Grid city comprehensive management evaluation system and method

Abstract

The invention provides a gridding city comprehensive management evaluation system and method. The method comprises the following steps: grouping planning areas of a city according to development positioning; performing case extraction and quality inspection on the total case data of the planning area based on the case quality supervision and evaluation model to obtain a quality supervision and evaluation result of the planning area; selecting a comprehensive management actual effect evaluation model corresponding to the group where the planning area is located, and processing full-amount case data of the planning area in combination with a quality supervision evaluation result to obtain a management actual effect evaluation result of the planning area; and comprehensively analyzing the management actual effect evaluation result and the quality supervision evaluation result to obtain a comprehensive management evaluation result of each planning region. According to the method, case quality supervision is added in assessment, and specific conditions and development requirements of each region are fully considered, so that assessment is more in line with actual conditions, and the effectiveness and pertinence of assessment are improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the field of Internet data processing technology and social management technology, and in particular to a grid-based city comprehensive management evaluation system and method. Background Art

[0002] With the acceleration of urbanization, the demand for refined urban management is growing. Traditional grid-based management systems, while a crucial tool for urban management, have exposed numerous limitations in practical application. First, in terms of the assessment mechanism, the current system often focuses on case quantity over quality, neglecting the authenticity and effectiveness of cases. This approach, which prioritizes quantity over quality, fails to fully recognize the importance of high-quality cases in addressing fundamental urban issues. Furthermore, the single-minded assessment model fails to account for the functional differences between different regions and lacks specificity and flexibility. Second, case detection primarily relies on manual inspections, which are inefficient and inaccurate, and fail to fully leverage modern technologies to improve management effectiveness. This reflects a lack of awareness of the application of existing technologies in urban management, as well as insufficient investment in new technologies and professional training. Furthermore, the lack of systematic integration and analysis of issues raised by citizens through hotlines makes it difficult to effectively identify the underlying causes and implement targeted measures to address them. Poor information flow and the lack of a unified data management platform are the primary contributors to this problem. Finally, flaws exist in the inspection mechanisms at the city and district levels, with unscientific and inappropriate supervisory methods and evaluation indicators, making it difficult to ensure a high and timely handling rate of cases. The lack of an effective supervision process and a scientific evaluation index system has made the supervision work more about form than content, making it difficult to achieve the expected results. In summary, these problems existing in the existing technology in urban grid management need to be solved urgently, and a more intelligent and efficient solution is needed to improve the quality and efficiency of urban management. This patent aims to provide an innovative urban grid management system and method to overcome all the above limitations and achieve refined and intelligent urban management. Summary of the Invention

[0003] The present invention aims to provide a grid-based urban comprehensive management evaluation system and method to overcome all the above limitations and achieve refined and intelligent urban management.

[0004] A grid-based urban comprehensive management and evaluation system, where the city is divided into multiple planning areas, including:

[0005] The regional grouping module is used to group the planning areas into which the city is divided according to development positioning;

[0006] The evaluation model construction module is connected to the regional grouping module and is used to construct a case quality supervision and evaluation model and a corresponding comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model for each group of planning areas;

[0007] Case data collection module, used to collect all case data in each planning area of the city;

[0008] The case quality supervision and evaluation module is connected to the evaluation model construction module and the case data collection module respectively, and is used to extract and check the quality of all case data in the planning area based on the case quality supervision and evaluation model to obtain the quality supervision and evaluation results of the planning area;

[0009] The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation module is connected to the evaluation model construction module, the case data collection module, and the case quality supervision and evaluation module, and is used to: select the comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model corresponding to the group to which the planning area belongs, combine it with the quality supervision and evaluation results, process the full amount of case data of the planning area, and obtain the management effectiveness evaluation results of the planning area;

[0010] The evaluation result analysis module is connected to the comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation module and the case quality supervision evaluation module respectively, and is used to comprehensively analyze the management effectiveness evaluation results and the quality supervision evaluation results according to the preset evaluation cycle to obtain the comprehensive management evaluation results of each planning area.

[0011] Furthermore, the system also includes:

[0012] The mechanism construction evaluation module is used by scorers to give the scoring results of the management mechanism construction indicators of the planning area;

[0013] The management plus-minus scoring evaluation module is used by scorers to give the scoring results of the management plus-minus scoring indicators of the planning area according to the preset plus-minus scoring rules;

[0014] The evaluation result analysis module is also connected to the mechanism construction evaluation module and the management plus and minus score evaluation module respectively, and is used to comprehensively analyze the management effectiveness evaluation results, quality supervision evaluation results, management mechanism construction index scoring results and management plus and minus score index scoring results when the preset evaluation cycle is one year, so as to obtain the comprehensive management evaluation results of each planning area.

[0015] Furthermore, the quality supervision evaluation results include the number of cases with deductions for supervision quality and the scoring results of the case quality supervision indicators;

[0016] The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation module combines the number of cases with deductions for supervision quality and conducts management effectiveness evaluation on all case data in the planning area according to the preset evaluation cycle to obtain the management effectiveness evaluation results of the planning area;

[0017] The management effectiveness evaluation results include the indicator scores of multiple first-level management effectiveness indicators;

[0018] The evaluation result analysis module is also used to sum the scores of the management mechanism construction indicators, the scores of the first-level management effectiveness indicators, the scores of the case quality supervision indicators, and the scores of the management plus and minus indicators according to the weights to obtain the total assessment score of each planning area in the preset evaluation cycle;

[0019] The system also includes an analysis and display module, which is connected to the evaluation result analysis module and is used to rank and display the total assessment scores of the planning area.

[0020] Furthermore, the comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model includes a supervision discovery effectiveness evaluation sub-model for evaluating supervision discovery effectiveness;

[0021] The evaluation of supervisory findings effectiveness includes multiple secondary supervisory findings effectiveness indicators;

[0022] Multiple secondary supervision effectiveness indicators were found, including standard process case filing indicators, expanded case filing indicators, simplified process case filing indicators, and standard process case cancellation indicators;

[0023] Each secondary supervision and discovery effectiveness indicator has a corresponding indicator scoring template and indicator weight;

[0024] The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation module includes:

[0025] The supervision and discovery effectiveness evaluation unit is used to process the full case data of the planning area based on the supervision and discovery effectiveness evaluation sub-model, and calculate the indicator score of each secondary supervision and discovery effectiveness indicator by combining the indicator scoring template and indicator weight corresponding to each secondary supervision and discovery effectiveness indicator.

[0026] Furthermore, the comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model includes a command and coordination effectiveness evaluation sub-model for command and coordination effectiveness evaluation;

[0027] The command and coordination effectiveness evaluation includes multiple secondary command and coordination effectiveness indicators;

[0028] Multiple second-level command and coordination effectiveness indicators include the timely closure indicator for standard process cases, the closure indicator for standard process cases, the closure indicator for city-level inspection cases, and the timeliness indicator for handling standard process cases;

[0029] Each second-level command and coordination effectiveness indicator has a corresponding indicator scoring template and indicator weight;

[0030] The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation module includes:

[0031] The command and coordination effectiveness evaluation unit is used to process the full case data of the planning area based on the command and coordination effectiveness evaluation sub-model, and calculate the indicator score of each second-level command and coordination effectiveness indicator by combining the indicator scoring template and indicator weight corresponding to each second-level command and coordination effectiveness indicator.

[0032] Furthermore, the comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model includes an effectiveness comprehensive supervision evaluation sub-model for effectiveness comprehensive supervision evaluation;

[0033] The effectiveness comprehensive supervision evaluation includes multiple secondary effectiveness comprehensive supervision indicators;

[0034] Multiple secondary comprehensive supervision indicators for effectiveness include hotline complaints involving grid components, city-level inspection first discovery indicators, and city-level inspection district first discovery indicators;

[0035] Each secondary comprehensive effectiveness supervision indicator has a corresponding indicator scoring template and indicator weight;

[0036] The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation module includes:

[0037] The effectiveness comprehensive supervision evaluation unit is used to process the full case data of the planning area based on the effectiveness comprehensive supervision evaluation sub-model, and calculate the indicator score of each second-level effectiveness comprehensive supervision indicator by combining the indicator scoring template and indicator weight corresponding to each second-level effectiveness comprehensive supervision indicator.

[0038] Furthermore, the full case data includes citizen hotline data;

[0039] The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model includes a natural language processing algorithm, which is used to parse citizen hotline data and extract information from the citizen hotline data.

[0040] Furthermore, the full case data includes the integration of data from each stage the case has gone through since its discovery.

[0041] A grid-based city comprehensive management evaluation method, using the aforementioned grid-based city comprehensive management evaluation system, includes:

[0042] Step A1: pre-group the planning areas into which the city is divided according to their development positioning, pre-build a case quality supervision and evaluation model, and build a corresponding comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model for each group of planning areas;

[0043] Step A2: Based on the case quality supervision and evaluation model, case extraction and quality inspection are performed on all case data in the planning area to obtain the quality supervision and evaluation results of the planning area;

[0044] Step A3: Select the comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model corresponding to the group to which the planning area belongs, combine it with the quality supervision evaluation results, process all the case data of the planning area, and obtain the management effectiveness evaluation results of the planning area;

[0045] Step A4: Comprehensively analyze the management effectiveness evaluation results and quality supervision evaluation results according to the preset evaluation cycle to obtain the comprehensive management evaluation results of each planning area.

[0046] Furthermore, when the preset evaluation period is one year, before step A4, the following steps are further included:

[0047] Step B1: The scoring personnel give the scoring results of the management mechanism construction indicators of the planning area. The scoring personnel give the scoring results of the management plus or minus points indicators of the planning area according to the preset plus or minus points scoring rules;

[0048] In step A4, the management effectiveness evaluation results, quality supervision evaluation results, management mechanism construction index scoring results and management plus / minus score index scoring results are comprehensively analyzed to obtain the comprehensive management evaluation results of each planning area.

[0049] The beneficial technical effects of this invention are as follows: This invention proposes a scientific assessment system that incorporates case quality supervision, focusing not only on the number of cases but also on their ability to solve practical problems and their effectiveness. This approach allows urban management to more accurately focus on key issues, thereby improving overall management level and efficiency. This invention also takes into account the specific conditions and development needs of each area based on its functional positioning, making the assessment more realistic and effective, and enhancing its effectiveness and pertinence. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0050] Figure 1-4 This is a module diagram of a grid-based city comprehensive management and evaluation system according to the present invention;

[0051] Figure 5-6 This is a flowchart of the steps of a grid-based urban comprehensive management evaluation method of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0052] The following will clearly and completely describe the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention in conjunction with the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present invention, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without making any creative efforts shall fall within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0053] It should be noted that, in the absence of conflict, the embodiments of the present invention and the features in the embodiments may be combined with each other.

[0054] The present invention will be further described below with reference to the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments, but they are not intended to limit the present invention.

[0055] See also Figure 1 The present invention provides a grid-based city comprehensive management and evaluation system, in which a city is gridded into multiple planning areas, including:

[0056] The regional grouping module (1) is used to group the planning areas into which the city is divided according to development positioning;

[0057] The evaluation model construction module (2) is connected to the regional grouping module (1) and is used to construct a case quality supervision and evaluation model and a corresponding comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model for each group of planning areas;

[0058] Case data collection module (3), used to collect all case data of each planning area in the city;

[0059] The case quality supervision and evaluation module (4) is connected to the evaluation model construction module (2) and the case data collection module (3) respectively, and is used to extract and perform quality inspection on the full amount of case data in the planning area based on the case quality supervision and evaluation model, and obtain the quality supervision and evaluation results of the planning area;

[0060] The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation module (5) is connected to the evaluation model construction module (2), the case data collection module (3) and the case quality supervision and evaluation module (4) respectively, and is used to: select the comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model corresponding to the group to which the planning area belongs, combine the quality supervision and evaluation results, process the full amount of case data of the planning area, and obtain the management effectiveness evaluation results of the planning area;

[0061] The evaluation result analysis module (6) is connected to the comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation module (5) and the case quality supervision evaluation module (4) respectively, and is used to comprehensively analyze the management effectiveness evaluation results and the quality supervision evaluation results according to the preset evaluation cycle to obtain the comprehensive management evaluation results of each planning area.

[0062] This invention proposes a scientific assessment system that incorporates case quality supervision, focusing not only on the number of cases, but also on their ability to solve practical problems and their effectiveness. In this way, urban management can focus more accurately on key issues, thereby improving the overall management level and efficiency. This invention fully considers the specific conditions and development needs of each area based on the functional positioning of different planning areas, making the assessment more in line with the actual situation and improving the effectiveness and pertinence of the assessment.

[0063] Furthermore, the full case data includes citizen hotline data;

[0064] The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model includes a natural language processing algorithm, which is used to parse citizen hotline data and extract information from the citizen hotline data.

[0065] See also Figure 2 ,Furthermore, the full case data includes the integration of data ,from each stage the case has gone through since its discovery.

[0066] The case data collection module (3) specifically includes a case discovery access unit (31), an acceptance and supervision access unit (32) and a command and disposal access unit (33).

[0067] The case discovery access unit (31) is used to access the discovery methods of cases. For example, the case discovery methods include active discovery types, such as access from grid government WeChat, existing mobile terminals in various districts, and business system inspection access. Case discovery methods also include passive discovery types, such as access to cases through citizen service hotlines, and non-police cases such as water leaks, power outages, and family disputes accessed through the alarm platform. Case discovery methods also include automatic discovery types, such as cases discovered by various planning areas using artificial intelligence technology for processing or decision-making assistance, such as introducing multiple discovery methods such as video data and IoT data, and using big data analysis technology and artificial intelligence technology to analyze data to discover data. By accessing case data from multiple discovery methods, the case data collection module (3) collects and stores the full case data of each planning area, forming a multi-data aggregation and fusion capability.

[0068] The acceptance supervision access unit (32) mainly accesses data on the stage of the discovered cases, such as case acceptance including pending acceptance, reported for verification and invalidation, case filing such as pending filing and not filed, case verification such as pending verification and withdrawn verification, case closure, special census, and other data access.

[0069] The command and disposal access unit (33) is used to access case handling data, such as case dispatch including pending dispatch, re-dispatch, management and control, case supervision such as case return, case extension, case appeal, disposal feedback, and other data access.

[0070] The case data collection module (3) accesses case discovery data, case stage data and case command and disposal data, thereby forming an integration of data from each stage the case has gone through since its discovery.

[0071] Furthermore, the system also includes:

[0072] Mechanism construction evaluation module (7), used by scorers to give the scoring results of the management mechanism construction indicators of the planning area;

[0073] A management plus / minus scoring evaluation module (8) is used for scoring personnel to give a scoring result of the management plus / minus scoring index of the planning area according to a preset plus / minus scoring rule;

[0074] The evaluation result analysis module (6) is also connected to the mechanism construction evaluation module (7) and the management plus-minus evaluation module (8) respectively, and is used to comprehensively analyze the management effectiveness evaluation results, quality supervision evaluation results, management mechanism construction index scoring results and management plus-minus index scoring results when the preset evaluation cycle is one year, so as to obtain the comprehensive management evaluation results of each planning area.

[0075] Management mechanism development indicators are evaluated annually using a qualitative assessment method. Key evaluation indicators include business training, staffing, the improvement of district-level supervision mechanisms, the improvement of grid management organizational mechanisms, and the optimization and improvement of grid management work standards and specifications. The system provides evaluators with an evaluation and scoring interface to enable them to score the corresponding indicators.

[0076] The management mechanism will be built into an indicator assessment system, and districts will be encouraged to use video technology, IOT, big data analysis technology and other means to discover cases. It will also be encouraged to use AI algorithms to improve the accuracy of discovering video, IOT and other cases.

[0077] Bonus points for management in the planning area, or comprehensive management, include, for example, the use of intelligent tools, such as AI, IoT, and big data analysis. For example, if intelligent tools are used in district grid-based comprehensive management, 1% will be added for each new technology adopted, with a maximum cumulative bonus of 3%.

[0078] Whether the city has completed key tasks for inclusion in the region this year. For example, 1% will be added for each completed task, with a maximum cumulative bonus of 3%.

[0079] Whether the remaining issues in the area have been resolved and the results are significant. For example, 0.5% will be added for each item completed, with a maximum cumulative bonus of 1%.

[0080] After being recognized by the municipal government, the relevant grid management system and work that are innovative, distinctive, replicable, and scalable will be completed. For example, 0.5% will be added for each item completed, with a maximum cumulative bonus of 1%.

[0081] Grid management work that is publicized and reported by city-level or higher media. If the district's grid-based comprehensive management work is publicized and reported by city-level or higher media (WeChat official public accounts, Weibo official public accounts, newspapers, television stations, radio stations, etc.), 0.5% will be added for each completed item, with a maximum cumulative bonus of 2%.

[0082] The management deduction items of the planning area, namely the comprehensive management deduction items, include, for example, the following.

[0083] Because grid cases were not handled promptly and properly, they were exposed by city-level and above media (official WeChat public accounts, official Weibo public accounts, newspapers, television stations, radio stations, etc.).

[0084] If the responsibilities are clear but they are not handled for various reasons, there will be cases of buck-passing, procrastination and fraud.

[0085] Failure to complete tasks assigned by the municipal government.

[0086] The management plus and minus score indicators are incorporated into the assessment system, and a qualitative evaluation method is adopted. The system provides an evaluation and scoring interface to the evaluators to implement scoring of the corresponding indicators.

[0087] Furthermore, the quality supervision evaluation results include the number of cases with deductions for supervision quality and the scoring results of the case quality supervision indicators;

[0088] The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation module (5) combines the number of cases with deductions in supervision quality and conducts management effectiveness evaluation on all case data in the planning area according to the preset evaluation cycle to obtain the management effectiveness evaluation results of the planning area;

[0089] The management effectiveness evaluation results include the indicator scores of multiple first-level management effectiveness indicators;

[0090] The evaluation result analysis module (6) is also used to sum up the score results of the management mechanism construction index, the index scores of each first-level management effectiveness index, the score results of the case quality supervision index and the score results of the management plus / minus score index according to the weights to obtain the total assessment score of each planning area in the preset evaluation cycle;

[0091] The system also includes an analysis and display module (9), which is connected to the evaluation result analysis module (6) and is used to rank and display the total assessment scores of the planning areas.

[0092] Multiple first-level management effectiveness indicators, case quality supervision indicators, management plus and minus points indicators, and management mechanism construction indicators are all first-level indicators. The weights of the first-level indicators are added together to obtain the total score of the comprehensive assessment.

[0093] Furthermore, the analysis and display module (9) also displays the indicator scores of the first-level management effectiveness indicators of each planning area.

[0094] Specifically, in urban grid management, each planning area can be further subdivided into multiple sub-areas, the city is divided into several grid units, sub-areas such as streets and towns are composed of grid units, and planning areas are composed of sub-areas. The case quality supervision and evaluation module can obtain the quality supervision and evaluation results of the sub-areas. The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation module can obtain the management effectiveness evaluation results of the sub-areas. The evaluation result analysis module can obtain the comprehensive management evaluation results of the sub-areas. The mechanism construction evaluation module can obtain the scoring results of the management mechanism construction indicators of the sub-areas. The management plus and minus evaluation module can obtain the scoring results of the management plus and minus indicators of the sub-areas. The analysis and display module (9) displays according to the preset evaluation cycle and regional dimension required by the user. For example, the user can choose to display the quantitative indicator score and total assessment score of the comprehensive management evaluation results of the planning area of the entire city, or the quantitative indicator score and total assessment score of the comprehensive management evaluation results of the planning areas of the same group, or the quantitative indicator score and total assessment score of the comprehensive management evaluation results of each sub-area within a planning area.

[0095] This system automatically scores multiple first-level management effectiveness indicators, such as the first-level supervision and discovery effectiveness indicator, the first-level command and coordination effectiveness indicator, and the first-level comprehensive supervision effectiveness indicator. Each first-level management effectiveness indicator is further subdivided into multiple second-level management effectiveness indicators. A first-level management effectiveness indicator is calculated by weighted summation of the scores of the subdivided second-level management effectiveness indicators.

[0096] The first-level management effectiveness indicator is a quantitative evaluation result of the model's automatic processing of all case data. The management plus / minus indicators and management mechanism construction indicators are qualitative evaluations, and staff manually score based on the qualitative evaluation. The system automatically calculates the final score based on the manual and automatic scoring results.

[0097] Specifically, the preset evaluation cycles are divided into daily, monthly, quarterly and annual evaluation cycles to achieve dynamic real-time evaluation.

[0098] See also Figure 3 , the case quality supervision and evaluation module (4) includes:

[0099] An area selection unit (41) is used to select an inspection area;

[0100] The case screening unit (42) is connected to the area selection unit (41) to extract cases from the selected spot check area;

[0101] The case evaluation unit (43) is connected to the case screening unit (42) and is used to perform a quality supervision qualitative evaluation on the processing quality of the extracted cases, decide whether to deduct points based on the quality supervision qualitative evaluation, and obtain the scoring result of the case quality supervision index based on the deduction result of the case quality.

[0102] The specific area selection unit (41) adopts a random sampling method, for example, randomly selecting the districts with a large number of cases filed under the unit population standard process on the previous day.

[0103] Specifically, the case screening unit (42) screens standard process cases generated in the spot check area, including component type cases and event type cases.

[0104] The case evaluation unit (43) uses artificial intelligence technology to determine whether there is any fraud in the case reporting and case handling process. After verification, for each such case, 10 points will be deducted from the case quality score of the area, until the default score set for the case quality supervision indicator is reached.

[0105] At the same time, cases with quality problems will have corresponding points deducted from the timely case closure rate and case closure rate statistics. Please refer to the following for details on the scoring calculation of the timely case closure rate and case closure rate indicators.

[0106] The case quality supervision and evaluation module (4) also includes a complaint unit (44) and a verification unit (45). The case evaluation unit (43) provides feedback on cases that are qualitatively evaluated by quality supervision as having quality problems.

[0107] The appeal unit (44) is used to appeal the region where the case with quality problem belongs;

[0108] The verification unit (45) is connected to the appeal unit (44) and is used to review the appeal and obtain a review result;

[0109] The case evaluation unit (43) is connected to the verification unit (45) and is used to combine the review results to finally obtain the scoring results of the case quality supervision indicators.

[0110] The specific calculation process of the scoring results of case quality supervision indicators is as follows.

[0111] Score first, and before review, the default score of this indicator is 100% for example;

[0112] Points will be deducted again to complete the system screening, and points will be deducted for cases with quality problems such as acceptable or unqualified according to the screening results.

[0113] After the points are returned, each district can appeal and the appeal case will be manually reviewed in a timely manner. If the review is successful, the points will be returned to the district; if the review is rejected, the deduction points will remain unchanged. After the review is completed, the system will lock the daily scoring results of the case quality supervision indicators in each region.

[0114] The system calculates the average score of the daily scores based on the number of days in the previous month as the monthly score for the case quality supervision indicator for the spot-checked cases in that area last month. The annual score for the case quality supervision indicator is calculated by averaging the monthly scores.

[0115] Specifically, the case quality supervision and evaluation module (4) can automatically conduct quality spot checks on cases in each region every day and obtain daily scoring results of case quality supervision indicators in each region.

[0116] Specifically, the analysis and display module (9) can list and display cases with quality problems, such as suspicious or unqualified cases, detected by the case quality supervision and evaluation module (4), and can compare them with sample cases. The displayed content includes basic case information, case description information, basic case flow information, and case flow process information of the current case and the comparison case.

[0117] Basic case information: including case number, case classification, case name, case discovery method, case reporting method, case reporting time, case reporter, district to which it belongs, street or town to which it belongs, neighborhood committee to which it belongs, grid to which it belongs, and other information.

[0118] Case description information: including case description, case address, case report pictures, case report audio, case report video and other information.

[0119] Basic information on case transfer: including basic information on the six major transfer processes of case discovery, filing, dispatch, disposal, verification, and case closure, including transfer time, transfer personnel, transfer department, transfer opinions and other information.

[0120] Case flow process information: includes detailed information on the six major flow processes of case discovery, case filing, dispatch, disposal, verification, and case closure, including time, operation name, operator, case status, case flow, case closure results, case description, pictures, audio, video and other information.

[0121] The analysis and display module (9) also collects statistics on the cases with quality problems found in the case quality supervision and evaluation module (4) and generates a spot check statistical report for display. The statistical dimensions include region and time, and the statistical content includes the number of published cases, the number of cases not appealed, the number of cases with overdue appeals, the number of cases under appeal, the number of cases approved for appeal, and the number of cases rejected for appeal.

[0122] Specifically, the analysis and display module (9) summarizes and displays the first-level indicator scores and total assessment scores of each planning area and sub-area under each planning area of the city, realizes a unified display of each planning area and sub-area, helps city managers to intuitively discover problems, analyze problems, and solve problems, and promotes the city's refined urban management.

[0123] Furthermore, the default statistical period for the daily comprehensive management evaluation results may be 0:00-24:00 on the same day.

[0124] Furthermore, the statistical period for the monthly comprehensive management evaluation results may be from the first day of the month to the last day of the month.

[0125] Furthermore, the statistical period for the quarterly comprehensive management evaluation results may be from the first day of the quarter to the last day of the quarter.

[0126] Furthermore, the statistical period for the annual comprehensive management evaluation results can be from November 1 of the previous year to October 31 of the current year.

[0127] See also Figure 4 ,Furthermore, the comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model includes a ,supervision discovery effectiveness evaluation sub-model for supervision discovery ,effectiveness evaluation;

[0128] The evaluation of supervisory findings effectiveness includes multiple secondary supervisory findings effectiveness indicators;

[0129] Multiple secondary supervision effectiveness indicators were found, including standard process case filing indicators, expanded case filing indicators, simplified process case filing indicators, and standard process case cancellation indicators;

[0130] Each secondary supervision and discovery effectiveness indicator has a corresponding indicator scoring template and indicator weight;

[0131] The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation module (5) includes:

[0132] The supervision discovery effectiveness evaluation unit (51) is used to process the full amount of case data in the planning area based on the supervision discovery effectiveness evaluation sub-model, and calculate the indicator score of each secondary supervision discovery effectiveness indicator by combining the indicator scoring template and indicator weight corresponding to each secondary supervision discovery effectiveness indicator.

[0133] Supervision discovery effectiveness evaluation refers to the assessment and evaluation of whether a case is filed or invalidated after it is discovered.

[0134] The standard process case filing index, the expanded case filing index, the simplified process case filing index, and the standard process case cancellation index are secondary evaluation indicators.

[0135] In this invention, standard process cases refer to urban management issues that comply with established standards and procedures.

[0136] In the present invention, extended cases refer to urban management issues that go beyond conventional definitions or processing procedures. They may be emerging issues or issues that require cross-departmental collaboration to resolve. Such cases may not have ready-made standard procedures and require special solutions.

[0137] In the present invention, simplified process cases refer to those urban management issues that are simple and can be resolved quickly, comply with established standards and simplified procedures, and can usually be handled without complex investigations or multi-party coordination.

[0138] Cases are categorized into two types: incidents and components. Components refer to urban infrastructure or collections of facilities, typically designed to provide public services or ensure the normal operation of the city, such as public facilities, road traffic, housing, and land. Incidents, on the other hand, are situations where the city's appearance and order are affected or disrupted due to human or natural factors, requiring the specialized urban management departments to address and restore normalcy. Examples include illegal parking.

[0139] As an implementation method, the indicator scoring process for the standard process case filing indicator is as follows:

[0140] The first step is to calculate the number of standard process cases filed per unit population, for example, the number of standard process cases filed per 10,000 permanent residents. The calculation formula is as follows:

[0141]

[0142] The second step is to convert the number of cases filed under the unit population standard process category into the final score.

[0143] The maximum number of cases filed per unit population standard process (Max) is set to 100 points;

[0144] The minimum number of cases filed under the general process of the unit population standard category (Min) is set at 80 points;

[0145] The number of cases filed per unit population standard procedure corresponding to each point (B) is calculated using the formula (Max-Min) / 20;

[0146] The index score for the standard process case filing index = [(number of standard process cases filed per district population - Min) / B+80]*weight coefficient of the index.

[0147] As an implementation method, the indicator scoring process for expanding the case filing indicator is as follows:

[0148] The first step is to calculate the number of expansion cases filed per unit population, for example, the number of expansion cases filed per 10,000 permanent residents. The calculation formula is as follows:

[0149]

[0150] The second step is to convert the number of cases filed per unit population expansion into the final score.

[0151] The maximum number of cases filed per population expansion unit (Max) is set at 100 points;

[0152] The minimum number of cases filed for population expansion per unit (Min) is set at 80 points;

[0153] The number of expansion cases filed per unit population (B) corresponding to each point is calculated using the formula (Max-Min) / 20;

[0154] Calculate the index score of the expansion case filing index = [(number of expansion case filings per unit population in the district - Min) / B+80)]*weight coefficient of the index.

[0155] As an implementation method, the indicator scoring process for the simplified process case filing indicator is as follows:

[0156] The first step is to calculate the number of simplified case filings per unit population, for example, the number of simplified case filings per 10,000 permanent residents. The calculation formula is as follows:

[0157]

[0158] The second step is to convert the number of cases filed under the simplified procedure per unit population into the final score.

[0159] The maximum number of cases filed under the simplified procedure per population (Max) is set at 100 points;

[0160] The minimum number of cases filed under the simplified procedure per unit population (Min) is set at 80 points;

[0161] The number of simplified procedure cases filed per unit population corresponding to 1 point (B) is calculated using the formula (Max-Min) / 20;

[0162] Calculate the index score of the simplified procedure case filing index = [(number of simplified procedure cases filed per unit population in the district - Min) / B+80)]*weight coefficient of the index.

[0163] As an implementation method, the indicator scoring process for the standard process case cancellation indicator is as follows: two steps.

[0164] The first step is to calculate the invalidation rate of standard process cases in the district. The calculation formula is as follows:

[0165]

[0166] The second step is to convert the cancellation rate of standard process cases into the final score.

[0167] The maximum invalidation rate of standard process cases (Max) is set at 80 points;

[0168] The minimum value (Min) of the cancellation rate of standard process cases is set to 100 points;

[0169] The invalidation rate (B) of standard general process cases corresponding to each point is calculated using the formula (Max-Min) / 20;

[0170] Calculate the indicator score of the standard process case cancellation indicator = [100-(district standard process case cancellation rate-Min) / B)*the weight coefficient of the indicator.

[0171] Furthermore, the comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model includes a command and coordination effectiveness evaluation sub-model for command and coordination effectiveness evaluation;

[0172] The command and coordination effectiveness evaluation includes multiple secondary command and coordination effectiveness indicators;

[0173] Multiple second-level command and coordination effectiveness indicators include the timely closure indicator for standard process cases, the closure indicator for standard process cases, the closure indicator for city-level inspection cases, and the timeliness indicator for handling standard process cases;

[0174] Each second-level command and coordination effectiveness indicator has a corresponding indicator scoring template and indicator weight;

[0175] The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation module (5) includes:

[0176] The command and coordination effectiveness evaluation unit (52) is used to process the full case data of the planning area based on the command and coordination effectiveness evaluation sub-model, and calculate the indicator score of each second-level command and coordination effectiveness indicator by combining the indicator scoring template and indicator weight corresponding to each second-level command and coordination effectiveness indicator.

[0177] The evaluation of the effectiveness of command and coordination refers to the assessment and evaluation of the case handling situation of the mobilized and dispatched personnel after the case is filed.

[0178] The indicators for timely closure of standard process cases, the indicators for closing standard process cases, the indicators for closing city-level inspection cases and the indicators for timeliness of handling standard process cases are secondary evaluation indicators.

[0179] As an implementation method, the indicator scoring process for the timely case closure indicator for standard process cases is as follows:

[0180] The first step is to calculate the timely settlement rate of standard process cases in the district (hereinafter referred to as the timely settlement rate). The calculation formula is as follows:

[0181]

[0182] The second step is to convert the timely case closure rate into a score.

[0183] The maximum value (Max) of the district's timely case closure rate is set at 100 points;

[0184] The minimum value (Min) of the district's timely case closure rate is set at 80 points;

[0185] The timely closing rate (B) of standard process cases corresponding to each point is calculated using the formula (Max-Min) / 20;

[0186] According to the number of cases (n) whose points were deducted in the spot check of the month in the quality supervision and evaluation results, each case is corresponding to S points, and the deduction points are calculated as Sn;

[0187] Calculate the indicator score for the timely settlement of standard process cases = [(timely settlement rate of district standard process cases - Min) / B + 80 - Sn)] * the weight coefficient of the indicator.

[0188] Introduce quality supervision cases into the scoring of timely case closure indicators for standard process cases, focus on the supervision of case quality, and pay attention to its ability and effectiveness in solving practical problems.

[0189] As an implementation method, the indicator scoring process for the standard process case closing indicator is as follows:

[0190] First, calculate the case closure rate of the district's standard process cases (hereinafter referred to as the case closure rate). The calculation formula is as follows:

[0191]

[0192] The second step is to convert the case closure rate into a score.

[0193] The maximum case closure rate (Max) is set to 100 points;

[0194] The minimum case closure rate (Min) is set at 80 points;

[0195] The case closing rate (B) corresponding to each point is calculated using the formula (Max-Min) / 20.

[0196] According to the number of cases (n) whose points were deducted in the spot check of the month in the quality supervision and evaluation results, each case is corresponding to S points, and the deduction points are calculated as Sn;

[0197] Calculate the indicator score of the standard process case closure indicator = [(district standard process case closure rate - Min) / B + 80 - Sn)] * the weight coefficient of the indicator.

[0198] As an implementation method, the indicator scoring process for the city-level inspection case closure indicator is as follows:

[0199] The first step is to calculate the case closure rate of city-level supervision cases, which is calculated as follows:

[0200]

[0201] The second step is to convert the city-level inspection case closure rate into the final score.

[0202] Convert the above-mentioned city-level inspection case closure rate into a percentage system, and then multiply it by the weight coefficient of the indicator to obtain the final score of the indicator.

[0203] As an implementation method, the indicator scoring process for the standard process case handling timeliness indicator is as follows: two steps.

[0204] The first step is to calculate the average handling time of standard process cases in the district. The formula is as follows:

[0205]

[0206] n represents the number of cases in the district that have standard procedures and have been handled.

[0207] The second step is to convert the average handling time of standard process cases into scores.

[0208] The handling time of the cases with standard procedures and have been handled = handling time - dispatch time;

[0209] Calculate the average handling time of the first to nth standard process cases that have been handled during the assessment period.

[0210] The maximum average treatment time (Max) is set at 80 minutes;

[0211] The minimum value (Min) of the average disposal time is set to 100 minutes;

[0212] The average treatment time (B) corresponding to each minute is calculated using the formula (Max-Min) / 20;

[0213] The indicator score of the standard process case handling time index = [100-(district average handling time-Min) / B]*the weight coefficient of the indicator.

[0214] Furthermore, the comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model includes an effectiveness comprehensive supervision evaluation sub-model for effectiveness comprehensive supervision evaluation;

[0215] The effectiveness comprehensive supervision evaluation includes multiple secondary effectiveness comprehensive supervision indicators;

[0216] Multiple secondary comprehensive supervision indicators for effectiveness include hotline complaints involving grid components, city-level inspection first discovery indicators, and city-level inspection district first discovery indicators;

[0217] Each secondary comprehensive effectiveness supervision indicator has a corresponding indicator scoring template and indicator weight;

[0218] The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation module (5) includes:

[0219] The effectiveness comprehensive supervision evaluation unit (53) is used to process the full amount of case data in the planning area based on the effectiveness comprehensive supervision evaluation sub-model, and calculate the indicator score of each secondary effectiveness comprehensive supervision indicator by combining the indicator scoring template and indicator weight corresponding to each secondary effectiveness comprehensive supervision indicator.

[0220] The comprehensive supervision and evaluation of effectiveness is an assessment and evaluation of the supervision of the handling of cases.

[0221] The hotline involves grid component complaint indicators, city-level inspection city first discovery indicators, and city-level inspection district first discovery indicators, which are secondary evaluation indicators.

[0222] As an implementation method, the hotline's indicator scoring process for grid component complaint indicators is as follows:

[0223] The first step is to calculate the number of complaints per unit population in the district, that is, the number of complaints per 10,000 permanent residents. The calculation formula is as follows:

[0224]

[0225] The second step is to convert the number of complaints per unit population into the final score.

[0226] The maximum number of complaints per unit population (Max) is set at 80 points;

[0227] The minimum number of complaints per unit population (Min) is set at 100 points;

[0228] The number of complaints per unit population (B) corresponding to each score is calculated using the formula (Max-Min) / 20;

[0229] Calculate the index score of the hotline complaint index involving grid components = [100-(number of complaints per unit population in the district-Min) / B]*weight coefficient of the index.

[0230] As an implementation method, the indicator scoring process for the city-level inspection first-discovery indicators is as follows:

[0231] The first step is to calculate the number of city-level discoveries.

[0232] The number of cases discovered first at the city level refers to the number of cases discovered by city-level inspections before those discovered by district inspections after comparison and confirmation.

[0233] Step 2: Convert the city-level first discovery number to the final score.

[0234] The first discovery number at the city level is zero as the benchmark and the score is set at 100;

[0235] The maximum number of first discoveries at the city level (Max) is set to 40 points;

[0236] The number of cases (B) corresponding to each score is calculated using the formula (Max-0) / 60;

[0237] The indicator score of the city-level inspection city's first discovery indicator = [100-(city-level first discovery number-0) / B]*the weight coefficient of the indicator.

[0238] As an implementation method, the city-level inspection area first finds that the indicator scoring process of the indicator is as follows.

[0239] The first step is to calculate the district-level first discovery rate. The formula is as follows:

[0240]

[0241] The second step is to convert the district-level first-discovery rate into the final score.

[0242] Convert the above district-level first-discovery rate into a percentage system and multiply it by the weight coefficient of the indicator to obtain the indicator score of the city-level inspection district-level first-discovery indicator.

[0243] As an embodiment of the present invention, the monthly assessment may include the following indicator scores:

[0244] The first-level supervision discovery effectiveness indicators, and the second-level indicators are subdivided into standard process case filing indicators, expanded case filing indicators, and simplified process case filing indicators;

[0245] The first-level command and coordination effectiveness indicators, and the second-level indicators are subdivided into the timely closure indicators of standard process cases, the closure indicators of standard process cases, the closure indicators of city-level inspection cases, and the timeliness indicators for handling standard process cases;

[0246] The first-level comprehensive supervision indicators are practical and effective, and the second-level indicators are subdivided into hotline complaint indicators involving grid components, city-level inspection city-first discovery indicators, and city-level inspection district-first discovery indicators.

[0247] As an embodiment of the present invention, the quarterly assessment may include the following indicator scores:

[0248] Case quality supervision indicators.

[0249] As an embodiment of the present invention, the annual assessment may include the following indicators: management mechanism construction indicators; management plus and minus indicators. The annual assessment also includes the total assessment score of each planning area.

[0250] The construction of a grid system under refined urban management will result in a geometric increase in the number of cases compared to the past. The present invention considers the diversification of evaluation dimensions (planning areas, further sub-areas), the diversification of evaluation models (mechanism construction, quality, quantitative addition and subtraction, regional functions), and the multipolarization of evaluation tasks in supervision and evaluation, and incorporates a variety of assessment principles.

[0251] On the one hand, the principle of quality assessment, the present invention focuses on the quality of discovered cases, attaches importance to the quality of regionalized discovered cases, and uses quantity as a supplementary assessment content.

[0252] Secondly, the regional group assessment principle is to group the city's planning areas according to their functional positioning. Different groups have different assessment focuses and models. For example, the city's planning areas are grouped into four types: modernization construction leading areas, urban function optimization areas, new urbanization areas, and comprehensive ecological development areas, forming four groups of assessment areas. The evaluation models and focus indicators of different areas are different, fully considering the specific conditions and development needs of each area, making the assessment more in line with the actual situation and improving the effectiveness and pertinence of the assessment.

[0253] Third, the mechanism construction assessment principle includes the construction of management mechanisms in the planning area as an indicator in the assessment. Districts are encouraged to use video technology, IOT, big data analysis technology and other means to discover cases, and to use AI algorithms to improve the accuracy of case discovery through video, IOT and other means.

[0254] Fourthly, the citizen feedback assessment principle is to extract grid-related issues reflected in the citizen hotline, identify the shortcomings of grid work, and improve the satisfaction of citizens with grid work;

[0255] Fifthly, the principle of urban and rural supervision and assessment should be implemented to strengthen the supervision of grid-based work at the municipal and district levels, and to improve the handling rate and timeliness of cases.

[0256] The construction of this evaluation system will revolve around the above-mentioned assessment principles. Based on the system's full case data, it will supervise all processes and results of the cases, realize the supervision and management of the grid case execution process and results, and while meeting the city's refined management needs, it will aggregate case-related data from all districts and towns across the city to realize grid management supervision and evaluation of all districts and towns across the city.

[0257] See also Figure 5 The present invention provides a grid-based city comprehensive management evaluation method, using the aforementioned grid-based city comprehensive management evaluation system, including:

[0258] Step A1: pre-group the planning areas into which the city is divided according to their development positioning, pre-build a case quality supervision and evaluation model, and build a corresponding comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model for each group of planning areas;

[0259] Step A2: Based on the case quality supervision and evaluation model, case extraction and quality inspection are performed on all case data in the planning area to obtain the quality supervision and evaluation results of the planning area;

[0260] Step A3: Select the comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model corresponding to the group to which the planning area belongs, combine it with the quality supervision evaluation results, process all the case data of the planning area, and obtain the management effectiveness evaluation results of the planning area;

[0261] Step A4: Comprehensively analyze the management effectiveness evaluation results and quality supervision evaluation results according to the preset evaluation cycle to obtain the comprehensive management evaluation results of each planning area.

[0262] See also Figure 6 Furthermore, when the preset evaluation period is one year, before step A4, the following steps are further included:

[0263] Step B1: The scoring personnel give the scoring results of the management mechanism construction indicators of the planning area. The scoring personnel give the scoring results of the management plus or minus points indicators of the planning area according to the preset plus or minus points scoring rules;

[0264] In step A4, the management effectiveness evaluation results, quality supervision evaluation results, management mechanism construction index scoring results and management plus / minus score index scoring results are comprehensively analyzed to obtain the comprehensive management evaluation results of each planning area.

[0265] The above are only preferred embodiments of the present invention and do not limit the implementation mode and protection scope of the present invention. For those skilled in the art, it should be aware that all solutions obtained by equivalent substitutions and obvious changes made using the description and illustrations of the present invention should be included in the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A grid-based city comprehensive management and evaluation system, where the city is divided into multiple planning areas, characterized by: include: A regional grouping module, used for grouping the planning areas into which the city is divided according to development positioning; An evaluation model construction module, connected to the regional grouping module, for constructing a case quality supervision and evaluation model and a corresponding comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model for each group of planning areas; Case data collection module, used to collect all case data of each planning area in the city; a case quality supervision and evaluation module, connected to the evaluation model construction module and the case data collection module, respectively, for extracting and quality checking the full amount of case data in the planning area based on the case quality supervision and evaluation model, and obtaining a quality supervision and evaluation result for the planning area; a comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation module, connected to the evaluation model construction module, the case data collection module, and the case quality supervision and evaluation module, respectively, for selecting the comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model corresponding to the group to which the planning area belongs, processing the entire case data of the planning area in combination with the quality supervision and evaluation result, and obtaining the management effectiveness evaluation result of the planning area; The evaluation result analysis module is respectively connected to the comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation module and the case quality supervision evaluation module, and is used to comprehensively analyze the management effectiveness evaluation results and the quality supervision evaluation results according to the preset evaluation cycle to obtain the comprehensive management evaluation results of each planning area.

2. A grid-based city comprehensive management and evaluation system as claimed in claim 1, characterized in that: The system further comprises: The mechanism construction evaluation module is used for the scoring personnel to give the scoring results of the management mechanism construction indicators of the planning area; A management plus-minus scoring evaluation module is used for scoring personnel to give scoring results of management plus-minus scoring indicators of the planning area according to preset plus-minus scoring rules; The evaluation result analysis module is also connected to the mechanism construction evaluation module and the management plus and minus score evaluation module respectively, and is used to comprehensively analyze the management effectiveness evaluation results, the quality supervision evaluation results, the scoring results of the management mechanism construction indicators and the scoring results of the management plus and minus score indicators when the preset evaluation period is one year, so as to obtain the comprehensive management evaluation results of each planning area.

3. A grid-based city comprehensive management and evaluation system as claimed in claim 2, characterized in that: The quality supervision and evaluation results include the number of cases where points were deducted for supervision quality and the scoring results of the case quality supervision indicators; The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation module combines the number of cases with deducted supervision quality points and performs a management effectiveness evaluation on the entire case data of the planning area according to a preset evaluation cycle to obtain a management effectiveness evaluation result of the planning area; The management effectiveness evaluation results include indicator scores of multiple first-level management effectiveness indicators; The evaluation result analysis module is further configured to sum the score results of the management mechanism construction index, the index scores of each of the first-level management effectiveness indicators, the score results of the case quality supervision index, and the score results of the management plus / minus score index according to the weights to obtain the total assessment score of each of the planning areas in the preset evaluation period; The system also includes an analysis and display module, which is connected to the evaluation result analysis module and is used to rank and display the total assessment scores of the planning areas.

4. A grid-based city comprehensive management and evaluation system as claimed in claim 3, characterized in that: The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model includes a supervision discovery effectiveness evaluation sub-model for supervision discovery effectiveness evaluation; The supervisory discovery effectiveness evaluation includes multiple secondary supervisory discovery effectiveness indicators; The multiple secondary supervision effectiveness indicators include standard process case filing indicators, expanded case filing indicators, simplified process case filing indicators, and standard process case cancellation indicators; Each of the secondary supervisory findings effectiveness indicators has a corresponding indicator scoring template and indicator weight; The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation module includes: The supervision and discovery effectiveness evaluation unit is used to process the full case data of the planning area based on the supervision and discovery effectiveness evaluation sub-model, and calculate the indicator score of each of the secondary supervision and discovery effectiveness indicators in combination with the indicator scoring template and indicator weight corresponding to each of the secondary supervision and discovery effectiveness indicators.

5. A grid-based city comprehensive management and evaluation system as claimed in claim 3, characterized in that: The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model includes a command and coordination effectiveness evaluation sub-model for command and coordination effectiveness evaluation; The command and coordination effectiveness evaluation includes multiple secondary command and coordination effectiveness indicators; The multiple secondary command and coordination effectiveness indicators include the timely closure indicator for standard process cases, the closure indicator for standard process cases, the closure indicator for city-level inspection cases, and the timeliness indicator for handling standard process cases; Each of the second-level command and coordination effectiveness indicators has a corresponding indicator scoring template and indicator weight; The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation module includes: The command and coordination effectiveness evaluation unit is used to process the full case data of the planning area based on the command and coordination effectiveness evaluation sub-model, and calculate the indicator score of each of the second-level command and coordination effectiveness indicators in combination with the indicator scoring template and indicator weight corresponding to each of the second-level command and coordination effectiveness indicators.

6. A grid-based city comprehensive management and evaluation system as claimed in claim 3, characterized in that: The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model includes a comprehensive supervision and evaluation sub-model for comprehensive supervision and evaluation of effectiveness; The effectiveness comprehensive supervision evaluation includes multiple secondary effectiveness comprehensive supervision indicators; The multiple secondary effectiveness comprehensive supervision indicators include hotline grid component complaint indicators, city-level inspection city first discovery indicators, and city-level inspection district first discovery indicators; Each of the secondary comprehensive effectiveness supervision indicators has a corresponding indicator scoring template and indicator weight; The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation module includes: The effectiveness comprehensive supervision and evaluation unit is used to process the full case data of the planning area based on the effectiveness comprehensive supervision and evaluation sub-model, and calculate the indicator score of each of the second-level effectiveness comprehensive supervision indicators in combination with the indicator scoring template and indicator weight corresponding to each of the second-level effectiveness comprehensive supervision indicators.

7. A grid-based city comprehensive management and evaluation system as claimed in claim 3, characterized in that: The full case data includes citizen hotline data; The comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model includes a natural language processing algorithm for parsing the citizen hotline data and extracting information from the citizen hotline data.

8. A grid-based city comprehensive management and evaluation system as claimed in claim 3, characterized in that: The full case data includes the integration of data from each stage the case has gone through since its discovery.

9. A grid-based urban comprehensive management evaluation method, characterized by: A grid-based city comprehensive management and evaluation system according to any one of claims 1 to 8 is used, comprising: Step A1: pre-group the planning areas into which the city is divided according to development positioning, pre-build a case quality supervision and evaluation model, and build a corresponding comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model for each group of planning areas; Step A2: extracting and quality checking the entire case data of the planning area based on the case quality supervision and evaluation model to obtain a quality supervision and evaluation result of the planning area; Step A3: selecting the comprehensive management effectiveness evaluation model corresponding to the group to which the planning area belongs, processing the entire case data of the planning area in combination with the quality supervision evaluation result, and obtaining the management effectiveness evaluation result of the planning area; Step A4: comprehensively analyzing the management effectiveness evaluation results and the quality supervision evaluation results according to the preset evaluation cycle to obtain a comprehensive management evaluation result for each planning area.

10. A grid-based city comprehensive management evaluation method according to claim 9, characterized in that: When the preset evaluation period is one year, before step A4, the method further includes: Step B1: The scoring personnel give the scoring results of the management mechanism construction indicators of the planning area. The scoring personnel give the scoring results of the management plus or minus scoring indicators of the planning area according to the preset plus or minus scoring rules; In step A4, the management effectiveness evaluation results, the quality supervision evaluation results, the scoring results of the management mechanism construction indicators and the scoring results of the management plus / minus points indicators are comprehensively analyzed to obtain the comprehensive management evaluation results of each planning area.

Images