Open Data Council: openness of Rosreestr and Rosimushchestvo, 2017 results and future plans

    image

    At the end of April, a regular meeting of the Open Data Council was held, the agenda of which was the openness of the Rosreestr and the Federal Property Management Agency, summing up the results of the Open Data Council activities and plans for the future.

    1. Open data of Rosreestr

    Rosreestr turned out to be one of the few departments (for a year and a half) that did not submit the text of the report or presentation. Only the Rosreestr Openness Departmental Plan Draft was available as materials, containing a list of generalized activities, for example, “auditing Rosreestr information resources”, “posting an updated registry of open data sets”, “preparing press releases regarding the disclosure of open data sets”, etc. Neither the schedule of publishing open data, nor the list of open data, nor the report for the previous year, which were present, for example, at the Federal Property Management Agency, was attached to the draft plan.

    From the “specific” there is, for example, an item on the refinement of the open data set “Cadastral map (metadata)”. Geodata specialists know that the cadastral map in Russia is not in the open data format, despite the fact that according to international ratings this set is one of the key (taking this opportunity, I note that of the key sets in Russia in the open data format there is also no real estate register , transaction data, register of organizations, legislation).

    You can look at the cadastral map on the website of Rosreestr, but using it (copying data, reproducing, distributing, publishing ...) without the written permission of Rosreestr is prohibited. According to experts, the problem of lack of access to machine-readable data is not in the cartographic data itself, but in that the copyright protection for the cartographic substrate (i.e. the map drawing) is taken into account, but the issue with the data itself, which is the object, is not worked out, georeferenced to the substrate, not being the objects of copyright. However, at a meeting of the Council, a representative of Rosreestr said that funds had been allocated from the Reserve Fund to finalize the Unified Electronic Cartographic Basis (EECO), so it remains to be hoped that soon one of the key data arrays will still appear in the public domain.

    image

    The Open Data Council recommended that Rosreestr finalize the Openness Action Plan and develop a timetable for the placement of open data sets.

    The report announced that Rosreestr processes 90 million requests per year, that is, it provides about three services per second. My experience with Rosreestr is limited to only one request: exactly two months ago when studying the English version of their site, I noticed that Igor Vasiliev was indicated as the head of the service on the About the Rosreestr page, although Victoria Abramchenko has been holding this post since 2016. In response to the electronic appeal, she received an automatic response: “Your appeal has been submitted for registration”, the information on the site has changed after some time, but the response to the appeal has not yet been received, although, in accordance with Russian law (Federal Law “On the Procedure for Considering Appeals of Citizens of the Russian Federation” ), an answer must be sent to any application of citizens within a month. I can not say whether the lack of an answer is random or systemic.

    2. Open data of the Federal

    Property Management Agency The Federal Property Management Agency, on the contrary, was pleased with the presentation of materials, presenting a colorful presentation and text report. Section “Open Data”contains 19 data sets, 13 of which are generated automatically from the “Unified System of State Property Management” and updated daily, the remaining 6 are generated manually and updated weekly. The total number of data downloads was 12,300 times, and the most requested sets are “Information from the register of federal property”, “Planned sales of shares” and “Information on sales of released real estate military property”.

    In 2018, the Federal Property Management Agency plans to expand the list of published data, conduct an audit of information resources and organize meetings with application developers based on open data. Prior to this, meetings with application developers were implemented only by the Ministry of Finance of Russia in 2014-2016 and were a unique mechanism allowing developers and activists to learn from the source (federal financial state agencies) information about the development of information systems and plans for open data and, most importantly, ask any questions of interest and get direct and quick answers to them. Let's hope that the meetings of the Federal Property Management Agency will be just as productive, and the meetings of the Ministry of Finance of Russia will return in 2018.

    Another initiative is the development by the Federal Property Management Agency of Linked Data, which now, judging by the submitted document, has the status “In Work”.

    3. Results of the third All-Russian contest “Open Data of the Russian Federation”

    The results of the contest can be found on the official website . In my opinion, its main feature this year was the involvement of federal authorities in the development of “50 creative assignments for participants”. At the hackathons that we carry out, for example, as part of the KGI “State expenditures” project, we periodically encountered the problem of the lack of ideas among the participants, which arose when programmers were not immersed in detail in the subject area of ​​the open data proposed at the hackathon. Therefore, the formation by government agencies of lists of ideas for services and applications could be relevant outside the framework of contests and hackathons (in the case, of course, if such ideas are not come up “for show”).

    4. The results of the self-examination of federal executive bodies

    “The index of the quality of work of federal executive authorities (FOIV) with open data”, first conducted in 2017, consists of a “self-examination” of the FOIV, during which employees of the federal authority fill out a questionnaire on how the state agency implemented the mechanisms of openness throughout the year, including information openness, open data, ensuring the clarity of legislation, etc. The results for 2017 are available in the presentation of the Open Government , and, judging by the materials presented for the meeting The Open Data Council will be further processed and published.

    It should be noted that the plans for the openness of federal authorities, and the self-examination methodology, often feature the criteria and positions in the ratings of the State Monitor and the Analytical Center under the Government (the second rating evaluates activity according to open data only on the federal open data portal data.gov.ru , not considering the sections of open data on the websites of government agencies). As you know, often ratings are not only one of the motivations of government agencies, but also a headache (in cases where the evaluated criteria raise questions). Today we are in a situation where the AIS “Monitoring of State Sites” and the Federal Open Data Portaltransferred to the service mode, while the date of the resumption of their work is not reported anywhere.

    5. On promising areas of work with open data

    The draft Priorities for the Council on Open Data for the next three years is aimed at regional government agencies, state development institutions at the federal and regional levels and state corporations.

    According to the project, the priority areas are improving the planning of activities in the field of open data; improvement of legislation; increasing the demand for information (enrichment of open data sets) and the development of infrastructure and scientific and methodological support for open data.

    Since this document is now in project status, and no one knows the structure of the future government and the place of open data in it, going into details does not make much sense, but I can’t but mention one point.

    The project includes a list of key thematic areas, consisting of 17 points. It has, for example, small and medium-sized enterprises, transport, elections, spatial data, housing and communal services, open science, public investment and public procurement, and more. What he lacks is the registry of organizations, which is not only one of the key sets of open data, but its absence in a machine-readable format makes it difficult (or in some cases even impossible) to use other open data.

    This is due to the fact that open data, even those that are automatically generated from federal information systems, contain a large number of errors and typos that do not allow us to identify the organization, and therefore to “connect” the data or prepare analytics. Another problem is the use of different identifiers in different data arrays, for example, some data arrays contain only TIN and KPP, others - OGRN, others - only the name of organizations. Over the past six months alone, we have encountered erroneous PSRN in the register of NPOs of the Ministry of Justice, errors in indicating the TIN and KPP in data on state contracts and government procurements, and errors in the names of organizations receiving federal subsidies. By the way, if you want to know more about financial data, then you can come to the events of the State spending May 12 in St. Petersburgand May 16 in Moscow . True, there will be not only about financial data, but also about OpenRefine, but there will be more about the structure and quality of data.

    At the same time, this is not even about the publication of the Unified State Register of Legal Entities and the Unified State Register of Enterprises and Informations. By the way, by providing information and documents from these registers on a paid basis, the federal budget received about a billion rubles in 2016 (missing the potential taxes on the income of organizations for which the annual fee of 300 thousand rubles for machine-readable data is too high ) Here we have in mind the minimum set of fields that allow you to identify the organization. The minimum set of fields can include: TIN / KPP, PSRN, OKVED, the name of the organization and the date of registration / liquidation. We have been working on the openness of these data since mid-2015, but today the position of the relevant federal authorities is that “any person or organization” can create a statement for one organization on the site, and charging for the use of the Unified State Register of Legal Entities and the Unified State Register of Industrial Property and Entrepreneurship in IT systems is considered reasonable by state bodies. ” The proposal to include this data in the openness plan was announced at the council, let's see where this leads.

    Instead of a conclusion, there was a

    general subjective impression of the structure of this meeting: it turned out to be more concise and informative - oral reports did not duplicate printed materials, questions and comments were prepared; and on the content: if after some time a cadastral map appears in Russia in the format of open data and a register of organizations, then the meeting of the Open Data Council was not in vain.

    Also popular now: