Public data
Published external data. We name the source and the year.
Results & Evidence
What we have measured — and what we have not.
Every figure on this website carries its source, its year, and an honest description of what kind of evidence it is. This page explains that system and shows everything we currently publish.
How we label evidence
Different kinds of evidence support different kinds of claims. Mixing them up is the most common way organizations overstate their impact, so we keep them separate and say which is which.
Internal assessment
Measured by BTATL using our own instruments. Labeled as internal, because it has not been independently validated.
Self-reported
Participants reporting about themselves. Genuinely useful — confidence drives whether someone attempts a task — but not a measure of competence.
Validated outcome
Independently verified. We currently publish none, and will not label anything this way until it is true.
City of South Fulton Pilot, 2026
Everything we measured, including what did not move
3.34 → 4.21/5
average self-reported confidence across seven assessed skills
Evidence type: Self-reported
Participants rated their own confidence before and after the program. This is a self-report measure, not an objective test of competence.
Source: City of South Fulton pilot internal assessments, 2026
4.95/5
participant program rating
Evidence type: Self-reported
Participant satisfaction rating from the final survey.
Source: City of South Fulton pilot final survey, 2026
100%
of 20 final-survey respondents said they would recommend the program
Evidence type: Self-reported
Based on 20 final-survey respondents. Respondents are those who completed the final survey, not necessarily every participant.
Source: City of South Fulton pilot final survey, 2026
11.95 → 11.95/12
objective knowledge score, unchanged before and after
Evidence type: Objective measure
The knowledge score did not increase. It began near the maximum, which is consistent with a ceiling effect: the instrument had little room to detect improvement. No knowledge gain is claimed.
Source: City of South Fulton pilot internal assessments, 2026
2 cohorts
delivered with the City of South Fulton Parks & Recreation Department
Evidence type: Program delivery
Source: Bridging Technologies ATL program records, 2026
Source note: City of South Fulton pilot internal assessments and final survey, 2026. Instruments were internal and not externally validated. The pilot had no control group, so no causal claim is made.
What participants experienced
Summaries of feedback from participants who gave permission for it to be shared. These are BTATL's summaries of what people told us, not direct quotations.
Yvonne J.South Fulton TTWC Participant
Described the program as transforming technology from something overwhelming into something she could use with greater confidence, independence, and connection.
Sharon J.South Fulton TTWC Participant
Highlighted the program's organization, easy-to-follow instruction, weekly support, and commitment to helping the community become more proficient and safer with technology.
Belinda B.Community Technology Class Participant
Emphasized the respectful and welcoming learning environment and how the program helped participants feel valued, capable, and more comfortable using technology.
What we are working to measure next
Naming the gaps is part of the evidence. These are the things we currently cannot show, and what it would take to change that.
- Knowledge gain. The South Fulton knowledge instrument started at 11.95 out of 12 and had no room to detect improvement. A calibrated assessment is the priority for the next cycle.
- Durability. We have no follow-up measurement showing whether confidence holds three or six months later. It needs a scheduled follow-up built into the program.
- Attribution. Without a comparison group, improvement cannot be attributed to the program alone.
- 180Angles Intelligence outcomes. No pilot outcome data exists to publish. Any that emerges belongs to the institution and would be cited only with written approval.
- PARLEN validation. PARLEN is in development, and it is an evolution of the Digital Confidence Index rather than the same instrument renamed. Validation and governance milestones come before any stronger language about it. The South Fulton figures on this page were produced by the Digital Confidence Index and stay described that way.
Ask us for the detail.
If you are evaluating BTATL and need the underlying methodology, the instruments, or a straight answer about something we have not measured, ask. We would rather tell you now.