Best Cases Awards Criteria (weight %)

Key evaluation aspects 

Impact and value creation (20%)

The criterion explores the degree to which the solution contributes to public value, focusing on its impact—both achieved and anticipated—on existing internal processes and/or public services. Emphasis is placed on solutions that are already implemented, thereby demonstrating tangible results. 

• Why and how the solution was implemented to address the identified needs. 

• How the solution improved public services (e.g., new, more responsive, accessible services) or administrative efficiency (e.g., cost reduction, better processes). 

• If and what metrics are used to assess the efficacy of the solution. 

• Strong quantitative data is presented, including impact figures on the solution’s effectiveness and value creation, and information on the level of user satisfaction. 

• To what extent has the solution achieved its intended objectives. 

Technology (20%)

This criterion looks at how innovative the chosen technology is in relation to the existing landscape of similar technologies and to the specific organisational context.

• The comparative advantage of the technology chosen over other solutions assessed to solve the identified problems. 

• The organisational context and capabilities, including its overall adoption readiness in relation to the implemented solution. 

• Note: Examples of innovative solutions can be found in PSTW stories. 

Interoperability (20%)

This criterion assesses the four levels of interoperability of the solution with other systems, including services at the national and transnational levels. The levels, according to the European Interoperability Framework (EIF), concerns legal, organisational, semantic and technical interoperability. 

• If and how the solution was designed following interoperability principles, in particular the EIF (if applicable) or national interoperability frameworks or policies. 

• Description of the four levels of interoperability with other internal systems and services. 

• Information on the level of interoperability with other national, subnational and transnational services, when applicable. 

Transparency and openness (10%)

The criterion considers how the solution enhances the openness and transparency of the decision processes and operations after its implementation. Transparency should be considered both from an internal point of view (e.g., communication of changes to internal employees) and external (e.g., communication of changes to citizens and external stakeholders). When relevant, it also considers the level of use and publication of data in an open format to increase transparency.  

• If and how the solution has contributed to the openness (e.g producing open data) of the administration/organisation in a particular service or process, i.e. increased transparency of public sector operations, increased public participation in policy making or improved public control and influence on government actions and policies. 

• If and how communication and awareness campaigns on the adoption of the technology and consequent changes were conducted, to inform and engage both employees and external stakeholders. 

• How is information about the impact of the solution communicated to the citizens and all relevant stakeholders and if it is easily accessible. 

Scalability and reusability (10%)

The criterion gauges the potential and feasibility of the solution to be scaled and replicated in other public administrations, application sectors or service types, administration levels, etc. It considers reusability and availability in open-source formats, or if the solution was replicated from other open-source software or models. Particular emphasis is on solutions shared and reused available in the Interoperable Europe Portal (IOP) catalogue.  

• If and how the solution is scalable, indicating to what extent scalability would be feasible and cost-effective. 

• If the solution is open and based/made available through OSS , or other open components (e.g., AI model, etc). In particular: 

• If it was constructed based on reused building blocks or Open-Source Software from other administrations. 

• If it is using/producing open components (software, data, AI models, etc) 

• If the solution was reused by other administrations already. 

• If the solution was retrieved or was made available on the IOP catalogue. 

Implementation process (20%)

This criterion evaluates the overall innovation process, from testing to deployment. For instance, it considers if and how the solution has prioritised the user needs, from the solution design to the process of involvement, consultation and feedback loops with the target users of the service for its development, implementation and improvement. In addition, this criterion considers if external actors were involved and the procurement process, with a focus on the engagement of GovTech actors such as SMEs and startups, innovative collaboration processes (e.g., EU community of buyers etc.) or the academia. 

• Detailed steps on the overall innovation process should be clearly provided. 

• Information on the development and deployment processes. 

• Details on the degree of citizen involvement in the development and/or implementation process.  

• Information on the procurement process, if applicable, and/or on the involvement of GovTech SMEs and startups. 

• How the solution was designed, including any co-creation processes, such as open innovation challenges or collaborative EU or national projects.  

• If the technological solution was developed using user-centred design principles. 

• If user research was conducted to understand the needs, preferences, and challenges of the intended users. 

• If the solution has been designed following accessibility principles (e.g. EU’s Web Accessibility Directive).