surveying villages…
Pick a village from the list (or click on the map) to see contextual stats.
63 of 63 overall avg
Indicators across villages all 14 indicators · 63 villages · dot size = households
0 20 35 50 70+ avg
77 avg
42 avg
40 avg
47 avg
14 avg
35 avg
14 avg
56 avg
52 avg
28 avg
38 avg
50 avg
40 avg
45 avg
Does local participation predict outcomes?
Spearman ρ · Institution (process measure) vs the other 13 indicators · n = 63
Aggregate view across the 63 filtered villages — selecting one in the list does not change Zone D. For per-village detail, use the radar / matrix / economic cards above.
Read this first. Institution measures process (vibrancy, attendance); the 13 below measure outcomes. Process moves in months, outcomes in years. Weak correlations in a snapshot are not evidence the institutions don't matter.
1 strong (|ρ| ≥ 0.30)
· 2 weak-positive
· 8 effectively flat
- Energy +0.37 ✓
- weak signal threshold
- Gender & Inclusion +0.23
- Agro Ecology +0.23
- WASH +0.14
- Export/Import +0.12
- Water +0.11
- Forest +0.03
- Distress Migration −0.00
- Health & Nutrition −0.02
- Livelihood Basket −0.03
- Soil −0.10
- Youth Employment −0.16
- HH Income −0.18
Scenario · what if we measured agency, not just vibrancy?
We don't have direct Agency data, but we can blend the current Vibrancy score with a proxy that behaves like ownership. Move the slider — bars above recompute live.
Agency proxy
0 · pure proxy α = 1.00 1 · current
The 5 survey additions that would replace the proxy with real Agency data →
- Self-initiated actions per year — community-identified issues acted on without prompting.
- Agenda-setting share — % of agendas set by members vs facilitator.
- Internal-to-external revenue ratio — fees / savings ÷ external grants.
- Successful entitlement claims won — MGNREGA, PDS, pension, forest-rights.
- Persistence-without-facilitator — activity over a 90-day no-visit window.