Each dimension asks one specific question about a country and has its own 0-to-5 criteria — not a generic scale. This page opens up the rubric for each dimension, shows each country's score together with the evidence supporting it, and states openly where the provisional score still does not distinguish between countries.
Read this before the scores. The assessments currently in the Atlas are provisional, inherited from an automatic migration: were assigned on the basis of the existence from each layer's record, not from its content. That is why seven of the eight dimensions concentrate almost every country in one or two scores — and "Law and regulatory framework" gives the same score of 4 to all 183 assessed countries, regardless of whether the country has a national law, a decree, a policy without binding force or no national programme.
The scores should not yet be read as a merit classification, nor feed any ranking.
The methodological rubric below is the one that applies; re-assessment country by country under these criteria requires human review.
There is a re-assessment proposal ready for review. O script
scripts/propor_notas_dimensoes.py
applies the criteria of each dimension to the objective fields of the collection and generates a proposed score per country, with the rule applied, the field values that produced it and the rationale — in data/final/proposta_notas_dimensoes.json. It is conservative by construction: when in doubt it assigns the lowest applicable score, absence of evidence does not become zero (it becomes "not assessable", outside the denominator) and no score of 5 is given without proof of implementation. Nothing was overwritten — the columns below show the two distributions side by side, and each country displays the comparison together with the reason.
How much each dimension discriminates today
Actual distribution of the provisional scores across the countries assessed. The more concentrated the bar, the less the score differentiates between countries.
DimensionCountriesCurrent distribution (0–5)Proposed distributionDiscrimination today
Open a dimension
What would make these scores reliable. The fields listed under "observable facts" for each dimension already exist in the record base and have sufficient coverage to support a graded assessment — the clearest case is the legal classification, completed for all 193 countries, which on its own would separate national laws from policies without binding force. Applying the rubric to these facts, country by country, with human review and evidence recording, is the step that turns these provisional scores into a defensible assessment. Until that happens, the Atlas compares by the facts in the layers — not by the scores.
Author and maintainer: Joelcio Carvalho · Data and method: repository compendio-alimentacao-escolar-brasil · The visualisations organise the available evidence and make comparisons explicit; they do not constitute a merit ranking or a legal opinion. Score, evidence and confidence are always presented separately.