Where theory turns into working software and tangible models.

Large government organisations keep changing — the national police after its formation into one force, an inspectorate moving from an accrual accounting system to a cash-and-commitments system, a regulator implementing findings from a management letter. Every change means planning, control and accountability have to be rebuilt.

Without a working planning-and-control cycle, steering becomes guesswork: KPIs without a risk picture, budgets without a forward view, digital systems that don't talk to each other.

At the national police (2017–2020): built sector-level annual plans, KPIs and a rolling forecast for the Equipment and Weapons sector, and coordinated the digital integration of source systems for integrated oversight of resources, costs and risk.

At the ILT (2020–2022): aligned the external planning-and-control cycle (annual plan, monthly reports, annual accounts) with the internal one, and consolidated separate department reports into one organisation-wide report.

At the Dutch Data Protection Authority (2022–2025): implemented findings from a management letter — set up risk management, developed a KPI dashboard, optimised procurement processes, and temporarily led the Finance and Procurement department.

Feedback on an exam answer usually covers one thing: right or wrong according to the marking scheme. Why it went wrong for this particular student stays unanswered.

Two students with the same score can have entirely different problems — one misreads the question, the other misses a concept. That calls for feedback that accounts for both the marking scheme and the student's learning style.

Every answer is graded against the exam's actual marking scheme, using a scoring engine tested against an in-house benchmark of real exam answers.

The explanation behind a score accounts for the student's learning style — the same mistake is explained differently to a Doer than to a Thinker.

At the end of an exam, a second layer of feedback follows: not isolated remarks per question, but an analysis of consistency and patterns across the whole exam — where the mistake repeats, and what's underneath it.

Streaks, XP and badges give an extra nudge to keep practising, without making it about the score alone.

Companies that need to demonstrate privacy law compliance usually piece it together from scattered sources — statute text, enforcement news, generic compliance tools. There was no central, independent place that combined all of it.

Most compliance problems stay invisible until someone specifically looks for them — a cookie firing before a visitor gives consent goes unnoticed without a scan.

The core is a free knowledge base: privacy laws across 69 jurisdictions, an enforcement monitor with live cases, and standalone tools such as a DSAR deadline calculator and a privacy policy generator.

A scanner automatically checks a website for cookies, pre-consent trackers, and the quality of its privacy policy, and immediately returns a free risk score. The full report with a step-by-step fix guide and drafted policy text then costs €9.50.

Sustainability advice is often generic. Figures that actually hold for your specific home — postcode, home type, roof — are hard to find.

The rules keep changing — the net-metering scheme is being phased out, grid congestion limits what's still possible, and both vary sharply by municipality and home type.

Every calculation is based on official, public data — Kadaster/BAG for property data, EP-Online for energy labels, RVO and CBS for subsidy and consumption data.

Seven free tools (energy calculator, net-metering impact, home battery ROI, grid congestion check, district heating postcode check, contract comparison, installer score) all run on the same address: one postcode, an immediate concrete picture.

Counterfeit goods are visible in tourist areas like Aruba and Sint Maarten, but the path from signal to seizure to settlement runs largely by hand there, worked out case by case.

Every country has its own seizure procedures, deadlines and role divisions. A system built for one country rarely just works for the next.

A country-agnostic workflow from signal to settlement, with a "Country Pack" per country: legal rules, cost structure, network partners and templates are configuration, not new code.

Built with Profectus Legal (mr. L.F. Herben) in Curaçao for the legal side. Aruba and Sint Maarten are the first two countries — small enough to oversee the whole ecosystem, and legally almost identical to the Netherlands.

Target thresholds: at least double the case value as a payback measure, and a turnaround from signal to settlement of under four weeks.

Women in perimenopause rarely search for "menopause" — they search by symptom: sleep problems, mood swings, constant fatigue. A trustworthy, Dutch-language place that met them there without immediately attaching a medical label did not exist.

Trust in an unfamiliar platform is low. Trust in a personal story and real expertise is high.

A diagnostic funnel: a short emotional check leads to an urgency colour profile, followed by deeper questions on two self-chosen pillars. The word "menopause" only appears after the full report.

Every output is phrased as a pattern observation, never a diagnosis — "your data shows a pattern," never "you have X" — developed together with Lucille Holtel, a clinical psycho-neuro-immunologist at Resiliendo.

After the report, an invitation follows to a private community.