable access | Inclusion | 6 | 56 |
| Equitable access | Open policy making | 4 | 56 |
| Equitable access | Freedom of expression | 1 | 56 |
| Equitable access | Trust | 3 | 56 |
| Equitable access | Place-based | 1 | 56 |
| Equitable access | Women and Girls Political Participation | 1 | 56 |
| Anti-corruption and illicit finance | Anti-corruption | 15 | 19 |
| Anti-corruption and illicit finance | Beneficial ownership | 4 | 19 |
| Procurement | Procurement | 3 | 19 |
| Procurement | Open contracting | 16 | 19 |
| Representative democracy | Parliament | 11 | 12 |
| Representative democracy | Election data | 1 | 12 |
| Environmental | Environment | 3 | 12 |
| Environmental | Nature | 4 | 12 |
| Environmental | Natural resource | 1 | 12 |
| Environmental | Water | 1 | 12 |
| Environmental | Emission | 1 | 12 |
| Environmental | Waste management | 2 | 12 |
| Justice | Justice | 3 | 5 |
| Justice | SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) | 2 | 5 |
| Fiscal | Fiscal | 12 | 23 |
| Fiscal | Participatory budgeting | 1 | 23 |
| Fiscal | Business case | 1 | 23 |
| Fiscal | Grants data | 3 | 23 |
| Fiscal | Aid transparency | 6 | 23 |
| Ethics and integrity | Standards in public life | 3 | 5 |
| Ethics and integrity | Whistleblowing | 1 | 5 |
| Ethics and integrity | Donations | 1 | 5 |
| Other themes | Health | 3 | 11 |
| Other themes | Local transparency | 6 | 11 |
| Other themes | Planning | 1 | 11 |
| Other themes | Drowning | 1 | 11 |
ANNEX I: Detailed Theme Assessment Tables
Access to information and digital governance
CSSU analysis of public call for evidence
| Theme | No. of relevant ideas | Summary of ideas | CSSU analysis of civil society capability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Digital governance | 9 | 7 topics: strengthening algorithmic transparency; FOI review; collaborative working on data assets; countering dis/misinformation; standards in public life; UK civil society register; AI and open code | A broad range of submissions was received, with many overlapping in three areas: strengthening algorithmic transparency, coordination and oversight; public transparency standards; and interoperability and better use of data assets. There was evidence of civil society capability to co-create potential commitments. Expertise put forward by networks and organisations willing to engage included the press monitoring charity Full Fact, Public Law Project, MySociety which convene the FOI network, and Funders Together. The anti-discrimination and technologies charity, Glitch also put forward expertise and is part of the Data and AI Civil Society Network whose work also overlaps with this ambition. Wider civil society expertise is also noted, including Ada Lovelace Institute and Connected by Data. |
| Algorithmic transparency | 19 | 10 topics: AI regulation; public participation in AI procurement; deliberative processes; enhancing Algorithmic Transparency Recording Standard; Engagement on AI strategy; countering dis/misinformation; collaborative working on data assets; standards in public life; open justice; AI safety; Data sharing, use of AI to support freedom of information system | A broad range of submissions was received, with many overlapping in four core areas: AI; algorithmic transparency, public participation and coordination; standards in public life; data sharing. There was compelling evidence of civil society capability to form thematic stakeholder groups and drive potential co-creation. Expertise was put forward by a variety of networks and institutions willing to co-lead or support activities, including Public Law Project, Glitch, Connected by Data, International Centre for Sustainability, State of the Future, Sense about Science, and Full Fact, among others. Open Data Services Co-operative offered its expertise, highlighting its ongoing work on CivTech with the Scottish Government. |
| Information integrity | 1 | 1 topic: civil society engagement on information integrity | The single submission advocated creating a civil society-government working group focused on information integrity, including a wider spectrum of challenges from mis/disinformation to AI system accountability. The charity Full Fact outlined that it would welcome active NAP participation and seek to build on existing engagement between other civil society organisations and government. Other submissions under this theme indicate wider civil capability to support this proposal. |
| Public record | 4 | 4 topics: mandatory record-keeping and legal protection; funding for record-keeping; professional qualifications in record-keeping; open government legislation | Four submissions received on this topic focus on the profession of record keepers and opportunities for open government legislative change. While explicit support came exclusively from the Archives and Records Association UK & Ireland, its standing as the leading professional body for the sector carries significance. |
| Copyright | 1 | 1 topic: record keeping | The single submission received advocates for the development of a new public records act to meet the challenges of the 21st Century. It doesn’t indicate a strong capability for co-creation. |
| EIR (Environmental Information Regulations) | 2 | 2 topics: review of Environmental Information Regulations 2004; better use of data assets | Two submissions focus on unlocking the value of open data assets and reviewing environmental regulation. While neither indicate strong standalone capability for co-creation, they highlight successful initiatives where data is published with adequate context locally —pointing to Open Data portals of Sheffield City Council and Camden Council. |
| Data asset | 7 | 6 topics: better use of data assets; data sharing; government transparency; informed debate; identifying and publishing core data assets; strengthen local government transparency | A range of submissions was received, with many overlapping in three areas: leveraging better value of government data assets, government transparency, and strengthening trustworthy information There was compelling evidence of civil society capability to form an informed stakeholder group to co-develop a potential commitment. Expertise was put forward by a variety of networks and institutions willing to co-lead, including Datadaptive, Icebreaker One, Bellingcat, the Royal United Services Institute, State of the Future, Open Data Services Cooperative, and individual contributors. The range of contributions and topics identified suggests more than one potential focus area is viable. |
| Open data | 32 | 16 topics: easy data recovery; open evidence to support verifiability of government claims; boost government use of data, not just data access; joining-up organisational identifiers; introduce a Secondary Publishing Right for publicly funded research; update the Local Transparency Code; coordinate open data as a strategic national asset; drowning; visibility of broadband investment; interoperability across public registers; support for communities to use national data and influence prioritisation, including via the National Data Library; improve availability of electoral data; publishing data on government engagement with civil society organisations; open postal address data; support waste crime prevention; open data strategy for the water sector | There are a broad range of ideas addressing both broad cross-cutting open data issues and specific types of open data, covering both UK-wide and at more local levels. Both the volume and quality of submissions indicates a clear capability within civil society to engage with government around open data, but it is less clear whether there is a viable single focus to focus on. |
| Readability | 1 | 1 topic: easily understood versions of documents which contain technical language, such as research papers, cases studies and legal documents | There was a single suggestion on this topic from an individual, which doesn’t indicate a strong capability for co-creation. |
| Open standards | 12 | 12 topics: Open standards to support greater useful release of open data; open data advisory group; Industry open standards in packaging; ID verification applications; transparency water utilities; major projects business cases; digital planning information; consultation standards; local government payments data; use of OCDS data; improvements to lobbying register; standard for broadband investment | Civil society submissions indicated a clear recognition of the value of open standards across a range of submissions, both explicitly and implicitly. Submissions tend to be focused on individual use cases rather than the broader open standards landscape, and it is unclear how much overlap there is between interested parties. Many of the individual use cases are covered in other themes as well. Civil society organisations that submitted ideas related to open standards included Open Data Services Cooperative, Your Dsposal Ltd, Open Data Manchester, the3million, Transport Action Network, Oxford Procurement of Government Outcomes Club and friends, InfluenceMap, Center for Consultation, Local Loop Merseyside. |
| Proactive disclosure | 1 | 1 topic: review progress with proactive disclosure in other countries | There was a single submission on this theme, although there are broader overlaps with other aspects of access to information policy. |
| FOI (Freedom of Information) | 14 | 5 topics: centralised maintenance of disclosure log; reform of timings and refusal clauses in FOI Act; extension of FOI to Include public service contracts delivered by private companies; funded regional data commons; inclusion of police archives under the Public Records Act (PRA) | A broad range of submissions was received, with many overlapping in three themes: a centralised, proactive disclosure log; extension of the FOI Act to include private companies; and navigating further exemptions from the FOI act, such as timings and refusal clauses. Both the volume and quality of submissions indicates a clear capability within civil society to engage with government. |
CSSU analysis of government internal outreach
A broad range of government teams hold policy responsibility for access to information and digital governance spanning Cabinet Office, the Department for Science Innovation and Technology (DSIT) - particularly in the Government Digital Service (GDS), the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), the UK Statistics Authority (UKSA), and The National Archives (TNA), amongst others. Many are already working on relevant workstreams, such as development of the Strategic Data Roadmap led by GDS, and The National Archives work to enhance government’s ability to manage its digital records and information and make them available for re-use, and the resilience of the archives sector. However, because these policy remits closely interlock, further discussion is required on the potential focus for any commitments as part of the NAP.
Equitable access
CSSU analysis of public call for evidence submissions
| Sub-theme | No of relevant ideas | Summary of ideas | CSSU analysis of civil society capability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Public Participation | 33 | 6 topics: legislative & parliamentary scrutiny reform (e-petition reform and citizen led inquiries); institutionalising participation in policy pipeline; Scaling democratic tools (mini publics and Participatory Budgeting); embedding lived experience in healthcare delivery; building Open-Source (OSINT) literacy; civic mobilisation | A broad range of interlinked submissions were received, with strong evidence of civil society capability for a potential commitment across these suggested topics. Many submissions overlapped with themes covered under open data. |
| Lobbying | 3 | 2 topics: expanding scope and transparency of UK lobbying register; centralised cabinet office database of gifts, hospitality and external meetings and unmonitored channels | There is a clear set of willing stakeholders to co-create a commitment in this topic. Organisations and networks include State Capture Accountability Project, Transparency International UK and potential interest from InfluenceMap which cited further backing by industry professional bodies including the Chartered Institute of Public Relations (CIPR) and the Public Relations and Communications Association (PRCA). |
| Consultation | 3 | 3 topics: restoring public trust through strengthened consultation regulations; plain-language consultations; include publication of consultation responses as standard in the consultation principles | While this topic received a low volume of submissions from civil society, there is evidence of willing stakeholders ready to co-create specific elements of this topic. The Community Planning Alliance has expressed willingness to co-create the regulations surrounding data integrity and consultation fairness; and the State Capture Accountability Project also expressed interest alongside willing academic institutions and public engagement organisations to co-create the plain-language baseline standards. |
| Inclusion | 6 | 3 topics: government diversity participation transparency; mandated demographic monitoring (relating to LGBTQ+ patient experience)/ reforming local healthcare; standardising children and young people’s participation in policy, electoral data democratic deficit | This topic received a broad range of submissions from civil society and there is evidence of stakeholders ready to co-create specific elements of this topic. Muslim Charities Forum and Elect Her are interested in supporting the co-creation of government diversity participation transparency. LGBT Foundation is ready to contribute lived-experience insights, cross-sector health networks, and practical monitoring tools to co-develop the healthcare data framework. In addition, there are strong existing practices to utilise within the UK’s children’s rights organisations, charities, local government and youth work and participation networks. |
| Open Policy Making | 4 | 5 topics: open-source verification (OSINT); public-good curriculum/toolkits; standardising evidence transparency in public policy decisions; enforcing universal participation standards for children and youth; innovative (in-person and digital) participatory pilots | A diverse set of submissions were received, with the potential to bring together a group of willing civil society stakeholders to work together on the theme of open policy making. This includes Bellingcat, Sense about Science, State of the Future and Just for Kids. |
| Freedom of Expression | 1 | 1 topic: eliminating loopholes in existing anti-SLAPP legislation | Evidence of civil society capability was limited to a single organisation, Foreign Policy Centre. This group cited support from a network of academics, lawyers, journalists, and civil society representatives who are willing to collaborate and advise, in addition to working closely with the UK Anti-Corruption Coalition. |
| Women and Girls Political Participation | 1 | 1 topic: women and girls political participation | While evidence of civil society capability was limited to a single organisation - Elect-Her - it has expressed interest in civic participation in participatory engagement processes specifically designed with underrepresented groups, and shared learning amongst stakeholders. |
| Trust | 3 | 2 topics: enabling public participation; strengthen democratic participation in UK Parliament | Three submissions received on this topic focus broadly on enabling and strengthening public participation in government institutions. While the proposed ideas were wide-ranging, evidence of civil society’s capacity to form stakeholder groups to develop a potential commitment was limited. Specific expertise was noted from the Community Planning Alliance. |
| Place based | 1 | 1 topic: enabling public participation | The single submission received on this topic advocates for inclusive participation at the neighbourhood level. Though formal evidence of civil society capability came solely from Citizen Network, wider interest exists among Voluntary, Community, Faith and Social Enterprise (VCFSE) organisations. |
CSSU analysis of government internal outreach
Mainstreaming public participation
The relevant government stakeholders include teams in Cabinet Office, and members of the Participatory Methods Forum, a cross-government network to support the use of participatory methods in policy making across government. Public participation and democratic engagement is a cross-cutting theme and involves various stakeholders across the UK Government, devolved governments and local government.
UK Government stakeholders are clear that there is strong potential for resource, capability, and appropriate political sponsorship to proceed to co-creation and highlighted the readiness of external stakeholders, including Involve, Demos and members of the government’s Civil Society Council, amongst others. The proposed areas of focus are to leverage new technologies and innovative approaches to improve the way in which government consultation rules and duties can support decisions and policy development. The aspiration is to create a more effective and efficient system that mainstreams public participation across government.
Public participation on rule of law
The relevant government team is situated within the Attorney General Office (AGO). The AGO is clear that strong capability exists and they are well-placed to participate in co-creation, building on a strong existing programme of work which can draw on established civil society networks.
The proposed areas of engagement are public legal education and the future resilience of the rule of law. Government stakeholders welcome further suggestions that can contribute to fulfilling AGO’s objective of strengthening a rule of law culture and building future resilience.
Democratic Participation
The relevant government team are situated in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG). They are currently focused on launching the Democratic Engagement Fund, a new multi-million-pound grant programme to support people to engage with democracy. The fund will provide grants to civil society organisations (CSOs) to deliver politically neutral, place‑based activities that help people understand, engage with, and participate in democracy. Once the launch has been completed this team would like to revisit the possibility of future engagement with the NAP.
Anti-corruption and illicit finance
CSSU analysis of public call for evidence submissions
| Sub-theme | No of relevant ideas | Summary of ideas | CSSU analysis of civil society capability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anti-corruption | 15 | 12 topics: company information register; lobbying transparency; asset ownership review; civil engagement on UK anti-corruption agenda; beneficial ownership; Illicit Finance Summit; political donations; standards in public life; asset recovery; whistle blowing review; open contracting; democratic engagement | A broad range of submissions was received, focusing on the anti-corruption strategy, leadership, and coordination; beneficial ownership transparency; and political integrity regarding lobbying and anti-SLAPP measures. Evidence of civil society’s capacity to co-create potential commitments was equally broad. Expertise was put forward by a variety of networks and institutions, including Shout Out UK, the UK Anti-Corruption Coalition, Spotlight on Corruption, Transparency International, the State Capture Accountability Project, the Centre for the Study of Corruption (University of Sussex), and Civic tech group Open Data Services Co-operative. |
| Beneficial ownership | 4 | 2 topics: asset ownership review; company information register | Submissions on asset and beneficial ownership were received alongside evidence of civil society’s capacity to co-create potential commitments.. Subject matter expertise was put forward by a variety of networks and institutions consistent with wider anti-corruption submissions (see above). |
CSSU analysis of government internal outreach
The relevant government teams are primarily focused on implementing the 123 commitments in the UK Anti-Corruption Strategy 2025 (ACS) which runs from 2026 to 2030, including the delivery of the Illicit Finance Summit 2026. The ACS was informed by civil society input as part of a commitment in NAP6, and its implementation includes regular civil society engagement through an ACS governance mechanism. The potential for developing a commitment(s) as part of NAP7 is strongest where it is aligned with existing efforts and priorities, including ideas for implementing ACS commitments.
Procurement
CSSU analysis of public call for evidence submissions
| Sub-theme | No of relevant ideas | Summary of ideas | CSSU analysis of civil society capability |
| Procurement | 3 | 2 topics: open contracting and procurement; participatory budgeting | This theme received a diverse set of ideas under the umbrella theme of procurement reform. Submissions highlighted strong potential for a capable stakeholder group, bringing together networks and organisations new to the UK NAP cycle alongside those with a long history of engagement in the domestic open government process. |
| Open contracting | 16 | 8 topics: open contracting and procurement; anti-corruption and integrity of public services; open standards; fiscal transparency; enhance social value; public transparency engagement; algorithmic transparency; AI assurance/ health check for AI | A broad range of submissions was received, with many overlapping in two areas: strengthening the technical aspects of procurement integrity and maximising public benefit. Three stakeholder groups with a long history of UK NAP engagement offered support for a potential commitment: Open Contracting Advisory Group, Open Contracting Partnership, and individuals convened through the Oxford Procurement of Government Outcomes Club. Additionally, Local Loop Merseyside and Posterity Global Group demonstrated relevant commercial capability. |
CSSU analysis of government internal outreach
The relevant lead government teams are situated in Government Commercial Function within Cabinet Office. They are already leading implementation of the UK standalone Open Gov Challenge commitment ‘Building Public Dashboards for Open Contracting Data’ which needs to remain the immediate focus. However, they do wish to engage in a new round of co-creation in a few months time to build on progress during the last six NAPs and the Open Gov Challenge commitment.
Representative democracy
CSSU analysis of public call for evidence submissions
| Sub-theme | No of relevant ideas | Summary of ideas | CSSU analysis of civil society capability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parliament | 11 | 7 topics: standardising public participation mechanisms; institutionalising citizen participation in Gov Bill Pipeline; standardising channels for citizen policy inputs; introducing a minister for the people; overhauling parliamentary committee process; reforming constituency convention and Nolan Principles; defining parliament’s core role (Servant or Dictate from above) | While the proposed ideas were wide-ranging, evidence of civil society’s capacity to form stakeholder groups was unclear, though specific expertise was noted from Demos. |
| Election data | 1 | 2 topics: regional data fragmentation (particularly pertaining to NI), central open election data portal | Single submission from an individual, indicates low capability with respect to this specific idea on election data. |
CSSU analysis of government internal outreach
Due to UK constitutional arrangements, potential commitments held by the UK Parliament fall outside coordination of the government’s UK National Action Plan. There is scope however to co-create open parliament commitments but this is a matter for Parliament to decide upon.
Consideration of the election data element of this theme could be explored further as part of the theme on access to information and digital governance.
Environmental
CSSU analysis of public call for evidence submissions
| Sub-theme | No of relevant ideas | Summary of ideas | CSSU analysis of civil society capability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Environment | 3 | 1 topic: lack of transparency in environmental/climate target delivery plans | Transport Action Network (TAN) would be willing to contribute its expertise and engage its networks to help move this forward, alongside potential capability with United Kingdom Without Incineration Network (UKWIN). TAN actively campaigns and monitors a range of transport issues DfT/Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) National Transport Decarbonation Plan) and is a national umbrella body for many local transport groups across England and Wales. |
| Nature | 4 | 2 topics: lack of international climate and biodiversity spending transparency; mandatory and itemised International Climate Finance (ICF) annual reporting | While a low number of submissions, evidence of a clear civil society stakeholder group (Conservation International UK, Campaign for Nature, Great Blue Ocean coalition, Fauna & Flora) was demonstrated over overlapping themes. |
| Natural Resource | 1 | 1 topic: modernisation of data access to public register Information | The was a single submission received on this topic, although there are broader overlaps with other submissions regarding the theme of access to information which could draw on expressed civil society capability |
| Water | 1 | 2 topics: transparency gap of privatised water utilities; Water Data Taskforce | The single submission received on this topic highlighted existing practices within the energy sector that could be used for the water industry and Ofwat’s Water Efficiency Fund as a potential source of civil society funding. |
| Emissions | 1 | 1 topic: lack of centralised target tracking | The single submission advocates an emissions-based standard reporting mechanism. Climate Emergency UK outlined it would be willing to work with government, funding permitted. |
| Waste management | 2 | 3 topics: data fragmentation and waste crime; open data standards; system interoperability through Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) | Evident civil society support from Your Dsposal Ltd (social enterprise) in tandem with the Waste Compliance Taskforce (WACT). WACT is a cross-sector, collaborative forum that bridges the gap between environmental regulators (Environment Agency (EA), Natural Resources Wales, Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) and industry bodies like the Environmental Services Association (ESA) and United Resource Operators Consortium (UROC). |
CSSU analysis of government internal outreach
These topics are not likely to proceed further as part of NAP7 at this time, although CSSU will seek to test these ideas with relevant parts of government.
Justice
CSSU analysis of public call for evidence submissions
| Sub-theme | No of relevant ideas | Summary of ideas | CSSU analysis of civil society capability |
| Open Justice | 3 | 5 topics: civil society engagement on strengthening open justice; open justice; equitable access to justice data; public inquiry integrity/ data management/ record-keeping; open justice | A small but focused number of submissions explored interlinked themes around promoting the rule of law and a fairer justice system. These responses highlighted compelling civil society capability and expertise from a variety of organisations and networks, including the Courts and Tribunals Observers Network, the UK Anti-Corruption Coalition, Spotlight on Corruption, INQUEST, JUSTICE, Hillsborough Law Now, the Campaign for Freedom of Information (FOI), and APPEAL. Wider sector engagement is evident in the UK government’s ‘Open Justice: the way forward’ consultation. Out of 131 responses, NGOs, charities, and civil society groups accounted for 20%.. |
| Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) | 2 | 1 topic: Anti-SLAPP measures | Although submissions were few, they highlighted the capability and the expertise of the civil society network UK Anti-SLAPP Coalition. |
CSSU analysis of government internal outreach
The relevant government team for open justice are situated in the Ministry of Justice. They welcome the suggestions made in the public call for evidence but are clear that any potential open justice commitment requires further testing and approval within government before moving to co-creation. The Open Justice: the way forward call for evidence ran from May 2023 to September 2023 and the outcomes from this could not be included in NAP6 due to previous constraints on timing. The findings have, however, informed ongoing work across the justice system and a number of areas are now progressing to a point where they would benefit from co-creation through the NAP.
Fiscal
CSSU analysis of public call for evidence submissions
| Sub-theme | No of relevant ideas | Summary of ideas | CSSU analysis of civil society capability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fiscal | 12 | 8 topics: public spending; procurement contract tracker; International nature spending; anti-corruption; data standards; international aid transparency; better use of UK research assets; open contracting and procurement |
A broad range of submissions were received which overlapped in two areas: unlocking the value of open data and strengthening oversight of public spending. While the ideas received were broad, civil society’s capacity to support these potential commitments is more limited, concentrating around specific expertise in procurement, UK research, and Overseas Development Assistance (ODA). |
| Participatory budgeting | 1 | 1 topic: participatory budgeting | The single submission received on this topic advocates expanding the use and principles of participatory budgeting within government. Evidence of civil society capability was limited to one specific organisation, Shared Future. |
| Business case | 1 | 1 topic: standardisation in business cases and evaluation | The single submission received on this topic advocates for improving transparency and standardisation in business cases for major projects. Evidence of civil society capability was limited to one specific organisation, Transport Action Network. |
| Grants data | 3 | 2 topics: 360 giving data standard; ID verification | Three submissions received on this topic focus on broadening open procurement standards (360Giving) and widening their implementation across public bodies. Evidence of civil society capability includes the Open Contracting Advisory Group, which has a long history of involvement in UK NAP commitments, and the funding infrastructure network Funders Together. |
| Aid transparency | 6 | 4 topics: UK aid strategy; international climate financing; international nature spending; joined-up identifiers | Climate-focused networks, such as Conservation International UK, Campaign for Nature amongst others, highlighted civil society’s capability to support a potential climate finance commitment. Similarly, humanitarian and development networks involved in previous NAP cycles demonstrated their readiness to engage in co-creation, while stressing that the resource and capacity burdens current facing civil society organisations must be acknowledged. |
CSSU analysis of government internal outreach
The relevant government team in FCDO is not currently in a position to engage in co-creation of a new commitment on aid transparency and will revisit this situation ahead of the October MSF.
The other topics are not likely to proceed further as part of NAP7 at this time, although CSSU will seek to test these ideas with relevant parts of government.
Ethics and integrity
CSSU analysis of public call for evidence submissions
| Sub-theme | No of relevant ideas | Summary of ideas | CSSU analysis of civil society capability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standards in public life | 3 | 3 topics: reconciling parliamentary conventions with the Nolan Principles; conflict of interest: cabinet responsibility vs. constituency MP duty; cap on individual political donations | Although submissions were few, they highlighted the capability and expertise of the civil society network Transparency International. |
| Whistleblowing | 1 | 2 topics: strengthening protection and support systems; introducing transparent financial reward schemes | There was a single submission on this theme, although there are broader overlaps with other aspects of anti-corruption. |
| Donations | 1 | 2 topics: cap on individual political donations; reducing campaign spending limits | There was a single submission on this theme and evidence of civil society capability to form a stakeholder group came solely from Transparency International. However, a broad range of expertise and democracy campaigners was also noted. |
CSSU analysis of government internal outreach
Some of the ideas deal directly with Parliament which due to constitutional arrangements are unlikely to be involved in a government-led action plan. There is scope for Parliament however to co-create open parliament commitments but this is a matter for Parliament to decide upon.
The other topics are not likely to proceed further as part of NAP7 at this time, although CSSU will seek to test these ideas with relevant parts of government.
Other sub-themes
CSSU analysis of public call for evidence
| Sub-theme | No of relevant ideas | Summary of ideas | CSSU analysis of civil society capability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Health | 3 | 2 topics: environmental regulation and public health; drowning | Out of the three submissions received, two were deemed relevant to open government principles, covering a diverse range of ideas. In separate submissions, the British Society for Medical Mycology and the LGBT Foundation highlighted their readiness for co-creation with government. The latter highlighted its previous work alongside other civil society organisations dedicated to supporting community health outcomes for marginalised and LGBTQ+ people. |
| Local transparency | 6 | 3 topics: effective knowledge sharing for tackling climate change; enhance transparency requirements; 360 giving data standard | A range of submissions was received, with many overlapping in two areas: deliberative approaches to tackling climate change and strengthening the Local Government Transparency Code. There was compelling evidence of civil society’s capacity to co-create potential commitments. Expertise was put forward by a variety of networks and institutions willing to co-lead, including the Great Collaboration, Open Council Network, Icebreaker, Climate Change UK, International Centre for Sustainability, Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) and Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM). Additionally, a longer list of supportive partners was identified, featuring organisations such as the Environmental Data Network, Connected by Data, and mySociety. |
| Drowning | 1 | 3 topics: fragmented governance and Accountability; open data transparency; implementing a shared “Safe Systems” model | The single submission received on this topic demonstrated a clear set of willing stakeholders to co-create (Royal Life Saving Society (RLSS),Water Safety England, National Water Safety Forum). |
| Planning | 1 | 1 topic: fragmentation of digital planning programme across government, particularly regarding ‘Local Growth Plans’ | The single submission received on this topic was limited to one specific organisation, Transport Action Network, in engaging with its networks to drive this forward. |
CSSU analysis of government internal outreach
There is some potential to explore local transparency through the Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government, such as via the Mayoral Data Council which convenes the Strategic Mayoral Authorities.
The other topics are not likely to proceed further as part of NAP7 at this time, although CSSU will seek to test these ideas with relevant parts of government, with particular note given the interest in local transparency.
ANNEX II: Lessons Learned
Lessons learned
As part of our ongoing commitment to open evaluation and improvement of the NAP process, CSSU considered lessons learned from the NAP6 outreach phase and considered any new lessons learned from the NAP7 outreach phase.
During the NAP7 outreach phase CSSU have considered the lessons learned from the NAP6 outreach phase as follows:
- Fewer but ambitious commitments: NAP6 contained 4 commitments which were largely delivered, creating the kind of ambitious change that was intended. Experience during NAP5 and NAP6 have shaped this initial discovery phase of NAP7 as well as the review of OGP’s rules governing NAPs co-led by the UK Government, allowing us to pursue ambitious open government commitments at a time that makes sense for individual policy areas.
- Employ several submission methods during outreach: a single public call for evidence was the primary focus for this initial discovery phase of NAP7, however the new more flexible approach to the NAP allows us to explore other approaches in the coming months.
- Open government reform beyond National Action Plans - the review of OGP’s rules governing NAPs co-led by the UK Government has created the opportunity to involve efforts at open government reform which would previously have been excluded from the NAP.
During the NAP7 outreach phase CSSU identified the following lessons:
- Any future general calls for evidence to launch a NAP, or targeted calls for evidence or consultations on a specific theme would benefit from making use of a suitable automated idea categorisation, specifically the Consult tool from i.AI. This would be particularly important with higher volumes of submissions to save time and improve consistency compared with human theme classifications. Unfortunately, the Consult tool was not available for widespread use at the time of the NAP7 call for evidence.
- Utilise and explore new, forthcoming features of GOV.UK Forms as they are rolled out. The platform saves time and money and complies with various government standards including accessibility and cyber security, and as the platform matures more features are expected to become available.
- Assessing capability is complex and dependent on information provided in submissions, supplemented by contextual knowledge. Whilst the initial call for evidence is only part of the initial process, it was launched before a pre-election period and ended shortly after it. This necessarily hampered proactive communication, whilst other factors delayed internal government outreach. Overall, a more proactive range of earlier engagement would be beneficial.