Evidence-informed curriculum selection
Curricula Intelligence
Compare youth relationship-violence prevention curricula side by side, with the evidence, implementation demands, and open questions in plain view.
Curricula Intelligence is a decision-support tool for the school, district, and prevention teams who choose these programs. Explore a curated registry of 31 program profiles, compare evidence and fit against your local constraints, research current details like pricing and training, and document the reasoning behind your team’s decision.
- Status
- Live in production
- Registry
- 31 curated program profiles
- Evaluation model
- Deterministic rubrics & cited evidence
- Stage
- Pre-revenue · Available for acquisition
Why it's hard
Strong research doesn't guarantee local fit.
Choosing a prevention curriculum means reconciling information that rarely lives in one place: clearinghouse ratings, peer-reviewed studies, publisher materials, current pricing and training requirements, and state or district policy. Teams then have to weigh all of it against their own grade levels, schedules, staffing, and student needs.
Two things make this harder than it looks. A program can have strong research behind it and still be difficult to implement in a particular setting. And a study that measured dating violence is not the same as a study that showed it decreased. That distinction is easy to lose when evidence gets summarized.
Product walkthrough
See the decision workflow in the interface.
Move from registry discovery to program-level evidence, side-by-side comparison, and structured screening without collapsing the decision into a single recommendation. Each view keeps the evidence and implementation context visible so teams can inspect the basis for a decision.
Authentic application views and annotated decision workflows based on the current Curricula Intelligence interface.
Explore the evidence base
Search and narrow 31 curated program profiles using evidence, audience, delivery, and implementation criteria, then move promising candidates into comparison.
Workflow
From local context to a documented rationale.
- STAGE // 01
Define your context
Set grade bands, setting, schedule, staffing, priorities, and relevant state or policy context.
- STAGE // 02
Explore the registry
Search and filter profiles by audience, dosage, delivery format, topics, implementation requirements, and evidence.
- STAGE // 03
Compare evidence and fit
Review up to four programs side by side. The comparison organizes tradeoffs; it doesn't rank programs for adoption.
- STAGE // 04
Research what changes
Look into current pricing, training, licensing, recent evaluations, and publisher updates, with sources cited.
- STAGE // 05
Document the rationale
Score candidates against a structured rubric and generate a preliminary screening memo that records the evidence reviewed, local constraints, and open questions.
- 01
Define your context
Set grade bands, setting, schedule, staffing, priorities, and relevant state or policy context.
- 02
Explore the registry
Search and filter profiles by audience, dosage, delivery format, topics, implementation requirements, and evidence.
- 03
Compare evidence and fit
Review up to four programs side by side. The comparison organizes tradeoffs; it doesn't rank programs for adoption.
- 04
Research what changes
Look into current pricing, training, licensing, recent evaluations, and publisher updates, with sources cited.
- 05
Document the rationale
Score candidates against a structured rubric and generate a preliminary screening memo that records the evidence reviewed, local constraints, and open questions.
Tools
Structured tools built on one evidence base.
Works without AI or an account
Program Explorer
Search and filter the registry, and open detailed profiles covering evidence, delivery requirements, implementation context, and sources.
Curriculum Comparison Matrix
Compare up to four programs across evidence, audience, dosage, implementation, and cost. An optional AI summary is kept separate from the structured comparison data.
Evidence & Outcomes Matrix
See documented outcomes, evidence attributes, and clearinghouse classifications across programs in one view.
100-Point Curriculum Vetting Rubric
Score candidates across six weighted domains using fixed, reviewable rules, then generate a Preliminary Curriculum Screening Memo.
Learning Hub
Methodology and professional guidance on evidence, safety, implementation, and review.
AI-assisted, when AI features are enabled
AI Evidence Q&A Assistant
Ask questions in plain language and get answers synthesized from the curated registry.
Live Research & Audit Lab
Investigate information that changes over time, such as pricing, training, licensing, recent evaluations, and documented critiques, using current sources with citations.
Hybrid Statutory & Recommendation Engine
Combine your local criteria with current-source research to produce scenario-specific screening guidance. When it can't find adequate sourced evidence, it returns no result rather than an unsupported one.
With an account
Saved Workspace
Save analyses, favorites, and decision presets. Nothing is saved unless you choose to save it.
Evidence and AI boundaries
AI assists. It doesn't decide what's true.
Curricula Intelligence separates evidence, deterministic decision logic, AI assistance, and human judgment. Curated records establish the evidence baseline. Rule-based tools organize comparison and screening. AI can explain registry information or research current sources with citations, but it cannot rewrite classifications, alter scores, or update canonical records.
- 01
Registry truth
Curated, source-linked records establish the evidence baseline, including evidence classifications. AI does not assign those classifications.
- 02
Rule-based decisions
Search, filtering, comparison, fit analysis, radar scoring, and rubric scoring come from deterministic rules and curated data rather than generative output.
- 03
Bounded AI
AI may synthesize registry information or research current sources with citations when those features are enabled. It does not rewrite canonical records, change classifications or scores, or make adoption decisions.
- 04
Human authority
People review evidence, uncertainty, local requirements, and policy context. Curriculum selection, procurement, policy interpretation, and implementation remain human decisions.
- 05
Privacy boundary
The product is designed for curriculum and organizational context, not student or survivor case information. Users should not enter records, disclosures, safety plans, or identifying incident details. Working selections remain in the browser unless a signed-in user chooses to save them.
Evidence decision flow
From source evidence to a human decision.
The workflow keeps curated evidence, deterministic decision logic, AI assistance, and local decision authority separate.
AI assistance versus Human authority
- AI assistance: Summarizes information from the curated registry.Human authority: Inspects the underlying source-linked evidence and context.
- AI assistance: Researches current external sources with citations when enabled.Human authority: Reviews whether the evidence is adequate, relevant, and current.
- AI assistance: Cannot change classifications, scores, or canonical records.Human authority: Makes local selection, procurement, policy, and implementation decisions.
Proposed evidence changes require source verification and editorial review before the curated registry is updated.
Fit
Built for curriculum decisions, and for the organizations that support them.
Who uses it
- 01
School and district teams
comparing programs against local grade, schedule, staffing, and policy requirements.
- 02
Prevention programs and youth-serving organizations
reviewing evidence, delivery demands, safety considerations, and facilitator requirements.
- 03
Public health, research, and evaluation teams
examining evidence and implementation tradeoffs.
- 04
Curriculum committees and grant teams
documenting screening decisions.
- 05
Technical assistance and policy organizations
supporting curriculum review.
Who could acquire it
- 01
Organizations that provide evidence review or technical assistance to prevention programs.
- 02
Education and prevention organizations
looking for a structured program-selection tool.
- 03
Curriculum and education-technology companies extending a program-selection or implementation offering.
- 04
Research and policy organizations
that maintain evidence workflows.
Keeping the registry useful requires ongoing source review, so the strongest fit is an organization able to maintain it. These categories describe potential fit only. They don't indicate current use, endorsement, partnership, or adoption by any organization.
Status
A working application, not a static directory.
Curricula Intelligence is live in production. The current release includes the registry, comparison and scoring tools, AI-assisted research, the screening rubric, and Saved Workspace. Changes are verified through continuous integration, including automated tests, type checking, production builds, registry integrity checks, and desktop and mobile browser tests. Verification records are available during review.
Product & Operational Parameters
SPECIFICATION LEDGER- Application status
- Live in production
- Registry
- 31 curated program profiles
- Verification gate
- CI, automated tests & browser tests
- Release scope
- Registry, scoring, AI research & Saved Workspace
- Commercial stage
- Pre-revenue · Available for acquisition
Technical foundation
A layered system with clear decision and data boundaries.
Curricula Intelligence separates the product experience, rule-based decision tools, curated evidence, AI workflows, runtime services, and user persistence. Build-time pages use the committed, validated registry, while request-time services can use verified runtime sources without making external registry availability a build dependency.
How the system is separated
SYSTEM PROFILE- 01
Connected product — Registry exploration, program profiles, comparison, research, screening, and saved work operate within one application.
- 02
Deterministic core — Filtering, evidence classification, comparison, fit analysis, radar scoring, and rubric logic remain reviewable and separate from generative AI.
- 03
Evidence foundation — Canonical curriculum records, provenance, evaluation relationships, and source-linked evidence form the shared data foundation.
- 04
Controlled updates — Current-source research and proposed evidence changes do not automatically rewrite the curated registry. Evidence updates require review and verification.
This is a public architecture summary. Detailed infrastructure and deployment materials are reviewed separately during controlled diligence.
Transfer scope
A software and evidence package ready for continued development.
Application source code
FULL-STACK TYPESCRIPT WEB APPLICATION (PRIVATE REPOSITORY)
Curriculum registry
CURATED PROGRAM PROFILES AND THE STRUCTURED DATA MODEL BEHIND THEM
Evaluation logic
RULE-BASED COMPARISON, FIT, SCORING, AND RUBRIC MODELS
AI and research workflows
REGISTRY-BASED Q&A AND COMPARISON SUMMARIES; CITED CURRENT-SOURCE RESEARCH
Account features
AUTHENTICATION, SAVED WORKSPACE, FAVORITES, AND DECISION PRESETS
Verification and deployment
AUTOMATED TESTS, CI CONFIGURATION, BROWSER TOOLING, AND DEPLOYMENT SPECS
Documentation
ARCHITECTURE, DATA, AI, OPERATIONS, AND HANDOFF MATERIALS
Transfer scope
A software and evidence package ready for continued development.
Application source code
FULL-STACK TYPESCRIPT WEB APPLICATION (PRIVATE REPOSITORY)
Curriculum registry
CURATED PROGRAM PROFILES AND THE STRUCTURED DATA MODEL BEHIND THEM
Evaluation logic
RULE-BASED COMPARISON, FIT, SCORING, AND RUBRIC MODELS
AI and research workflows
REGISTRY-BASED Q&A AND COMPARISON SUMMARIES; CITED CURRENT-SOURCE RESEARCH
Account features
AUTHENTICATION, SAVED WORKSPACE, FAVORITES, AND DECISION PRESETS
Verification and deployment
AUTOMATED TESTS, CI CONFIGURATION, BROWSER TOOLING, AND DEPLOYMENT SPECS
Documentation
ARCHITECTURE, DATA, AI, OPERATIONS, AND HANDOFF MATERIALS
Proposed Transfer Inventory & Asset Scope
VERIFIED ARTIFACTS- 01Full-stack TypeScript web application (private repository)
Application source code
- 02Curated program profiles and the structured data model behind them
Curriculum registry
- 03Rule-based comparison, fit, scoring, and rubric models
Evaluation logic
- 04Registry-based Q&A and comparison summaries; cited current-source research and screening guidance
AI and research workflows
- 05Authentication, Saved Workspace, favorites, and decision presets
Account features
- 06Automated tests, CI configuration, browser test tooling, and deployment configuration
Verification and deployment
- 07Architecture, data, AI, operations, and handoff materials
Documentation
Limited transition support can be defined as part of a transaction. Final scope, external service accounts, and included assets are subject to review and agreement terms. Offered by Prosocial Coding LLC. Third-party curriculum names, trademarks, publications, and source materials belong to their respective owners. Page last updated September 2026.
Questions
Frequently asked questions
01Is the registry comprehensive?
No. It's a curated working set of 31 programs, not a claim of complete coverage of the field. Each profile lists its sources and when it was last reviewed.
02Is the rubric score an effectiveness score?
No. Comparison views, fit indicators, and rubric scores help teams organize a decision. They don't measure whether a program works, and they don't establish that one program is better than another in every setting.
03What does the review process involve?
It starts with a conversation about your organization and how you'd use or extend the product. If there's a fit, review can include a product walkthrough, methodology and evaluation-model inspection, architecture and code review, and transition planning. Detailed technical materials are shared under appropriate confidentiality terms.
Next steps
Interested in Curricula Intelligence?
Start with a conversation about fit. Everything else follows from there.
Staged Review & Diligence Path
ENGAGEMENT SEQUENCE- 01
Software and evidence-registry asset acquisition
- 02
Controlled technical diligence and architecture review
- 03
Private product walkthrough and methodology inspection
- 04
Transition and deployment support packages
All inquiries are routed through the canonical contact route for qualification, seller review, and staged diligence access.