Open Government Data: What to Publish First

Open government data is one of the fastest ways to increase trust without waiting for a constitutional rewrite or a new election cycle. But many public institutions get stuck on the first step: they either publish “easy” datasets that nobody uses, or they try to publish everything at once and burn out.

If your goal is real accountability and citizen power (the core promise of continuous direct democracy), the question is not “How do we launch an open data portal?” It is: What should we publish first so people can actually oversee decisions and influence what happens next?

The principle: publish what changes power, not what looks good

In JustSocial’s manifesto, “The Face of Democracy”, the central claim is that democracy must become continuous: citizens should be able to engage not just at election time, but across agenda setting, deliberation, decision, and oversight. Open government data is the backbone of the last part, oversight, and it also improves the first three.

A practical way to translate that into an open data strategy is:

• Prioritize datasets that reveal commitments (money, contracts, rules, timelines).

• Publish data tied to decisions people can contest (permits, enforcement, service performance).

• Ship in iterations (a reliable weekly or monthly release beats a perfect one-time dump).

Open data is not a PR exercise. It is democratic infrastructure.

A decision framework for “what to publish first”

Before listing datasets, align internally on a simple scoring model. This avoids endless debates and keeps releases tied to civic value.

Score datasets on five criteria

Public value: Will this data help residents understand outcomes, tradeoffs, or risks?

Decision proximity: Does it connect to real decisions (spending, procurement, enforcement, approvals)?

Actionability: Can journalists, civic groups, businesses, or ordinary residents do something with it?

Maintainability: Can you update it on a predictable schedule without heroics?

Safety: Can you publish it without exposing personal data, protected locations, or security-sensitive details?

In continuous democracy terms, you are building the “feedback loop.” Data that is high-value but never updated breaks the loop.

Adopt “open by default, closed by exception” with a real privacy gate

Many teams use “privacy” as a blanket reason to publish nothing. The better approach is a strict, documented release gate:

• Remove direct identifiers and apply aggregation where needed.

• Treat small counts and rare combinations as re-identification risks.

• Publish the logic: what you removed, what you aggregated, and why.

This is how you preserve legitimacy while still increasing transparency.

What to publish first: the top 8 datasets that unlock accountability

If you publish only eight categories in your first phase, publish these. They are the fastest path to measurable transparency and citizen oversight.

1) Budget, spending, and transactions (the money trail)

Start with the core: planned spending and actual spending.

Publish:

• Adopted budget (by department, program, and major line items)

• In-year amendments

• Actuals: monthly or quarterly expenditures

• Transaction-level spending when feasible (with appropriate redactions)

Why first: budgets are where promises become commitments. Without financial transparency, participation often becomes symbolic.

2) Procurement: contracts, vendors, and awards

Procurement is one of the highest-leverage transparency areas because it affects fairness, costs, and corruption risk.

Publish:

• Active contracts (vendor, amount, start/end, scope)

• Award decisions and scoring summaries where allowed

• Change orders and extensions

• Vendor lists and beneficial ownership disclosures when legally possible

Why first: contracts translate policy into execution. For continuous oversight, citizens need to see who is paid, for what, and how terms change over time.

3) Grants, subsidies, and discretionary funding

If your institution allocates grants to nonprofits, businesses, or communities, publish that stream early.

Publish:

• Grant programs and criteria

• Awardees, amounts, and intended outcomes

• Reporting and performance results (where available)

Why first: discretionary funding is where trust often collapses, because outsiders suspect favoritism. Publishing criteria and outcomes makes accountability possible.

4) Legislation, meeting records, and voting results (machine-readable)

Many governments “publish” this as PDFs. That is better than nothing, but not enough for civic tech, journalists, or scalable oversight.

Publish:

• Agendas and supporting documents

• Motions and amendments (with version history)

• Voting records per representative

• Attendance

• Public comments (with privacy protections)

Why first: this is the most direct link between representatives and decisions. It supports the manifesto’s call for visible, ongoing accountability, not only electoral accountability.

5) Service performance and operational KPIs

Trust is often lost at the service layer: potholes, permits, sanitation, inspections, response times. Publish the numbers people feel.

Publish:

• 311/service request volumes and resolution times

• Permit timelines and backlog metrics

• Infrastructure maintenance schedules (at a safe level of detail)

• Outcome metrics (for example, average time to restore services after outages)

Why first: open data becomes real when it answers “Is the system working?” and “If not, where is it failing?”

6) Enforcement and inspections (with careful aggregation)

This category is powerful and sensitive. When done responsibly, it makes equity and consistency measurable.

Publish:

• Inspection results by area and category (aggregated to avoid identifying individuals)

• Enforcement actions by type

• Complaint intake volumes and dispositions

Why first: enforcement is where citizens experience fairness or bias. Transparency here supports the manifesto’s emphasis on institutions that can be audited by the public.

7) Public assets and land (what the public owns)

Governments control significant assets: buildings, vehicles, land, leases. Publish an inventory.

Publish:

• Property holdings and leases

• Major capital projects (status, budget, timeline)

• Fleet inventory at a sensible level (avoid operational security issues)

Why first: asset transparency reduces waste, improves planning, and enables informed debate about development and long-term priorities.

8) FOIA/public records logs and disclosure metrics

Even if individual records requests are complex, the meta-data about the process is often publishable and extremely valuable.

Publish:

• Number of requests received

• Time to respond

• Outcomes (fulfilled, denied, partially fulfilled)

• Topics/categories

Why first: it measures transparency itself. It also helps justify staffing and process reforms.

In practice, FOIA and disclosure workflows can create legal complexity. Some legal teams use specialized tools to accelerate document review and drafting in high-volume situations. If your team needs to turn document collections into structured work product quickly, an example of an AI litigation support platform can illustrate what “end-to-end” document processing looks like in the legal domain.

A practical “publish first” table you can use internally

Use this table to align stakeholders, assign owners, and set update expectations.

Dataset to publish first	Why it matters for accountability	Typical system owner	Privacy/safety risk	Recommended update cadence
Budget and actual spending	Makes commitments visible, enables scrutiny of priorities	Finance	Medium (vendor names, payroll details)	Monthly or quarterly
Contracts and procurement	Exposes vendor relationships, change orders, and award patterns	Procurement	Medium	Monthly
Grants and subsidies	Shows who benefits, under what criteria, with what outcomes	Grants office	Medium	Monthly or per award cycle
Legislation and voting	Links representatives and decisions, supports continuous oversight	Clerk/secretariat	Low to medium	Per meeting
Service performance KPIs	Reveals system health and operational failures	Operations/service departments	Low to medium	Weekly or monthly
Inspections and enforcement	Makes fairness measurable (if aggregated responsibly)	Regulatory departments	High if overly granular	Monthly
Public assets and capital projects	Reduces waste, supports informed planning debates	Asset management/public works	Low to medium	Quarterly
FOIA/public records logs	Measures transparency and institutional responsiveness	Legal/records office	Low (if anonymized)	Monthly

How to publish: minimum viable open data (MVOD) that people can trust

Many open data programs fail because they focus on the portal, not the reliability. A credible first phase has three parts: usability, metadata, and proof that updates will continue.

Usability: publish formats that match real use

For most audiences, CSV + a simple API covers the majority of use cases. PDFs should be considered an additional artifact, not the primary publication.

Metadata: make datasets self-explanatory

Every dataset should ship with:

• A plain-language description

• Field definitions (data dictionary)

• Source system and owner

• Update cadence and last updated timestamp

• Known limitations (missing fields, partial coverage)

This is the difference between “data posted” and “data usable.”

Integrity: keep a changelog

When fields change or definitions shift, publish a short changelog. Otherwise, outside users will stop trusting the numbers.

This is aligned with the manifesto’s broader argument: legitimacy comes from inspectability and repeatability, not from declarations.

Common mistakes that undermine open data on day one

Publishing only “safe” datasets

If you publish only park locations and public art (while money and contracts stay opaque), people correctly interpret it as avoidance.

Publishing without a decision link

Open data has the most impact when it is tied to a decision workflow. For example, publishing procurement data is stronger when citizens can also see:

• Upcoming bids

• Evaluation criteria

• Award rationale

• Change orders

That end-to-end visibility is what creates real accountability.

Underestimating privacy and overreacting to it

Two failures are common:

• Under-protecting: publishing granular data that can expose individuals.

• Over-protecting: using privacy as a reason to publish nothing.

The correct approach is systematic: privacy review, aggregation rules, redaction logs, and clear exclusions.

Letting “perfect” block “reliable”

A monthly, clean, well-documented release beats a one-time “big bang” that never updates again.

Turning open data into continuous democracy (not a one-off transparency project)

Open data becomes transformative when it is connected to participation and oversight loops.

In the JustSocial model of continuous direct democracy, data supports:

• Agenda setting: people can point to measurable problems (backlogs, overruns, inequities).

• Deliberation: debate becomes evidence-based, not only ideological.

• Decision: budget and procurement choices are visible and contestable.

• Oversight: performance can be tracked over time, with real consequences.

If your institution wants open data to strengthen legitimacy, connect every published dataset to a place where citizens can ask: “What should change?” and then track whether it did.

For related implementation thinking, JustSocial’s practical approach to transparency and auditability is also reflected in guides like How to Run a Transparent Online Referendum and the broader roadmap in The Face of Democracy.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the best first dataset for open government data? Budget and spending data is usually the highest-impact place to start because it shows priorities and commitments, and it is relevant to almost every public debate.

Should we publish procurement and contracts even if it will attract criticism? Yes, if your goal is legitimacy. Procurement data is one of the clearest accountability levers. Publish it with context (scope, timelines, change orders) so it is interpretable.

How do we publish open data without violating privacy? Use a release gate: remove identifiers, aggregate sensitive categories, suppress small counts when needed, and document what you changed and why.

Do we need a full open data portal before publishing anything? No. Start with a simple, stable publication page and reliable downloads, plus clear metadata and update dates. Portals help, but consistency matters more.

How often should we update open government datasets? As often as your decision cycle requires. Spending and procurement often work monthly. Legislative and voting data should be per meeting. The key is predictable cadence.

Build trust you can measure with JustSocial

Open government data is one of the most practical ways to move from “trust us” to “verify this.” If you want transparency to lead to continuous participation, not just passive observation, explore JustSocial’s vision for technology-enabled citizen oversight and decision-making.

Read the manifesto to understand the full model of continuous direct democracy, then join the community shaping prototypes and public transparency initiatives at JustSocial.io.