evidoria

What works in Mexico City

All catalogues · Mexico profile

9
evaluated practices
66/100
average quality score
0%
strong evidence, of 8 assessed
10
adoptions elsewhere
{# 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

Evidence snapshot for Mexico City

Laboratorio para la Ciudad (LabCDMX) was an experimental civic-innovation office that ran 50+ experiments between 2013 and 2018, most notably the Mapatón crowdsourcing initiative, which engaged 3,594 participants who collectively mapped 51,308km of informal bus routes over approximately 685,188 minutes of GPS tracking. The office also gathered 42,700 citizen surveys across 1,474 neighbourhoods and collected over 280,000 petition signatures as part of its constitutional drafting process. The lab was discontinued in 2018 following a mayoral transition, though its participatory model subsequently spread across Latin America.

Drawn from: Mexico's "Paridad en Todo" Constitutional Reform 2019 — Gender Parity Across All Institutions · CFE Internet para Todos – Free Rural Broadband Hotspots across Mexico · Paridad en Todo — Mexico's 2019 Constitutional Gender Parity Reform · Laboratorio para la Ciudad (LabCDMX) — Mexico City's Experimental Urban Innovation Office · Laboratoria — AI and Data-Analysis Upskilling Bootcamp for Women in Mexico · Laboratorio para la Ciudad (LabCDMX) — Mexico City’s Government Innovation Lab · Mexico's National Care System (Sistema Nacional y Progresivo de Cuidados) — Mapping 118,600+ Care Centres via SIDECU · Mexico SAT — Machine Learning and Graph Analytics for High-Risk Taxpayer Detection (Plan Maestro 2024)

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

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

Evaluation evidence +64 pts 100 here · 36 average

Equity & inclusion +46 pts 100 here · 54 average

Evidence of learning impact +37 pts 67 here · 30 average

Documented learning +27 pts 100 here · 73 average

Inclusiveness / equity +26 pts 67 here · 41 average

Demonstrated reach +25 pts 100 here · 75 average

Curator validation +25 pts 100 here · 75 average

Innovation level +22 pts 87 here · 64 average

Gender-mainstreaming embedding +10 pts 100 here · 90 average

Weaknesses

Effectiveness -14 pts 67 here · 81 average

Impact on gender equality -16 pts 67 here · 83 average

Governance, capability & sustainability -16 pts 50 here · 66 average

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

Evaluated outcomes -17 pts 67 here · 84 average

Efficiency -18 pts 33 here · 52 average

Scalability beyond pilot -19 pts 47 here · 66 average

Transparency, fairness & accountability -20 pts 33 here · 54 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

Evaluation evidence
100 · 36
Equity & inclusion
100 · 54
Evidence of learning impact
67 · 30
Documented learning
100 · 73
Inclusiveness / equity
67 · 41
Demonstrated reach
100 · 75
Curator validation
100 · 75
Innovation level
87 · 64
Gender-mainstreaming embedding
100 · 90
Achievement / evidence
100 · 93
Multi-stakeholder collaboration
83 · 78
Evidence of impact / measured public value
58 · 60
Transferability / replicability
57 · 59
Teacher capability & pedagogy
33 · 39
Sustainability (ongoing)
72 · 80
Effectiveness
67 · 81
Impact on gender equality
67 · 83
Governance, capability & sustainability
50 · 66
Transparency, ethics & data protection
33 · 50
Evaluated outcomes
67 · 84
Efficiency
33 · 52
Scalability beyond pilot
47 · 66
Transparency, fairness & accountability
33 · 54

Coloured bar: Mexico City. 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

Mexico's "Paridad en Todo" Constitutional Reform 2019 — Gender Parity Across All Institutions · 96

CFE Internet para Todos – Free Rural Broadband Hotspots across Mexico · 92

Paridad en Todo — Mexico's 2019 Constitutional Gender Parity Reform · 85

Laboratorio para la Ciudad (LabCDMX) — Mexico City's Experimental Urban Innovation Office · 71

Laboratoria — AI and Data-Analysis Upskilling Bootcamp for Women in Mexico · 67

Laboratorio para la Ciudad (LabCDMX) — Mexico City’s Government Innovation Lab · 62

Mexico's National Care System (Sistema Nacional y Progresivo de Cuidados) — Mapping 118,600+ Care Centres via SIDECU · 52

Mexico SAT — Machine Learning and Graph Analytics for High-Risk Taxpayer Detection (Plan Maestro 2024) · 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. #}

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
{# 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. #}

Abolition of Chhaupadi — Ending Menstrual Exile Huts in Nepal's Far- and Mid-Western Districts · fit 82/100

  • Rated highly transferable
  • 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. #}

Guyana's One-Third Gender Candidate Quota — Two Decades of Sustained Representation · fit 82/100

  • Rated highly transferable
  • 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