What works in Cambridge
All catalogues · United Kingdom profile· United States of America profile
This profile covers practices recorded under this city name in 2 countries — check each practice's own page for its exact location.
Quality scores are 0–100 rubric scores; “strong evidence” reflects study design; adoptions count documented replications elsewhere. Know more
Evidence snapshot for Cambridge
PlanAI: AI-Summarised Public Consultation Analysis for Cambridge Planning shows that Greater Cambridge Shared Planning partnered with the University of Liverpool to build an AI tool that summarised 320 public consultation submissions in 16 minutes, compared to over 60 hours of manual work previously required by council planners. The evidence is limited to a descriptive evaluation of three trial consultations with no independent validation; council officers confirmed planners still reviewed every individual submission before deciding.
Drawn from: Coracle Inside — Secure In-Cell Digital Learning for UK Prisons · Experience AI — free global AI literacy curriculum (Raspberry Pi Foundation & Google DeepMind) · Write & Improve — Cambridge English free AI writing-feedback tool for EFL learners · PlanAI: AI-Summarised Public Consultation Analysis for Cambridge Planning · Cambridge Enterprise — University of Cambridge's Technology Transfer & Spinout Office · Brave Behind Bars — Virtual Web Design Curriculum in US Prisons and Jails
Generated from this place's cited practices only. Always check the linked sources.
Strengths & weaknesses vs peers
Strengths
Equity & inclusion +46 pts 100 here · 54 average
Teacher capability & pedagogy +44 pts 83 here · 39 average
Evidence of learning impact +37 pts 67 here · 30 average
Transparency, ethics & data protection +34 pts 83 here · 50 average
Documented learning +27 pts 100 here · 73 average
Evidence of impact / measured results +23 pts 83 here · 60 average
Sustainability (ongoing) +20 pts 100 here · 80 average
Scalability & sustainability +17 pts 83 here · 66 average
Evaluation evidence +14 pts 50 here · 36 average
Transparency, fairness & accountability +13 pts 67 here · 54 average
Weaknesses
Multi-stakeholder collaboration -12 pts 67 here · 78 average
Demonstrated reach -25 pts 50 here · 75 average
Inclusiveness / equity -41 pts 0 here · 41 average
Score profile vs peers
Coloured bar: Cambridge. 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
Coracle Inside — Secure In-Cell Digital Learning for UK Prisons · 92
Experience AI — free global AI literacy curriculum (Raspberry Pi Foundation & Google DeepMind) · 87
Write & Improve — Cambridge English free AI writing-feedback tool for EFL learners · 80
PlanAI: AI-Summarised Public Consultation Analysis for Cambridge Planning · 73
Cambridge Enterprise — University of Cambridge's Technology Transfer & Spinout Office · 67
Brave Behind Bars — Virtual Web Design Curriculum in US Prisons and Jails · 56
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.
Digital Green — Video-Mediated Agricultural Extension · fit 100/100
- Backed by strong evidence
- Addresses this place's weak dimensions
Kartu Prakerja – National Digital Skills and Financial Inclusion Programme · fit 100/100
- Backed by strong evidence
- Addresses this place's weak dimensions
Copenhagen Business Hub (Erhvervshus Hovedstaden) · fit 90/100
- Rated highly transferable
- Backed by strong evidence
- Addresses this place's weak dimensions
Smart City Wien Framework Strategy · fit 82/100
- Rated highly transferable
- Addresses this place's weak dimensions
Ciudad Mujer — El Salvador's Integrated Women's Services Programme · fit 100/100
- Rated highly transferable
- Backed by strong evidence
SASA! Community Mobilisation Programme against Intimate Partner Violence — Uganda · fit 100/100
- Rated highly transferable
- Backed by strong evidence
Rwanda's Land Tenure Regularization Programme — Titling Land in Women's Names · fit 90/100
- Rated highly transferable
- Backed by strong evidence
- Rated highly transferable
- Backed by strong evidence
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