What works in Washington, D.C.
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
Strengths & weaknesses vs peers
Strengths
Water & soil — retention, infiltration, erosion control +49 pts 100 here · 51 average
Evaluation evidence +31 pts 67 here · 36 average
Transparency, fairness & accountability +30 pts 83 here · 54 average
Documented learning +27 pts 100 here · 73 average
Demonstrated reach +25 pts 100 here · 75 average
Transferability / demonstrated replication +24 pts 83 here · 59 average
Scalability beyond pilot +17 pts 83 here · 66 average
Fire resilience — risk reduction, evidenced +8 pts 17 here · 9 average
Weaknesses
Sustainability (ongoing) -13 pts 67 here · 80 average
Innovation level -18 pts 47 here · 64 average
Carbon — sequestration / storage, evidenced -18 pts 17 here · 35 average
Biodiversity — conservation / improvement, evidenced -20 pts 33 here · 53 average
Score profile vs peers
Coloured bar: Washington, D.C.. 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
Safety Net — NNEDV's Technology Safety Project for Domestic Violence Survivors · 92
MCP for Federal Open Data — U.S. Digital Corps Pilot Lifts AI Query Accuracy from Near-Zero to 95% · 87
The Federal AI Use Case Inventory — How Many AI Systems US Agencies Actually Report Using · 80
NASA's AI-Generated Metadata Tags — Machine-Learning Auto-Tagging for Federal Open Data Discovery · 80
iCanConnect — National Deaf-Blind Equipment Distribution Program (USA) · 68
Affordable Connectivity Programme (ACP) · 68
USDA Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) · 67
GSAi — The U.S. General Services Administration's Internal AI Chatbot · 53
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
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
Copenhagen Business Hub (Erhvervshus Hovedstaden) · 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
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