evidoria

What works in Richmond

All catalogues · United States of America profile

3
evaluated practices
42/100
average quality score
0%
strong evidence, of 3 assessed

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

Strengths & weaknesses vs peers

Strengths

Water & soil — retention, infiltration, erosion control +49 pts 100 here · 51 average

Weaknesses

Fire resilience — risk reduction, evidenced -9 pts 0 here · 9 average

Transferability / demonstrated replication -9 pts 50 here · 59 average

Governance, capability & sustainability -11 pts 56 here · 66 average

Scalability beyond pilot -16 pts 50 here · 66 average

Biodiversity — conservation / improvement, evidenced -20 pts 33 here · 53 average

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

Evidence of impact / measured public value -27 pts 33 here · 60 average

Carbon — sequestration / storage, evidenced -35 pts 0 here · 35 average

Score profile vs peers

Water & soil — retention, infiltration, erosion control
100 · 51
Fire resilience — risk reduction, evidenced
0 · 9
Transferability / demonstrated replication
50 · 59
Governance, capability & sustainability
56 · 66
Scalability beyond pilot
50 · 66
Biodiversity — conservation / improvement, evidenced
33 · 53
Transparency, fairness & accountability
33 · 54
Evidence of impact / measured public value
33 · 60
Carbon — sequestration / storage, evidenced
0 · 35

Coloured bar: Richmond. 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

Justinian — Virginia's Statewide AI System for Rewriting and Cutting State Regulations · 47

Virginia DEQ's AI Checklist Assistant for Environmental Permit Reviews · 40

Virginia's Chesapeake Bay Watershed Nutrient Credit Exchange Program · 40

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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