How it works

Two questionnaires.
One clear picture
of your system.

Each partner answers 25 questions independently — about 15 minutes each.
Within 48 hours you receive a private structural report showing exactly where daily coordination works, where it strains, and where your perceptions of the same situation differ most.

Get Your Report — $49 See a full sample report ↗
1The process 2Five areas 3Scoring 4Position stands 5Perception gaps 6Your report 7What this isn't 8FAQ
Section 01 — The process

Three steps.
One complete picture.

The independence between both partners' answers is what makes the insight possible. Before you see each other's responses, the analysis is already done.

1
Both partners — separately
Each partner completes 25 questions independently

You each answer the same structured questionnaire — but separately, privately, at your own pace. Neither partner sees the other's responses before the report is generated. There is no right or wrong answer. You are describing how you currently experience your shared household system.

Takes approximately 15–20 minutes each. You don't need to complete it at the same time. Once both partners have submitted, your report enters the analysis queue. A 7-point scale is used — from strongly disagree to strongly agree — across five structural areas of your relationship.
2
Automated — no human involvement
The system maps your coordination strengths and pressure points

Your combined responses are scored across five structural domains. Each domain receives a strength score (how well it is functioning for both partners combined) and a distance score (how differently each partner experiences the same area). A structural mismatch in perception is often more revealing than a low score alone.

Divergence is the insight that most assessments miss. Two partners can both rate a domain moderately and still have a 30-point gap in perception — which produces entirely different daily experiences of the same household. The distance score surfaces that gap clearly.
3
Within 48 hours
You receive a private, structured report — with scores, gaps, and conversation prompts

Your report shows a scored structural map across all five domains, the areas of highest pressure, where your perceptions diverge most, and specific conversation prompts to begin closing the gaps. It does not tell you what to think or feel — it gives you a shared language and a starting point.

No jargon. No clinical language. No blame framing. Every finding is presented in neutral, system-based terms. The report is designed to be read together — and to generate the kind of conversation that open-ended talking usually cannot.
Section 02 — Five areas

What the assessment
actually measures.

Every couple's daily coordination is evaluated across five domains. These are not personality traits or emotional states — they are structural features of how two people organise a shared life.

1
SC — How We're Organised
Who does what, how decisions get made, and whether both partners are working from the same understanding of their roles.
Examples: recurring household tasks, financial decisions, parenting responsibilities, who handles what
SC
Scored 0–100
2
RS — Time, Money & Capacity
Whether time, money, and energy feel manageable — or like they are running consistently short with no recovery in sight.
Examples: financial pressure, time demands, daily exhaustion, ability to plan ahead, unexpected disruptions
RS
Scored 0–100
3
DA — Where We're Headed
Whether both partners agree on what matters most right now and feel that they are moving in the same direction.
Examples: life priorities, lifestyle expectations, major decisions, short-term and long-term goals
DA
Scored 0–100
4
FM — Conflict & Recovery
Whether disagreements stay contained and recovery happens efficiently — or the same argument keeps coming back without resolution.
Examples: how tension is handled, how quickly recovery happens, whether conflict disrupts daily planning
FM
Scored 0–100
5
AC — How We Adapt
How well the partnership reorganises when circumstances change — without the whole system coming under sustained strain.
Examples: responses to illness, job change, moving, unexpected events, revising prior agreements
AC
Scored 0–100
Section 03 — How scoring works

Two numbers
per domain.

Each of the five areas produces two scores — a strength score and a distance score. Together they tell a more complete story than a single number ever could.

Strength score
0–100 · The combined view

The strength score is the average of both partners' responses within a domain. It reflects how well that area of daily coordination is currently functioning for the couple as a unit.

A score of 75+ is supportive — the system is working in this area. A score of 55–74 is mixed — functioning, but with room for improvement. Below 55 indicates the domain is under meaningful load and likely generating repeated friction.

Distance score
0–100 · The perception gap

The distance score measures how differently both partners experience the same domain. It is the absolute difference between their individual scores — not a measure of fault, but a measure of misalignment in perception.

A distance of 20+ points is significant. It means both partners may be living inside the same household but experiencing a particular area of it in genuinely different ways — which makes coordination harder without either person realising why.

FCIFamily Clarity Index™
The Family Clarity Index is the overall score — the average strength across all five domains, adjusted downward when the average perception gap exceeds 20 points. This adjustment reflects the real-world cost of structural misalignment: two people can score reasonably well individually while still having a poorly coordinated system. The FCI (0–100) determines your Position Stand (A through E).
Score scale reference
75–100
Supportive
55–74
Mixed
0–54
Under load
Section 04 — Position stands

What your FCI means
in plain language.

Five neutral categories. No judgement, no predictions — just a description of where your cooperative system currently sits, and a clear starting point for what comes next.

A
80–100
Stable structure, manageable frictionThe system is working well. Some areas may benefit from maintenance conversations but no urgent clarification is required.
B
65–79
Generally stable with moderate load areasMost domains function well. One or two areas carry more weight than they should — targeted clarification will reduce ongoing friction.
C
50–64
Mixed stability — clarification recommendedThe system is functioning but under meaningful load in several areas. Starting with the highest-pressure point will have the widest impact.
D
35–49
Multi-domain strain — prioritise stabilisationSeveral areas are under significant load simultaneously. A structured, one-domain-at-a-time approach to clarification is recommended before attempting broader change.
E
< 35
High structural pressure — support recommendedSignificant strain across multiple domains. Automated assessment provides a starting map, but professional or facilitated support is likely to be more effective at this level.
Important: Position Stands describe the current structural state of your cooperative system — not the quality of your relationship, the character of either person, or any prediction about the future. They are a starting point for conversation, not a verdict.
Section 05 — When you see gaps

A distance score
is not a fault.

When two partners experience the same household area very differently, the gap is not a sign that one person is wrong. It is a signal that expectations or definitions have never been made explicit — and that a single structured conversation can close what months of unstructured talking could not.

↕
Understanding distance bands
What each level means in practice

Every domain produces a distance score — the gap between each partner's individual score. A small gap means both partners perceive the domain similarly. A large gap means they are experiencing the same system in genuinely different ways.

0–10
Low distance — broadly similar perceptions. Coordination in this area is easier because both partners are working from similar assumptions.
11–20
Moderate distance — different assumptions or definitions. Usually resolved with a single focused conversation to align on what each person means.
20+
High distance — a strong candidate for a structured clarification conversation. This gap is likely generating repeated friction without either person identifying the source.
💬
Why independent responses matter
The methodology behind the insight

If both partners completed the questionnaire together — discussing, agreeing, compromising — the responses would reflect the negotiated middle, not the genuine individual experience. That is precisely what produces the blind spots that the assessment is designed to surface.

Independent completion means the distance score is real. When the report shows a 28-point gap in FM — Conflict & Recovery, it means one partner genuinely experiences that area very differently from the other — not that one of them is wrong, but that both are working from different unspoken definitions of the same situation.

The report's job is to surface that gap. The conversation prompts are the first step toward closing it.

The Clarification Ladder — for any high-distance area
1
Define terms
Ask each other: "What does this mean to you?" — without assuming the answer is the same as yours. Most perception gaps exist because both people are using the same words to describe different things.
Example: "When you say this area is working, what does working actually look like for you?"
2
Describe examples
Move from abstract to specific: "When did you last feel this was working well? When did you last feel it wasn't?" Grounding the conversation in specific situations removes the tendency to talk past each other.
Example (FM — Conflict & Recovery): "When was the last time you felt a disagreement was fully resolved? What made it feel that way?"
3
Agree a minimum viable rule
Not a permanent solution — a defined starting point: "For the next two weeks, we will at least do X." Small, explicit agreements do more work than large intentions.
Example: "For the next two weeks: if either of us says 'I need 20 minutes,' we pause and agree a specific time to return."
Section 06 — Your report

What you receive
within 48 hours.

A private report delivered to both partners. Not a summary of problems — a structural map with specific scores, specific gaps, and specific starting points for the conversations that matter.

◆
Family Clarity Index™ and Position Stand
Your overall score (0–100) and a Stand A–E classification with a plain-language description of what it means for your current coordination system
📊
Five-pillar radar profile
Visual map of strength and distance across all five domains — at a glance, showing both where the system is working and where it is under load
↕
Alignment and distance map
The two areas where your structural perceptions diverge most — the gaps most likely to be generating repeated friction without a visible cause
⚠
Top 3 pressure points
Ranked by combined structural load — where to focus first, why it matters, and one clarification question to start with for each
💬
Per-pillar conversation prompts
Three structured, non-combative questions for each of the five areas — designed to make the first conversation easier to start and easier to actually finish
📅
7-day stabilisation plan
One practical micro-action per day, starting with the highest-pressure area — structured as options, not instructions. One page. One week. One clear starting point.
See exactly what the report looks like before you decide — a full sample report for a fictional couple, at real score levels.
View sample report →
Section 07 — What this is and isn't

Designed for clarity.
Not clinical evaluation.

The language, methodology, and output are all structured to help couples understand their coordination system — without crossing into therapy, diagnosis, or any clinical territory.

This is not
Therapy or couples counselling
Psychological diagnosis or clinical assessment
Personality testing or compatibility scoring
Intimacy or sexual compatibility evaluation
Conflict mediation or legal preparation
A prediction about your relationship's future
Suitable if safety or coercion concerns are present
This is
A structural assessment of how two adults coordinate a shared life
Based on each partner's independent description of the current system
Scored across five domains with neutral, non-clinical language throughout
Designed to surface coordination gaps before they become chronic friction
Action-oriented — every finding comes with a specific starting point
A tool for planning and conversation, not evaluation of any person
Usable at any relationship stage — proactively or reactively
What it evaluates: the stability of a two-adult cooperative system — how you coordinate daily life, share time and financial load, align on direction, manage recurring friction, and adapt when things change. That is enough to create real clarity.
Section 08 — Common questions

Frequently asked
questions.

The assessment requires independent completion by both partners to generate the distance scores that make the report meaningful. If one partner is reluctant, sharing the sample report first often helps — seeing exactly what the output looks like removes the uncertainty about what the process involves. The assessment cannot be completed by one person on behalf of both.
The default report does not show individual question-level responses — only pillar-level scores and distances. This is intentional: the insight comes from the pattern across domains, not from specific items. Showing individual answers can introduce defensiveness that makes the report harder to act on constructively. A detailed response appendix is available as an opt-in for couples who specifically want it.
Your responses are encrypted in transit and at rest. They are not shared with any third party, not used to train any model, and not shared between partners except in the aggregated form that appears in the report. You can request deletion of your data at any time. See the Privacy Policy for full details.
Consistently. Couples with high overall scores frequently find that the distance scores surface assumptions they didn't know they were making — particularly in DA — Where We're Headed and RS — Time, Money & Capacity. A structural check-in when things are functioning well is the cheapest time to identify small gaps before they compound. It's the relationship equivalent of a financial review.
If your situation involves safety concerns, coercive control, or a relationship in active crisis, this automated assessment is likely insufficient as a primary resource. Please consider professional support. For couples experiencing significant but not acute friction — the "something needs to change but we don't know what" category — the assessment can provide useful structural clarity as a starting point or complement to facilitated support.
Couples therapy is relationship treatment, typically involving a trained clinician, emotional processing, and therapeutic goals. Family Clarity is a structural diagnostic tool — it produces a scored map of coordination patterns across five domains, without clinical involvement, emotional evaluation, or therapeutic framing. The output is designed to be read by the couple themselves and used as a starting point for their own structured conversations. Think of it as a diagnostic instrument, not a treatment modality.
For most couples, one assessment at a meaningful transition point and a follow-up 6–12 months later provides a useful before-and-after structural picture — particularly around major life transitions (new child, job change, relocation, financial shift). Each assessment is a separate one-time Full Report; there's no subscription to manage.

Ready to see
your picture?

Two partners. 25 questions each. One private report within 48 hours — with scores, coordination gaps, and structured conversation prompts.

Get Your Report — $49
Both partners complete independently 48-hour delivery Not therapy · Not coaching Confidential