What works in Wellington
All catalogues · New Zealand 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
Evaluation evidence +64 pts 100 here · 36 average
Efficiency +48 pts 100 here · 52 average
Transparency, ethics & data protection +34 pts 83 here · 50 average
Teacher capability & pedagogy +27 pts 67 here · 39 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
Sustainability +20 pts 100 here · 80 average
Effectiveness +19 pts 100 here · 81 average
Impact on gender equality +17 pts 100 here · 83 average
Fire resilience — risk reduction, evidenced +16 pts 25 here · 9 average
Evaluated outcomes +16 pts 100 here · 84 average
Gender-mainstreaming embedding +10 pts 100 here · 90 average
Weaknesses
Transferability / demonstrated replication -9 pts 50 here · 59 average
Multi-stakeholder collaboration -12 pts 67 here · 78 average
Evidence of impact / measured public value -17 pts 43 here · 60 average
Scalability beyond pilot -19 pts 47 here · 66 average
Equity & inclusion -21 pts 33 here · 54 average
Curator validation -25 pts 50 here · 75 average
Score profile vs peers
Coloured bar: Wellington. 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
New Zealand Care and Support Workers (Pay Equity) Settlement Act 2017 · 96
Marae Digital Connectivity Programme · 92
New Zealand Free Period Products in Schools Programme (Ikura) · 85
New Zealand National Wilding Conifer Control Programme · 73
Inland Revenue — AI-assisted tax compliance screening (New Zealand) · 73
Creative HQ — Wellington's Two-Decade Startup Accelerator and Innovation Hub · 67
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
- 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