Transparency alternatives to ProudCity
Other Software for local government vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at ProudCity. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 61 that differ from ProudCity on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
ProudCity has 8 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at ProudCity” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at ProudCity | Found at ProudCity, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Accelaaccela.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Accela | 57/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +2 | 3 Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Submittablesubmittable.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Submittable | 52/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +2 | 3 Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| OpenGovopengov.comSee also Transparency alternatives to OpenGov | 52/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +1 | 2 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Fluxxfluxx.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Fluxx | 43/100 | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, +1 | 2 Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Foundantfoundant.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Foundant | 39/100 | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, +1 | 3 Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Rekorrekor.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Rekor | 39/100 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Axonaxon.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Axon | 30/100 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | 3 Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Granicusgranicus.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Granicus | 17/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | 4 Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | Compare |
| Kahuakahua.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Kahua | 17/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | 4 Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | Compare |
| Polcopolco.usSee also Transparency alternatives to Polco | 26/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 3 Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116) | Compare |
| Apply4apply4.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Apply4 | 17/100 | 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact | 4 Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 | Compare |
| Mark43mark43.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Mark43 | 17/100 | 2 Certifications named, Named privacy contact | 3 Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 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.