Sub-national · edition 2026

Mexico - Jalisco 2026: strong rules, weak public use

Mexico - Jalisco's strongest dimension is enabling environment; its weakest is citizen participation. The framework is not yet translating evenly into practice.

93 indicators 30 procuring entities 4 dimensions

Overall ITI score

53/100

Global average: 44.2

First edition

The ITI score

Mexico - Jalisco enters the index at 53 of 100

8.8 points above the global average. Enabling environment carries the score; citizen participation holds it back.

The 2026 baseline

532026

View as table

Edition	Overall ITI score
2026	53

Score by dimension, 2026

Enabling environment75.2

Capacities and processes36.4

Citizen participation28.5

Data publication66.3

Dashed marks show the global average.

Inside the four dimensions

Where the score comes from

Enabling environment

75.2/100

Strongest area:Access-to-public information law · Right to request public information +3 more100

Weakest area:Proactive publication of information on public infrastructure projects · Infrastructure data disclosure standard +5 more60

Explore 3 sub-areas

1.1Legal framework and digital tools75.2

1.1.1Access to public information regulatory framework100

1.1.2Transparency standards in the public infrastructure sector68

1.1.3National digital information tools60

Capacities and processes

36.4/100

Strongest area:Connectivity to the internet56.7

Weakest area:Plan to mitigate limitations for publishing information · Level of disclosed infrastructure projects +1 more5.3

Explore 5 sub-areas

2.1Institutional capacities47.6

2.1.1Basic knowledge44.8

2.1.2Digital capacities50.3

2.2Institutional processes28.9

2.2.1Procedures to disclose information46.1

2.2.2Enablers and barriers to disclose information31.9

2.2.3Control over infrastructure projects disclosure5.3

Citizen participation

28.5/100

Strongest area:Requests and responses of access to information55.3

Weakest area:Citizens use evidence16

Explore 2 sub-areas

3.1Participation practices28.5

3.1.1Participation opportunities27

3.1.2Use of information by citizens29.7

Data publication

66.3/100

Strongest area:Project owner85

Weakest area:Contract scope of work47.3

Explore 6 sub-areas

4.1Disclosure practices66.3

4.1.1Project identification69.6

4.1.2Project preparation61.5

4.1.3Execution contract procurement71.7

4.1.4Supervision contract procurement67.4

4.1.5Execution contract implementation56.8

4.1.6Supervision contract implementation66.7

Procuring entities

How 30 procuring entities compare

Scores run from 80.1 to 0, with a median of 37.1.

1Leading80 to 100

12Strong60 to 79

1Developing40 to 59

16Weak0 to 39

#
1	Secretaría de Infraestructura y Obra Pública / Infraestructura para la movilidad sustentable.	80.1	71.8	63.2	97.9
2	Secretaría de Infraestructura y Obra Pública / Fondo Complementario para el Desarrollo Regional "FONDEREG"	79.9	71.8	63.2	97.4
3	Secretaría de Infraestructura y Obra Pública / Infraestructura de salud	79.9	71.8	63.2	97.4
4	Secretaría de Infraestructura y Obra Pública / Infraestructura y equipamiento social de proyectos estratégicos.	79.6	71.8	63.2	96.8
5	Secretaría de Infraestructura y Obra Pública /Fondo Común Concursable para la Infraestructura "FOCOCI"	79.6	71.8	63.2	96.8
6	Secretaría de Infraestructura y Obra Pública / Conservación, reconstrucción y construcción de la red carretera estatal.	79.3	71.8	63.2	95.9
7	Ayuntamiento de Guadalajara	78.7	75.9	50.1	99
8	Ayuntamiento de Tlajomulco de Zuñiga	76.7	66.1	65.1	93.3
9	INFEJAL (Instituto de la Infraestructura Física Educativa del Estado de Jalisco)	76.2	75.2	42.3	98.3
10	Ayuntamiento de Zapopan	75.9	62.6	62.6	95.8
11	OPD Servicios de Salud Jalisco	75.4	71.6	49.9	94.7
12	Sistema Intermunicipal de los servicios de Agua Potable y Alcantarillado	61.9	53.1	42.3	81.8
13	Comisión Estatal del Agua (CEA)	61.8	64.7	50.4	66.4
14	Ayuntamiento de Tonalá	48.2	59.6	53.6	35
15	Ayuntamiento de Tepatitlán	38.1	0	0	95.3
16	Ayuntamiento de Lagos de Moreno	37.1	0	0	92.7
17	Ayuntamiento de Ocotlán	36.4	0	0	91.1
18	Sistema de Agua Potable, Drenaje y Alcantarillado de Puerto Vallarta, Jalisco (SEAPAL)	35.6	54.9	17.4	30
19	Ayuntamiento de Zapotlán el Grande	29.9	0	0	74.7
20	Universidad de Guadalajara	28	0	0	69.9
21	Ayuntamiento de Autlán de Navarro	27.1	35.2	3.3	34.8
22	Consejo de Colaboración municipal de Guadalajara	24.1	41.5	38.5	0
23	Ayuntamiento de Puerto Vallarta	23.5	0	0	58.8
24	Ayuntamiento de Tlaquepaque	21.3	0	0	53.2
25	Ayuntamiento de Ameca	17.6	0	0	44.1
26	Ayuntamiento de Sayula	14.6	0	0	36.4
27	Ayuntamiento de Chapala	14.4	0	0	35.9
28	Ayuntamiento de Colotlán	10.8	0	0	27
29	Sistema de Agua Potable, Alcantarillado y Saneamiento del Municipio de Atotonilco el Alto (SAPAMA)	0	0	0	0
30	Ayuntamiento de Cihuatlán	0	0	0	0

Entity dashboard

Inspect one entity in depth

Choose an entity

Secretaría de Infraestructura y Obra Pública / Infraestructura para la movilidad sustentable.

Ranked #1 of 30 entities

80.1PE ITI score

Capacities and processes35.4 above average71.8

Citizen participation34.7 above average63.2

Information disclosure31.6 above average97.9

Ticks mark the average across all 30 entities.

Full detail The complete 93-indicator breakdown

National ITI ScoreScore53

1Enabling environmentDimension75.2

1.1Legal framework and digital toolsVariable75.2

1.1.1Access to public information regulatory frameworkSub-variable100

1.1.1.1Access-to-public information lawIndicator100

1.1.1.2Right to request public informationIndicator100

1.1.1.3Sanctions over non-compliance with access to public information mandatesIndicator100

1.1.1.4Organisation guaranteeing the sanctionsIndicator100

1.1.2Transparency standards in the public infrastructure sectorSub-variable68

1.1.2.1Proactive publication of information on public procurement processesIndicator100

1.1.2.2Proactive publication of information on public infrastructure projectsIndicator60

1.1.2.3Infrastructure data disclosure standardIndicator60

1.1.2.4Infrastructure data disclosure standard proactively published as open dataIndicator60

1.1.2.5Organisation responsible for the infrastructure data disclosure standardIndicator60

1.1.3National digital information toolsSub-variable60

1.1.3.1Centralised digital information platformsIndicator60

1.1.3.2Easy access to information in digital information platformsIndicator60

1.1.3.3Infrastructure projects geographic information system (GIS) platformIndicator60

2Capacities and processesDimension36.4

2.1Institutional capacitiesVariable47.6

2.1.1Basic knowledgeSub-variable44.8

2.1.1.1Knowledge about the access-to-information lawIndicator46

2.1.1.2Knowledge about transparency initiatives in the infrastructure sectorIndicator47.3

2.1.1.3Knowledge about the transparency data standard in the infrastructure sectorIndicator27.3

2.1.1.4Knowledge about sanctions due to non-compliance on the access-to-public-information lawIndicator48.7

2.1.1.5Knowledge about different data categoriesIndicator54.7

2.1.2Digital capacitiesSub-variable50.3

2.1.2.1Computer equipmentIndicator56

2.1.2.2Connectivity to the internetIndicator56.7

2.1.2.3Institutional websiteIndicator54

2.1.2.4Information systems for infrastructure projectsIndicator51.3

2.1.2.5Use of digital information systemsIndicator44

2.1.2.6Infrastructure open data publicationIndicator30

2.1.2.7Visualisations based on infrastructure projects dataIndicator44.7

2.2Institutional processesVariable28.9

2.2.1Procedures to disclose informationSub-variable46.1

2.2.1.1Procedures for the publication of informationIndicator38

2.2.1.2Responsibilities for disclosureIndicator39.3

2.2.1.3Information officer profileIndicator50.7

2.2.1.4Information officerIndicator50.7

2.2.1.5Follow-up mechanisms on information requestsIndicator52

2.2.2Enablers and barriers to disclose informationSub-variable31.9

2.2.2.1Internal policy for information publicationIndicator34

2.2.2.2Disclosure training programmeIndicator26.7

2.2.2.3Identification of limitations for publishing informationIndicator45.3

2.2.2.4Plan to mitigate limitations for publishing informationIndicator5.3

2.2.2.5Bureaucratic barriers to publish informationIndicator48

2.2.2.6Documentation of non-compliance and sanctionsIndicator33.3

2.2.3Control over infrastructure projects disclosureSub-variable5.3

2.2.3.1Level of disclosed infrastructure projectsIndicator5.3

2.2.3.2Level of investment represented by disclosed infrastructure projectsIndicator5.3

3Citizen participationDimension28.5

3.1Participation practicesVariable28.5

3.1.1Participation opportunitiesSub-variable27

3.1.1.1Institutionalised citizen participationIndicator30.7

3.1.1.2Permanent and inclusive citizen participationIndicator27.3

3.1.1.3Citizen participation in infrastructure projectsIndicator16.7

3.1.1.4Citizen attention officeIndicator33.3

3.1.1.5Online form for consultation or requestsIndicator24

3.1.1.6Awareness of participation opportunitiesIndicator32.7

3.1.2Use of information by citizensSub-variable29.7

3.1.2.1Centralised citizen complaintsIndicator28.7

3.3.2.2Requests and responses of access to informationIndicator55.3

3.3.2.3Institutional response capacityIndicator50

3.3.2.4Institutional use evidenceIndicator26.7

3.3.2.5Citizens use evidenceIndicator16

3.3.2.6Evidence of joint projectsIndicator20

3.3.2.7Improvements as a response to citizen participationIndicator22

4Information disclosureDimension66.3

4.1Disclosure practicesVariable66.3

4.1.1Project identificationSub-variable69.6

4.1.1.1Project reference numberIndicator80.3

4.1.1.2Project ownerIndicator85

4.1.1.3Sector and sub-sectorIndicator76.7

4.1.1.4Project nameIndicator84.3

4.1.1.5Project locationIndicator78.3

4.1.1.6Project descriptionIndicator61

4.1.1.7PurposeIndicator56.3

4.1.2Project preparationSub-variable61.5

4.1.2.1Environmental impactIndicator54.3

4.1.2.2Land and settlement impactIndicator51.7

4.1.2.3Contact detailsIndicator75

4.1.2.4Project budget and date of approvalIndicator72.7

4.1.2.5Funding sourcesIndicator76.7

4.1.3Execution contract procurementSub-variable71.7

4.1.3.1Procuring entity and contact detailsIndicator82

4.1.3.2Procurement processIndicator83.3

4.1.3.3Number of firms biddingIndicator78.3

4.1.3.4Contract typeIndicator70.3

4.1.3.5Contract titleIndicator66.7

4.1.3.6Contract priceIndicator70

4.1.3.7Contract start dateIndicator70

4.1.3.8Contract durationIndicator75

4.1.3.9Contractor(s)Indicator73.7

4.1.3.10Contract scope of workIndicator47.3

4.1.4Supervision contract procurementSub-variable67.4

4.1.4.1Procuring entity and contact detailsIndicator74.3

4.1.4.2Procurement processIndicator66.7

4.1.4.3Number of firms/individuals biddingIndicator66.7

4.1.4.4Contract typeIndicator66.7

4.1.4.5Contract titleIndicator66.7

4.1.4.6Contract priceIndicator66.7

4.1.4.7Contract start dateIndicator66.7

4.1.4.8Contract durationIndicator66.7

4.1.4.9Contract firm/individualIndicator66.7

4.1.4.10Contract scope of workIndicator66

4.1.5Execution contract implementationSub-variable56.8

4.1.5.1Variation to contract priceIndicator56.7

4.1.5.2Reasons for price changesIndicator55

4.1.5.3Variation to contract durationIndicator58.3

4.1.5.4Reasons for contract duration changesIndicator57.7

4.1.5.5Variation to contract scopeIndicator57.7

4.1.5.6Reasons for scope changesIndicator56.7

4.1.6Supervision contract implementationSub-variable66.7

4.1.6.1Variation to contract priceIndicator66.7

4.1.6.2Reasons for price changesIndicator66.7

4.1.6.3Variation to contract durationIndicator66.7

4.1.6.4Reasons for duration changesIndicator66.7

4.1.6.5Variation to contract scopeIndicator66.7

4.1.6.6Reasons for scope changesIndicator66.7

Mexico - Jalisco 2026: strong rules, weak public use

Mexico - Jalisco enters the index at 53 of 100

Where the score comes from

How 30 procuring entities compare

Inspect one entity in depth

Compare this country with others