evidoria

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.

14
evaluated practices
69/100
average quality score
17%
strong evidence, of 12 assessed

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

Evidence snapshot for Cambridge

Cambridge University Press & Assessment developed Write & Improve, a free AI writing-feedback tool launched in September 2016 that assigns CEFR proficiency levels (A1–C2) to English-language essays and highlights errors by type. The tool has registered over 2 million global learners and is used in classrooms across 100+ countries. A 2025 peer-reviewed study found AI-to-human-rater agreement on CEFR level comparable to inter-rater reliability between trained human examiners, and in 2024 Cambridge released an openly licensed corpus of 23,000+ annotated essays to support further research.

Drawn from: Coracle Inside — Secure In-Cell Digital Learning for UK Prisons · Gender Shades: The MIT Audit That Made Amazon, IBM and Microsoft Confront Facial-Recognition's Gender Gap · Experience AI — free global AI literacy curriculum (Raspberry Pi Foundation & Google DeepMind) · Write & Improve — Cambridge English free AI writing-feedback tool for EFL learners · Bloomberg Harvard City Leadership Initiative — Peer Learning and Executive Education for Mayors · PlanAI — Greater Cambridge's AI Tool Cuts Planning-Consultation Analysis From 18.5 Hours to 16 Minutes · PlanAI: AI-Summarised Public Consultation Analysis for Cambridge Planning · Cambridgeshire's Resource Allocation System — the UK Supreme Court Case That Set Rules for Algorithmic Care Budgets

Generated from this place's cited practices only. Always check the linked sources.

Strengths & weaknesses vs peers

Strengths

Evidence of learning impact +35 pts 61 here · 26 average

Effectiveness +32 pts 100 here · 68 average

Teacher capability & pedagogy +29 pts 67 here · 37 average

Impact on gender equality +29 pts 100 here · 71 average

Transferability / demonstrated replication +29 pts 89 here · 60 average

Curator validation +27 pts 100 here · 73 average

Documented learning +26 pts 100 here · 74 average

Evaluated outcomes +21 pts 100 here · 79 average

Transparency, ethics & data protection +20 pts 67 here · 47 average

Sustainability (ongoing) +15 pts 93 here · 78 average

Achievement / evidence +12 pts 100 here · 88 average

Gender-mainstreaming embedding +11 pts 100 here · 89 average

Scalability & sustainability +10 pts 73 here · 62 average

Multi-stakeholder collaboration +9 pts 83 here · 74 average

Evidence of impact / measured results +9 pts 67 here · 57 average

Weaknesses

Governance, capability & sustainability -8 pts 56 here · 64 average

Inclusiveness / equity -9 pts 33 here · 43 average

Demonstrated reach -26 pts 50 here · 76 average

Efficiency -33 pts 0 here · 33 average

Score profile vs peers

Evidence of learning impact
61 · 26
Effectiveness
100 · 68
Teacher capability & pedagogy
67 · 37
Impact on gender equality
100 · 71
Transferability / demonstrated replication
89 · 60
Curator validation
100 · 73
Documented learning
100 · 74
Evaluated outcomes
100 · 79
Transparency, ethics & data protection
67 · 47
Sustainability (ongoing)
93 · 78
Achievement / evidence
100 · 88
Gender-mainstreaming embedding
100 · 89
Scalability & sustainability
73 · 62
Multi-stakeholder collaboration
83 · 74
Evidence of impact / measured results
67 · 57
Innovation level
68 · 62
Transparency, fairness & accountability
56 · 54
Evaluation evidence
50 · 49
Equity & inclusion
50 · 50
Governance, capability & sustainability
56 · 64
Inclusiveness / equity
33 · 43
Demonstrated reach
50 · 76
Efficiency
0 · 33

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

Gender Shades: The MIT Audit That Made Amazon, IBM and Microsoft Confront Facial-Recognition's Gender Gap · 89

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

Bloomberg Harvard City Leadership Initiative — Peer Learning and Executive Education for Mayors · 76

PlanAI — Greater Cambridge's AI Tool Cuts Planning-Consultation Analysis From 18.5 Hours to 16 Minutes · 73

PlanAI: AI-Summarised Public Consultation Analysis for Cambridge Planning · 73

Cambridgeshire's Resource Allocation System — the UK Supreme Court Case That Set Rules for Algorithmic Care Budgets · 67

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.

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

Already adopted in 3 other places

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

Already adopted in 4 other places

Karya — Fair-Wage AI Data-Work Platform Bringing Digital Income to Rural India · fit 100/100

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

safe+natal — Comadrona-Designed Smartphone Checklist for Maternal Risk Screening in Rural Guatemala · fit 100/100

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

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

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

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

Already adopted in 6 other places

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