See your portfolio's readiness in three dimensions.
PRISM evaluates an education R&D project on three independent ladders that together describe what's actually true about a venture's readiness. A prototype can reach the top of one dimension and still be inequitable in ways no amount of additional prototype work can fix. The People and Process ladders catch what the Prototype ladder alone cannot.
How mature is the prototype itself? Adapted from NASA's Technology Readiness Levels and DARPA program-management practice. Answers "does the product work, in real classrooms, for the students it's built for?"
Who is at the table and who holds decision-making power? Five stages of team composition and community partnership. Answers "do the people building this product have the standing to build it for the population it serves?"
How is equity operationalized across the R&D cycle? Five stages of how subgroup evidence shapes design and iteration. Answers "does the R&D process surface and act on equity evidence at every step, or only at the end?"
A single prototype-maturity score is the most common framework in education R&D. It misses the most consequential failure modes.
Prototype maturity tells you whether the product works. It doesn't tell you whether the team building it reflects, partners with, or shares decision-making with the communities the product is meant to serve. It doesn't tell you whether the R&D process surfaces equity evidence early enough to change course.
The most common failure pattern in education R&D is a project at PRL 6 or 7 with PeoML stuck at 1 and ProML stuck at 1: a sophisticated product, built without the communities it's meant to serve, with equity evaluated only at the final report stage. The product "works" in lab settings and fails the moment it meets a real classroom of real students whose communities were never at the table.
PRISM's three ladders are designed to make this visible before it shows up in outcomes. Every PRISM assessment returns three scores, not one.
Where are you across all three dimensions? The three ladders measure different things, but cluster into early / developing / mature stages roughly comparable across dimensions.
| Stage | Prototype (PRL) | People (PeoML) | Process (ProML) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Early first stage | PRL 1–3 Basic research, applied research, proof of concept. No working prototype yet, or components only. |
PeoML 1–2 Equity stated as a value (1) or community informed via consultation (2). One-directional engagement. |
ProML 1–2 Equity defined as a goal (1) or in design choices (2). Documented decision trail emerging. |
| Developing middle | PRL 4–6 Initial prototype through high-fidelity demonstration in simulated environments. Performance potential articulated. |
PeoML 3 Community members in formal, paid team or advisory roles. Present in defined R&D moments. Participating but not yet co-leading. |
ProML 3 Data collection and analysis designed for disaggregation, subgroup learning, pre-registered subgroup hypotheses. |
| Mature later stage | PRL 7–9 Real-classroom integration through sustained scaled use across multiple sites with priority student populations. |
PeoML 4–5 Community partnership with documented decision rights (4) or community co-ownership with shared governance & equity (5). |
ProML 4–5 Iteration cycles use subgroup evidence to drive design changes (4); findings & decision rights flow to communities served (5). |
The mapping is approximate, not strict. A project can be PRL 5 (developing prototype) and PeoML 1 (equity stated only), and identifying that gap is one of the most important things that PRISM surfaces.
Whether you are evaluating your own project or you are a portfolio manager evaluating proposed projects, we have a tool for you based on shared language and a common benchmarking rubric.