The online platforms of the Audit Courts of Brazilian states after six years of the Freedom of Information Act

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Raupp, Fabiano Maury
Data de Publicação: 2019
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Meta: avaliação (Rio de Janeiro)
Texto Completo: https://revistas.cesgranrio.org.br/index.php/metaavaliacao/article/view/1989
Resumo: This article presents the results of a study to understand the empirical reality of the platforms of the Audit Courts of Brazilian states after six years of the Freedom of Information Act (FIA). In addition to the courts of the 26 states, the Audit Court of the Federal District was also considered. Descriptive research was used for a documentary study, with a predominantly qualitative approach. Observation protocol was used to collect the data. In the theme of this study, the same information request was sent to all Audit Courts and the data was submitted to descriptive analysis. The online platforms evaluation model was developed based on Padilha, Michener and Contreras (2016). The theoretical framework discusses topics such as transparency and online platforms. All platforms have indicators that can be improved using the analyzed model. For those who received the highest scores, it is assumed that the effort to reach the “optimal” condition of the model (maximum score) is lower, unlike those that received the lowest scores. Most courts’ platforms were evaluated as “optimal”. The study shows that there is room for the online platforms to improve in the indicators ‘communication’, and ‘login and receipts’, observing that the scores for the indicator ‘barriers’ are already high.
id CESGRAN-1_0635592163bd67edc2b5abafdd643dd6
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.localhost:article/1989
network_acronym_str CESGRAN-1
network_name_str Meta: avaliação (Rio de Janeiro)
repository_id_str
spelling The online platforms of the Audit Courts of Brazilian states after six years of the Freedom of Information ActThis article presents the results of a study to understand the empirical reality of the platforms of the Audit Courts of Brazilian states after six years of the Freedom of Information Act (FIA). In addition to the courts of the 26 states, the Audit Court of the Federal District was also considered. Descriptive research was used for a documentary study, with a predominantly qualitative approach. Observation protocol was used to collect the data. In the theme of this study, the same information request was sent to all Audit Courts and the data was submitted to descriptive analysis. The online platforms evaluation model was developed based on Padilha, Michener and Contreras (2016). The theoretical framework discusses topics such as transparency and online platforms. All platforms have indicators that can be improved using the analyzed model. For those who received the highest scores, it is assumed that the effort to reach the “optimal” condition of the model (maximum score) is lower, unlike those that received the lowest scores. Most courts’ platforms were evaluated as “optimal”. The study shows that there is room for the online platforms to improve in the indicators ‘communication’, and ‘login and receipts’, observing that the scores for the indicator ‘barriers’ are already high.Fundação CesgranrioFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa e Inovação do Estado de Santa Catarina – FAPESCRaupp, Fabiano Maury2019-08-23info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://revistas.cesgranrio.org.br/index.php/metaavaliacao/article/view/198910.22347/2175-2753v11i32.1989Revista Meta: Avaliação; v. 11, n. 32 (2019): Revista Meta: Avaliação Maio/Ago.; 517 - 5382175-2753reponame:Meta: avaliação (Rio de Janeiro)instname:Fundação Cesgranrioinstacron:CESGRANRIOenghttps://revistas.cesgranrio.org.br/index.php/metaavaliacao/article/view/1989/pdfDireitos autorais 2019 Fundacao Cesgranriohttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2019-08-23T15:07:50Zoai:ojs.localhost:article/1989Revistahttps://revistas.cesgranrio.org.br/index.php/metaavaliacao/indexPRIhttps://revistas.cesgranrio.org.br/index.php/metaavaliacao/oaimetaavaliacao@cesgranrio.org.br2175-27532175-2753opendoar:2019-08-23T15:07:50Meta: avaliação (Rio de Janeiro) - Fundação Cesgranriofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv The online platforms of the Audit Courts of Brazilian states after six years of the Freedom of Information Act
title The online platforms of the Audit Courts of Brazilian states after six years of the Freedom of Information Act
spellingShingle The online platforms of the Audit Courts of Brazilian states after six years of the Freedom of Information Act
Raupp, Fabiano Maury
title_short The online platforms of the Audit Courts of Brazilian states after six years of the Freedom of Information Act
title_full The online platforms of the Audit Courts of Brazilian states after six years of the Freedom of Information Act
title_fullStr The online platforms of the Audit Courts of Brazilian states after six years of the Freedom of Information Act
title_full_unstemmed The online platforms of the Audit Courts of Brazilian states after six years of the Freedom of Information Act
title_sort The online platforms of the Audit Courts of Brazilian states after six years of the Freedom of Information Act
author Raupp, Fabiano Maury
author_facet Raupp, Fabiano Maury
author_role author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa e Inovação do Estado de Santa Catarina – FAPESC
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Raupp, Fabiano Maury
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv
description This article presents the results of a study to understand the empirical reality of the platforms of the Audit Courts of Brazilian states after six years of the Freedom of Information Act (FIA). In addition to the courts of the 26 states, the Audit Court of the Federal District was also considered. Descriptive research was used for a documentary study, with a predominantly qualitative approach. Observation protocol was used to collect the data. In the theme of this study, the same information request was sent to all Audit Courts and the data was submitted to descriptive analysis. The online platforms evaluation model was developed based on Padilha, Michener and Contreras (2016). The theoretical framework discusses topics such as transparency and online platforms. All platforms have indicators that can be improved using the analyzed model. For those who received the highest scores, it is assumed that the effort to reach the “optimal” condition of the model (maximum score) is lower, unlike those that received the lowest scores. Most courts’ platforms were evaluated as “optimal”. The study shows that there is room for the online platforms to improve in the indicators ‘communication’, and ‘login and receipts’, observing that the scores for the indicator ‘barriers’ are already high.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2019-08-23
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv


dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://revistas.cesgranrio.org.br/index.php/metaavaliacao/article/view/1989
10.22347/2175-2753v11i32.1989
url https://revistas.cesgranrio.org.br/index.php/metaavaliacao/article/view/1989
identifier_str_mv 10.22347/2175-2753v11i32.1989
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://revistas.cesgranrio.org.br/index.php/metaavaliacao/article/view/1989/pdf
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Direitos autorais 2019 Fundacao Cesgranrio
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Direitos autorais 2019 Fundacao Cesgranrio
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.coverage.none.fl_str_mv


dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Fundação Cesgranrio
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Fundação Cesgranrio
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista Meta: Avaliação; v. 11, n. 32 (2019): Revista Meta: Avaliação Maio/Ago.; 517 - 538
2175-2753
reponame:Meta: avaliação (Rio de Janeiro)
instname:Fundação Cesgranrio
instacron:CESGRANRIO
instname_str Fundação Cesgranrio
instacron_str CESGRANRIO
institution CESGRANRIO
reponame_str Meta: avaliação (Rio de Janeiro)
collection Meta: avaliação (Rio de Janeiro)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Meta: avaliação (Rio de Janeiro) - Fundação Cesgranrio
repository.mail.fl_str_mv metaavaliacao@cesgranrio.org.br
_version_ 1754845671930724352