GRAPHIC CONSTRUCTOR

Using a graphic constructor you can compare municipalities by separate indicators. Please follow the instruction:

1. Select years and cities you would like to compare.

2. Choose a filter by clicking on one of the icons (13 filters available)

3. Wait till constructor generates a comparative chart and a short data description.

Publicity Index

The following areas were evaluated: access to public information, open sittings of executive committee and free access to city council; public involvement into the development of local policies (through effective mechanisms of citizens’ participation); availability of administrative services.

City Mayor Publicity

The aggregated index of transparency, openness and accountability of the City Mayor. A full range of administrative and political measures taken by the Mayors was estimated so that they can ensure public and friendly relations with communities and contribute to the citizens’ trust and confidence  in municipal institutions.

City mayor publicity – Transparency

The following areas were evaluated: information about the city mayor available at the webpage (biographical data, tax declaration), his communication with citizens (description of mayor’s plenary powers, mayor’s meetings with citizens and procedures for being admitted to the meetings, cooperation with mass media); information on the mayor’s assistants and advisers available at the webpage; transparent rules and procedures for those applying for the vacancies at the city council; key program documents and normative acts publicized.

City mayor publicity – Openness

The following areas were evaluated: mayor’s cooperation with citizens (individual meetings with citizens, outdoor meetings, the use of modern communication technologies) and citizen’s participation in local policy making (through public discussions and consultations, hotline operation, local advisory bodies, cooperation with non-governmental organizations).

City mayor publicity – Accountability

The following areas were evaluated: process and the way mayors report on their work and implementation of social, economic and cultural development programs, local special programs, work of executive bodies, implementation of state regulation policy.

Publicity of executive bodies

The aggregated index of transparency, openness and accountability of the executive bodies. A full range of administrative and political measures taken by the executive bodies was estimated so that they can ensure public and friendly relations with communities and contribute to the citizens’ trust and confidence  in municipal institutions.

Executive bodies’ publicity – Transparency

The following areas were evaluated: information about the heads of executive bodies available at the webpage (biographical data, contacts, tax declaration); normative acts (including regulatory acts) and other documents (including procurement plans, local purpose-oriented programs) publicized; information about all the services provided by communal services and their cost, privileges on these services for separate categories of people is available at the webpage; conduct of land tenders.

Executive bodies’ publicity – Openness

The following areas were evaluated: access to public information; free access to the sittings of executive committee and council’s offices; public involvement through the mechanisms of citizens’ participation; access to administrative services.

Executive bodies’ publicity – Accountability

The following areas were evaluated: process and the way executive bodies report on their work and implementation of social, economic and cultural development programs, local special programs, on communal property disposal, responds given to information requests, city budget performance, regulatory acts efficiency.

Publicity of deputies

The aggregated index of transparency, openness and accountability of the city council deputies A full range of administrative and political measures taken by the Deputies was estimated so that they can ensure public and friendly relations with communities and contribute to the citizens’ trust and confidence  in municipal institutions.

Deputies’ publicity – Transparency

The following areas were evaluated: information about the deputies available at the webpage (biographical data, tax declarations, contacts, factions they belong to), their communication with citizens (schedule of meetings with citizens, description of deputy’s plenary powers); normative and legal acts and other documents (minutes of deputies commissions, information requests submitted by the deputies, plan of implementing voters’ orders) available at the webpage; transparent plenary sittings (electronic voting system, information about the registration of deputies at sittings and results of nominal voting, online audio and video broadcasting).

Deputies’ publicity – Openness

The following areas were evaluated: deputies’ cooperation with citizens (individual meetings with citizens, their involvement into public discussions), and open sittings run by collegiate bodies, due mechanisms of citizens’ participation.

Deputies’ publicity – Accountability

The process and the way deputies report on their work to the voters was evaluated as well as quality of their reports.