evidoria

What works in Apia

All catalogues · Samoa profile

3
evaluated practices
56/100
average quality score
0%
strong evidence, of 3 assessed
{# KAN-370: every section closes with a one-line "what is this number" note + Know more. The note only names metrics actually shown — the strong-evidence tile hides when nothing is assessed (KAN-364 honesty rule), so its mention hides with it. #}

Quality scores are 0–100 rubric scores; “strong evidence” reflects study design; adoptions count documented replications elsewhere. Know more

Strengths & weaknesses vs peers

{# KAN-369 chips show whole points; the explanation lives in the section's bottom note (KAN-370) so each concept is explained exactly once. #}

Strengths

Teacher capability & pedagogy +27 pts 67 here · 39 average

Demonstrated reach +25 pts 100 here · 75 average

Curator validation +25 pts 100 here · 75 average

Sustainability +20 pts 100 here · 80 average

Effectiveness +19 pts 100 here · 81 average

Impact on gender equality +17 pts 100 here · 83 average

Evaluated outcomes +16 pts 100 here · 84 average

Equity & inclusion +13 pts 67 here · 54 average

Weaknesses

Transparency, ethics & data protection -17 pts 33 here · 50 average

Transferability / replicability -26 pts 33 here · 59 average

Scalability & sustainability -33 pts 33 here · 66 average

Evaluation evidence -36 pts 0 here · 36 average

Efficiency -52 pts 0 here · 52 average

Documented learning -73 pts 0 here · 73 average

Gender-mainstreaming embedding -90 pts 0 here · 90 average

{# Score profile vs peers (KAN-364, UX2.3): every dimension as place-vs-corpus bars — the full picture behind the strengths/weaknesses shortlists above. #}

Score profile vs peers

Teacher capability & pedagogy
67 · 39
Demonstrated reach
100 · 75
Curator validation
100 · 75
Sustainability
100 · 80
Effectiveness
100 · 81
Impact on gender equality
100 · 83
Evaluated outcomes
100 · 84
Equity & inclusion
67 · 54
Achievement / evidence
100 · 93
Evidence of learning impact
33 · 30
Innovation level
60 · 64
Transparency, ethics & data protection
33 · 50
Transferability / replicability
33 · 59
Scalability & sustainability
33 · 66
Evaluation evidence
0 · 36
Efficiency
0 · 52
Documented learning
0 · 73
Gender-mainstreaming embedding
0 · 90

Coloured bar: Apia. Grey bar: peer average across the corpus. Both on a common 0–100 scale.

Points compare this place's average on each dimension with the average across all evaluated places, on a common 0–100 scale. Know more

Top good practices here

Constitutional Reserved-Seats Quota for Women in Parliament · 70

Digitally Connected and Resilient Samoa Project · 52

COL–NUS AI Helpdesk Cuts Support Wait Times for Samoa's Online Students · 47

Each number is the practice's overall 0–100 quality score against its catalogue's rubric. Know more

Recommended to adopt or replicate

Transferable practices from elsewhere that address this place's gaps.

{# KAN-369: display the true 0–100 fit (rec.score) — gap_score is ordering-only and exceeds 100 by construction; the weak-gap boost surfaces as a reason line instead. #}

Ciudad Mujer — El Salvador's Integrated Women's Services Programme · fit 100/100

  • Rated highly transferable
  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions
{# KAN-369: display the true 0–100 fit (rec.score) — gap_score is ordering-only and exceeds 100 by construction; the weak-gap boost surfaces as a reason line instead. #}

SASA! Community Mobilisation Programme against Intimate Partner Violence — Uganda · fit 100/100

  • Rated highly transferable
  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions
{# KAN-369: display the true 0–100 fit (rec.score) — gap_score is ordering-only and exceeds 100 by construction; the weak-gap boost surfaces as a reason line instead. #}

Digital Green — Video-Mediated Agricultural Extension · fit 100/100

  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions
{# KAN-369: display the true 0–100 fit (rec.score) — gap_score is ordering-only and exceeds 100 by construction; the weak-gap boost surfaces as a reason line instead. #}

Kartu Prakerja – National Digital Skills and Financial Inclusion Programme · fit 100/100

  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions
{# KAN-369: display the true 0–100 fit (rec.score) — gap_score is ordering-only and exceeds 100 by construction; the weak-gap boost surfaces as a reason line instead. #}

Rwanda's Land Tenure Regularization Programme — Titling Land in Women's Names · fit 90/100

  • Rated highly transferable
  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions
{# KAN-369: display the true 0–100 fit (rec.score) — gap_score is ordering-only and exceeds 100 by construction; the weak-gap boost surfaces as a reason line instead. #}

Sweden's Barnahus (Children's House) — Multidisciplinary One-Stop Centres for Child Victims of Sexual Abuse and Violence · fit 90/100

  • Rated highly transferable
  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions
{# KAN-369: display the true 0–100 fit (rec.score) — gap_score is ordering-only and exceeds 100 by construction; the weak-gap boost surfaces as a reason line instead. #}

Copenhagen Business Hub (Erhvervshus Hovedstaden) · fit 90/100

  • Rated highly transferable
  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions
{# KAN-369: display the true 0–100 fit (rec.score) — gap_score is ordering-only and exceeds 100 by construction; the weak-gap boost surfaces as a reason line instead. #}

Stadtidee Aarau — Switzerland's First City-Wide Participatory Budget Using the Method of Equal Shares · fit 90/100

  • Rated highly transferable
  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions

Fit estimates how well a practice matches this place, 0 (poor) to 100 (excellent); the list is ordered to favour practices that address this place's gaps. Know more