53 countries, 9 dimensions, each scored 0 to 100, equal weights. There is no composite score and no headline ranking. A single number answers “who is ahead”; this asks “what can this country do?”, which has nine answers. Two countries with the same average can have opposite shapes.
Every indicator stays visible with its source and year. Confidence is published beside the score and never folded into it. Missing values are dropped, nothing is imputed, and a dimension with too few observed indicators publishes no score rather than a guess. Indicators come from World Bank, Joint EVS/WVS, V-Dem and similar series with a public methodology.
Brazil is the first field case. The same dimensions, indicators, transforms and normalization apply to every country in the set; the field case gets no special treatment in the model.
Can the country see change coming and prepare for it?
Can it act on what it decides?
Can its institutions align around a response?
Do people and institutions trust each other enough to cooperate?
Does evidence change policy and practice?
Can it try things before it is certain?
Can it change course when conditions change?
Can it build the capacity it needs?
Can it hold a long-term priority across political cycles?
If the claim is right, countries at the same income level have different shapes, and a dimension can improve without the country first getting richer. If it is wrong, the nine dimensions collapse into one factor that tracks GDP per head. Every release runs that test, along with correlation and redundancy checks between dimensions.
The benchmark is published at ncb.envisioning.com: every country profile, a comparison view, the method, the indicator registry and sources, and a dispute form for anyone who thinks a score is wrong. For the data behind a country, or to add one, write to us.