Scan of 50 Selected DPGs in Government Use

What do we mean by “Scan of 50 Selected DPGs in Government Use”? In our landscape scan, we profiled 50 DPGs. While the DPG market is far broader than this, we curated this initial list to launch our exploration into the trends and characteristics of the varied solutions available in this growing ecosystem. We started with the Digital Public Goods Alliance (DPGA) Registry for a list of publicly recognized DPGs, making sure to profile DPGs in government use that had enough documented information available for analysis. We also looked beyond the registry to find active  DPGs that have documented use cases around the world. We aimed for our initial scan to include a mix, with 80 percent of DPGs recognized by the DPGA Registry and 20 percent that have currently not been profiled.

Scan of 50 Selected DPGs in Government Use: Dashboard 

To enlarge, please click FULL SCREEN ICON on the bottom right of the dashboard

Key snapshots from the dashboard:

• The 50 DPGs we assessed are predominantly managed by non-profit (46%) and for-profit (26%) organizations. Non-profit DPGs in government use commonly rely on public donations, philanthropic funding, and professional service fee components. In comparison, their for-profit counterparts predominantly utilize professional service fees. 
• 36 were not made by governments but are used by governments. The remaining 14 were made for governments, by governments.  
• 16 are deployed in the U.S., seven of those 16 DPGs are deployed across 15 states. The remaining nine DPGs are not tracked or it is unknown which states are utilizing the DPG. 
• The top five locations where DPGs are deployed for government use are the United States (16), India (14), the United Kingdom (13), Germany (11), and Canada (11).
• 14 are governed by all of the recommended elements of good governance as defined by Eaves et al. (2022). These elements include a codified vision, mission, and values statement; a documented code of conduct; the existence of a strategy board and technical board; and the ability to contribute to the DPG either with conditions or through open membership.

Scan of 50 Selected DPGs in Government Use: Dataset

To enlarge, please click “VIEW LARGE VERSION” on the bottom right of the dataset

This summary highlights key themes identified in our Scan of 50 DPGs in Government Use report. While the detailed findings can be found in the full report, the following considerations are intended to guide state and territorial agencies, advocates, technology implementers, and federal agencies in adopting DPGs to support how government technology is being used for the delivery of public services.

Key themes from the “Scan of 50 DPGs in Government Use” report: 

• There are a plethora of DPG solutions for governments to help meet evolving expectations
• DPGs in government use have a wide variety of governance structures, but some common success factors are emerging.
• Membership models not only maintain DPGs fiscally over time, but drive consistent collaborative efforts.

There are a plethora of DPG solutions for governments to help meet evolving expectations.

As states modernize their systems, the DPG landscape presents a rich array of products that can be integrated into their environments,  whether to enhance capabilities for digital identification, facilitate seamless payment processing, or optimize survey mechanisms. Furthermore, the significant cluster of domain-agnostic, versatile DPG tools offers governments opportunities to draw upon adaptable solutions that can suit diverse needs and challenges.

DPGs in government use have a wide variety of governance structures, but some common success factors are emerging.

Due to the scalability of DPGs, the diverse stakeholders involved in their creation and ongoing development, and the dual challenge of balancing openness with oversight, governance can be complex and inconsistent. This complexity was confirmed in our Scan of 50 DPGs. In an effort to identify some standardized levers for governance, we employed the DPG Governance Framework proposed by Eaves et al (2022), and found some areas of consistency, including in the documentation of a code of conduct and channels of contribution to name a few. 

Membership models not only maintain DPGs fiscally over time, but drive consistent collaborative efforts. 

For the fiscal sustainability and scalability of DPGs created by governments, state agencies and policymakers should consider establishing non-partisan, non-profit stewardship entities with membership models. Membership models can effectively drive stakeholders to localize development agendas and tailor solutions to municipal and/or (multi)state contexts. Embracing collaborative ecosystems is not easy, but can facilitate accountability, transparency, and the equitable sharing of development gains and benefits, ensuring accessibility across stakeholders.

Considerations for state and territorial governments exploring DPG adoption

Delivering outcomes requires making important decisions that impact choice, value, and quality of public service delivery. DPGs present an opportunity to transform how state agencies deliver public services by leveraging transparent, proven, shared resources and collaborative innovation.

Areas for Self-Reflection

Our goal in building and releasing these resources publicly is to make it easier for state and territorial agencies, advocates, technology implementers, and federal agencies to understand the scope, proven track record, and increasing potential of DPGs in the delivery of public services. 

When considering strategic integration of DPGs into their operations, governments can utilize the following questions to begin or continue discourse:

• Choice in Public Services Delivery:Can we leverage the diverse array of DPG solutions to meet our unique needs and operational requirements?
  Action: Filter through the various solutions in the DPG Landscape Scan Dataset to identify suitable DPGs.
• Targeted Interventions: Can we audit our needs against robust operating systems and specialized tools to identify targeted interventions that address municipal and/or multi-state regional needs most effectively?
  Action: Utilize the DPG Landscape Scan Dataset to identify relevant interventions.
• Collaborative Ecosystems: Are there collaborative ecosystems we can embrace to ensure accountability, transparency, and equitable sharing of development gains and benefits?
  Action: Filter for Collaborative/Initiatives under Entity Type and/or Membership under Funding Models in the DPG Landscape Scan Dataset.

Conclusion 

DPGs offer a transformative opportunity for state governments to deliver public services by leveraging shared resources and collaborative innovation. These technologies can significantly impact the choice, value, and quality of public service delivery. By leveraging the insights from the Scan of 50 DPGs in Government Use report and using the DPG Landscape Scan Data Set as a tool, we hope state and territorial agencies, advocates, technology implementers, and federal agencies can enhance their discourse and strategic planning for adopting DPGs to support the delivery of public services.