Transparency alternatives to Granicus
Other Software for local government vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Granicus. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 62 that differ from Granicus on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Granicus has 9 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at Granicus” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Granicus | Found at Granicus, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Accelaaccela.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Accela | 57/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | 1 Certifications named | Compare |
| Submittablesubmittable.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Submittable | 52/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | 1 Status page with history | Compare |
| ProudCityproudcity.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ProudCity | 26/100 | 4 Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Fluxxfluxx.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Fluxx | 43/100 | 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) | nothing | Compare |
| Rekorrekor.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Rekor | 39/100 | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 Status page with history | Compare |
| OpenGovopengov.comSee also Transparency alternatives to OpenGov | 30/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Foundantfoundant.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Foundant | 39/100 | 2 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | nothing | Compare |
| Axonaxon.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Axon | 26/100 | 2 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Polcopolco.usSee also Transparency alternatives to Polco | 26/100 | 2 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Status page with history, Certifications named | Compare |
| Harris Correctionsharriscorrections.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Harris Corrections | 22/100 | 2 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| MAGIQ Softwaremagiqsoftware.comSee also Transparency alternatives to MAGIQ Software | 22/100 | 2 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| PayItpayitgov.comSee also Transparency alternatives to PayIt | 22/100 | 2 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
Only criteria we could measure for both are counted. Where we could measure one and not the other, the row is silent: that would be a statement about our measurement, not about either vendor. Every single result with its source is on the two profiles.