What works in Los Angeles
All catalogues · United States of America profile
Quality scores are 0–100 rubric scores; “strong evidence” reflects study design; adoptions count documented replications elsewhere. Know more
Evidence snapshot for Los Angeles
Los Angeles County has deployed two AI-driven interventions with measurable results. Benefit Navigator's AI chatbot improved caseworker accuracy by 40% and helped secure an average of $10,869 in additional benefits per household, though only 65% of caseworkers with access actually used it. The Homelessness Prevention Unit's predictive model ranked approximately 90,000 people by housing risk and served 700+ people, with 86% remaining stably housed and enrolled participants 71% less likely to need street outreach or shelter within 18 months, though county-wide homelessness trends reflect multiple programs rather than this initiative alone.
Drawn from: Benefit Navigator — Imagine LA and Nava's AI Chatbot Improves Caseworker Accuracy by 40% in a Los Angeles County Pilot · LA County's Homelessness Prevention Unit — A UCLA California Policy Lab Model Ranks 90,000 People to Target $26 Million in Aid · Robles v. Domino's Pizza — Ninth Circuit Holds the ADA Applies to a Company's Website and App · AI-Driven Professional Development for Maths Teachers — Copur-Gencturk's U.S. Randomised Trial of Intelligent-Tutoring Feedback · LAUSD Pulls Generative AI From Every Student Device Pending a Districtwide Safeguards Review · Los Angeles Unified's 'Ed' chatbot (AllHere collapse)
Generated from this place's cited practices only. Always check the linked sources.
Strengths & weaknesses vs peers
Strengths
Transparency, fairness & accountability +46 pts 100 here · 54 average
Evidence of impact / measured public value +43 pts 100 here · 57 average
Documented learning +26 pts 100 here · 74 average
Demonstrated reach +24 pts 100 here · 76 average
Sustainability (ongoing) +22 pts 100 here · 78 average
Governance, capability & sustainability +20 pts 83 here · 64 average
Weaknesses
Scalability & sustainability -9 pts 53 here · 62 average
Transferability / demonstrated replication -10 pts 50 here · 60 average
Evidence of learning impact -15 pts 11 here · 26 average
Teacher capability & pedagogy -16 pts 22 here · 38 average
Equity & inclusion -27 pts 22 here · 50 average
Evaluation evidence -49 pts 0 here · 49 average
Score profile vs peers
Coloured bar: Los Angeles. 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
Robles v. Domino's Pizza — Ninth Circuit Holds the ADA Applies to a Company's Website and App · 72
LAUSD Pulls Generative AI From Every Student Device Pending a Districtwide Safeguards Review · 40
Los Angeles Unified's 'Ed' chatbot (AllHere collapse) · 7
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
- 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