evidoria

What works in The Hague

All catalogues · Netherlands profile

12
evaluated practices
56/100
average quality score
0%
strong evidence, of 11 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

Documented learning +27 pts 100 here · 73 average

Demonstrated reach +25 pts 100 here · 75 average

Sustainability (ongoing) +20 pts 100 here · 80 average

Effectiveness +19 pts 100 here · 81 average

Innovation level +16 pts 80 here · 64 average

Weaknesses

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

Evidence of impact / measured public value -12 pts 48 here · 60 average

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

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

Evaluation evidence -36 pts 0 here · 36 average

Score profile vs peers

Water & soil — retention, infiltration, erosion control
100 · 51
Documented learning
100 · 73
Demonstrated reach
100 · 75
Sustainability (ongoing)
100 · 80
Effectiveness
100 · 81
Innovation level
80 · 64
Transparency, fairness & accountability
59 · 54
Governance, capability & sustainability
70 · 66
Transferability / replicability
60 · 59
Scalability beyond pilot
59 · 66
Fire resilience — risk reduction, evidenced
0 · 9
Evidence of impact / measured public value
48 · 60
Biodiversity — conservation / improvement, evidenced
33 · 53
Carbon — sequestration / storage, evidenced
0 · 35
Evaluation evidence
0 · 36

Coloured bar: The Hague. 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

The Netherlands Court of Audit's Recurring Algorithm Audits — a Government Oversight Model for Public-Sector AI · 93

FRAIA — the Netherlands' Fundamental Rights and Algorithms Impact Assessment, Piloted Across 15 Government Algorithms · 87

Overheidsbrede Monitor Generatieve AI — the Netherlands' Government-Wide Tracker of GenAI Use by Civil Servants · 80

LessonUp · 76

The Netherlands' National Algoritmeregister — Europe's Largest Public Algorithm Register, and What the Court of Audit Found Missing · 67

The Netherlands' National AI Regulatory Sandbox — a Single Access Point Built on a 2024 Pilot · 60

Vlam-chat — the Netherlands' whole-of-government secure AI assistant for civil servants · 60

Room for the River — Netherlands National Flood-Conveyance Programme · 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.

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

Liga Inan – Mobile Maternal Health Messaging Network · fit 89/100

  • Matches your scale
  • Backed by strong evidence
  • 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

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

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