Abstract Objective: The objective of this thesis was to find out if the Norwegian Council for Priority Setting in Health Care (the Council) has succeeded in its attempt towards transparent decision-making. Background: Accountability for reasonableness (A4R) is a framework used to strengthen decision makers accountability and legitimacy. This framework uses four criteria to ensure fair decisions. One of them is publicity. Publicity and transparency is closely linked together. When the Council was appointed in 2007, one of their most important tasks was to ensure a transparent decision process. Method: In this thesis a framework for transparency is developed and used to evaluate the transparency of five case documents that are published online, and the availability of the cases on the Council s website, www.kvalitetogprioritering.no. Results: Several shortcomings where identified. Decisions where not fully justified. The case process was standardised, but what evidence and how they where collected was not. The ability to track decisions over time was not possible in all cases. Additionally, abbreviations, expressions and conditions that where important for decision making was not detailed nor explained. All cases evaluated used a technical language and long sentences. The cases of more recent date was more reader friendly. The availability of the cases published online could be better. What is published of important information need attention and the website need an upgrade. Conclusion: The Council is a pioneer in setting priorities in health care. By making documents and minutes of meetings publicly available online, the intention is to increase document transparency. However, placing documents on a website is not synonymous with making the documents transparent. The evaluation shows that the level of transparency can improve.