evidoria

What works in Washington, D.C.

All catalogues · United States of America profile

9
evaluated practices
71/100
average quality score
0%
strong evidence, of 9 assessed
{# 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

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

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 (KAN-364, UX2.3): every dimension as place-vs-corpus bars — the full picture behind the strengths/weaknesses shortlists above. #}

Score profile vs peers

Water & soil — retention, infiltration, erosion control
100 · 51
Evaluation evidence
67 · 36
Transparency, fairness & accountability
83 · 54
Documented learning
100 · 73
Demonstrated reach
100 · 75
Transferability / demonstrated replication
83 · 59
Scalability beyond pilot
83 · 66
Fire resilience — risk reduction, evidenced
17 · 9
Evidence of impact / measured public value
67 · 60
Governance, certification & transferability
72 · 66
Sustainability (ongoing)
67 · 80
Innovation level
47 · 64
Carbon — sequestration / storage, evidenced
17 · 35
Biodiversity — conservation / improvement, evidenced
33 · 53

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.

{# 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. #}

Digital Green — Video-Mediated Agricultural Extension · fit 100/100

  • 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. #}

Kartu Prakerja – National Digital Skills and Financial Inclusion Programme · fit 100/100

  • 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. #}

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