Best Cases Award - 2026 Edition

Criteria (weight %)

Impact and value creation (25%)

The criterion explores the degree to which the solution contributes to public value, focusing on its tangible impacts and evidence-based results—both achieved and/or anticipated.

• How the solution improved public services (e.g., new, more responsive, accessible services) or administrative efficiency (e.g., cost reduction, better processes),
• How much the solution contributed to public value and which identified needs or gaps it addressed successfully, or is expected to address, 
• If and what metrics are used to assess the efficacy of the solution, including quantitative data on effectiveness or user satisfaction,
• To what extent has the solution achieved its intended objectives. 

Technology innovativeness (10%)

This criterion assesses how innovatively the selected technology is implemented, with attention to its type, its proportionality to the identified need, and the added value generated through its use.

• The extent to which the implementation reflects a proportional and efficient use of the technology’s capabilities, avoiding “over-engineering” relative to the problem,
• The degree to which the technology is used in an innovative manner, including novel, context-aware, or non-standard applications that enhance its effectiveness within the organisation,
• 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), covers legal, organisational, semantic and technical interoperability. 

• If and how the solution follows interoperability principles, in particular the EIF (if applicable) or national interoperability frameworks or policies,
• The extent to which the solution adheres to the four levels of interoperability with other internal systems and services (see box below for detailed descriptions),
• The degree of interoperability with other national, subnational and transnational services, when applicable. 

Transparency and openness (10%)

The criterion assesses the extent to which the development and implementation of the solution were carried out in an open and transparent manner. It considers how information about the initiative, its objectives, and its changes was communicated both internally (e.g. to staff) and externally (e.g. to citizens and stakeholders).  

• If and how communication and awareness campaigns on the implementation 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 assesses the potential and feasibility of the solution to be scaled and replicated in other public administrations, application sectors or service types, or administration levels. It considers the extent to which the solution is reusable and made available in open-source formats, as well as whether it builds on or replicates existing open-source software or models, especially those developed within the European context or based on EU-level solutions. Particular emphasis is on solutions shared and reused available in the Interoperable Europe Portal (IOP) catalogue.

• The extent to which the solution is scalable, including the technical, organisational, and cost feasibility of replication in other contexts.
• If the solution is open and reusable, including whether it is based on or contributes to open-source software, open data, or shared components (e.g. AI models), and whether it has already been reused by other administrations, 
• If the solution leverages or contributes to EU-level assets, such as reusable building blocks, interoperability frameworks, or solutions available through the Interoperable Europe Portal, and whether it is made accessible for reuse by other European public sector actors.

Testing and implementation process (25%)

This criterion evaluates the overall implementation process, from design and testing to deployment and adoption, if applicable. It focuses on the mechanisms put in place to ensure effective uptake within the administration.

• The extent to which structured approaches were applied, such as co-creation, user-centred design, user needs mapping, iterative testing, and feedback loops, as well as the provision of training and upskilling for civil servants to support adoption,
• The degree of involvement of external stakeholders throughout the lifecycle, including citizens, other public administrations, academia, and EU GovTech companies, as well as participation in EU-level initiatives or innovation ecosystems,
• The extent to which appropriate and potentially innovative procurement models and instruments were used (e.g. communities of buyers, Horizon projects, or other EU toolboxes) to support development, testing, and scaling of the solution,
• If the solution has been designed following accessibility principles (e.g. EU’s Web Accessibility Directive).