- Who runs it
- Omgevingsdienst Flevoland & Gooi en Vechtstreek
- Can it affect people?
- Possibly. It may shape what people see, are recommended, flagged, or prioritised for.
- Possible rights impact: Indirect public effect
How much do we know?
A source is a published page or document behind a claim. The label measures what is documented, not whether a system is good or safe. Missing information does not prove that a safeguard is missing.
Sources and further reading
- Anonimiseren / Netherlands Algorithm Register / 2025-03-19
- Netherlands Algorithm Register - official inventory / Netherlands Algorithm Register
optional detailFull record and details
The interface and explanatory guides are translated. Record names, record descriptions, quotations, detailed editorial notes, and linked public documents stay in their published language so evidence is not silently changed.
What it does
De anonimiseringssoftware wordt ingezet om documenten die de Omgevingsdienst publiceert sneller en beter te anonimiseren. Zo voorkomen we datalekken en dragen we bij aan een betere bescherming van de AVG-rechten van betrokkenen.
If this affects someone
De uitkomst van het algoritme wordt gecontroleerd door een medewerker. De medewerker wordt door de software verplicht om alle pagina's te controleren. De medewerker bepaalt of het document correct is geanonimiseerd.
Alle informatie die te vinden is in de geüploade documenten (behalve de metadata), wordt verwerkt door het algoritme. Het kan daarbij gaan om gewone persoonsgegevens, bijzondere persoonsgegevens en strafrechtelijke gegevens. Het kan ook gaan om bedrijfsgevoelige informatie.
Sources and further reading
First indexed from Netherlands Algorithm Register on 2026-09-07. Only usable fields from the public record are shown; missing answers remain blank.
Fields were mapped from the linked public record by deterministic code. No generative model wrote this text.
Facts to check
- Who runs it
- Omgevingsdienst Flevoland & Gooi en Vechtstreek
- Life area
- Public sector
- Proof level
- Source-backed
- Footnotes
- 2
- updated
- 18 months ago
The score orders work, not people.
Review priority rises for rights-sensitive uses, missing sources, unanswered accountability fields, and old evidence. Strong official documentation lowers it. The score is not a verdict on safety, fairness, or legality.
A missing field means the attached public sources did not answer it. Coverage is uneven, publication does not prove performance, and a certificate has a defined boundary.
Previous versions
- Imported10 days agoPartialImported from Netherlands Algorithm Register.
Help check this record.
Add a public source, challenge a claim, or point out a missing way to reach a person.
A submitted name, email, description, source, or correction is used only to verify the record and prevent abuse. It is not published automatically.