Connect this app to your shared team database. Paste the two values from your Supabase project — Project Settings → API. You only do this once per device.
Clients are pseudonymous — a reference, never a name. Shared across the whole team, live.
Every assessment across all clients and assessors. Click a row to open the client. The dagger † marks a floor-rule cap.
Scores calculate live using the Protocol v1.1 engine. Blank fields are omitted and their weight redistributed within the domain. Saved records are tagged with the protocol version that produced them.
Optional. These never move the Index — they narrow the confidence interval reported around it. The longer the window a reading represents, the more it narrows: 90-day beats 30-day beats 7-day beats a single reading on the day.
Give someone their Index area, or a twelve-week programme, without a payment. If they already have an account it is theirs immediately. If they do not, the grant waits and is applied the moment they sign up — nothing to remember, nothing to chase.
Grants made to an address with no account yet. They apply automatically at sign-up; nothing here needs chasing.
Client records live in your shared Supabase database (EU region), visible to every signed-in team member. Export regular JSON backups regardless — a backup you hold is a backup nobody can accidentally erase.
JSON is the full, loss-free backup. CSV is a flat spreadsheet of every assessment. Import writes into the shared database for everyone.
The Evolution Index expresses a person's functional capacity as a single number from 0 to 100 — normed to their age and sex, alongside a band and a Capacity Age. It exists to make decline visible early enough to reverse, and to direct effort at the one input that will move the most. This is how it works, and why we trust it.
This document describes the assessment, scored in this app on Evolution’s own scales. A member’s own Index is scored against published percentiles, and the reference they read is Protocols and research.
The Index exists to direct work, not replace it. Every report ends with one intervention, never a list.
Cardiorespiratory fitness, strength and movement are independent risk pathways. Excellence in one does not offset failure in another — and the scoring enforces it.
Where a measure is included for engagement rather than hard outcome evidence, we say so — here, and in the report. Where a measurement device cannot carry the claim, the value is recorded as context and does not score.
Every metric carries a stated minimum detectable change. Below it, we report no change. Almost nobody in this market publishes their error. We do.
Three domains, weighted by the strength of the evidence linking each to all-cause mortality and loss of independence. The weighting is deliberate: cardiorespiratory capacity carries the most, because the evidence behind it is the strongest.
How well the body takes in, transports and uses oxygen — the single most powerful predictor of longevity in the battery.
The muscle and connective tissue that carry you through life and protect you when things go wrong. Four measures in v1.1: grip and lean tissue carry equal and largest weight, then lower-body power, then the hang.
The ability to get down to the world and back up from it — mobility, balance and control.
Standardisation is everything: the same conditions, the same scripted words, the same equipment at every retest — because a change in the test can masquerade as a change in the person. The scripted words are the ones members read. Each test is run in the clinic exactly as a member is told to run it, and the steps below are those same instructions, so a certified result and a member’s own measurement come from the same test. What the clinic adds is the instrument, how this engine scores the value, and its published error — the minimum detectable change (MDC) below which we report no change at all.
Six tests used to be run differently in the clinic. They now follow the member instructions:
An assessment before that date was run the old way on these tests, so at a client’s first retest a change on them can be the protocol rather than the person.
Ramp or Bruce protocol to volitional exhaustion on treadmill or cycle, with the modality fixed for the client's history. A true maximum is confirmed against objective criteria; where it can't be, it is recorded as a peak and flagged.
Keep walking. In the clinic the effort is the maximal test itself, so its peak is the peak. At the instant it ends the client keeps walking at a slow, easy pace and does not stop, sit, lean on the rail or put their hands on their knees. On the treadmill the belt drops to that pace; after a cycle test the client steps off and walks. The timer starts at the moment the effort ends, and the second reading is taken at exactly 60 seconds, still walking. This is the recovery the published thresholds belong to — the twelve-beat line comes from a walking recovery, and a standing or seated one is a different test with different figures. Posture and pace dominate this measure, so both are held identical at every retest and the belt speed is recorded; any deviation is recorded and the value flagged rather than quietly compared.
What counts
Your peak reading minus your reading one minute later. Slow means roughly half your normal walking pace — slow enough that going slower would feel awkward. The pace is what makes one test comparable with the next.
How to do it
What counts
The single best reading in kilograms, dominant hand.
Common mistakes
This wording is a draft that has not been reviewed yet; members see the same note.
In the clinic, a calibrated hydraulic dynamometer, and the same device at every retest — brands are not interchangeable.
What you need
A body composition measurement. DEXA and BodPod are the reference methods; multi-frequency scales are usable; single-frequency scales and calipers are not.
How to do it
Common mistakes
This wording is a draft that has not been reviewed yet; members see the same note.
Whole-body fat-free mass in kilograms divided by height in metres squared, on the same device each time. This engine scores FFMI rather than appendicular lean mass: it is available from every reference-grade body-composition method rather than DEXA alone, it is more robust to limb-segmentation differences between scanners, and it is what the devices in the field actually report. A member’s own Index scores FFMI too, from the same methods.
The acquisition method decides how the value is used, because a number is only as good as the instrument that produced it:
How to do it
What counts
For the jump, height in centimetres. For the chair, the time in seconds from the first stand to sitting on the fifth. Both are scored against their own thresholds.
Common mistakes
This wording is a draft that has not been reviewed yet; members see the same note.
One of the two, fixed for the client's history: the jump for the private cohort, the five-repetition sit-to-stand for corporate and older clients. Power is a more sensitive early-warning signal than maximal strength. The single-leg sit-to-stand that v1.1 added has been withdrawn: no published age or sex norms exist for it, and its thresholds had been constructed rather than sourced. An assessment recorded on it keeps its stored value.
What you need
A bar you can hang from with your feet clear of the floor.
How to do it
Hang with straight arms, feet off the floor, and hold as long as you can.
What counts
Time from feet leaving the floor to hands leaving the bar.
In the clinic, a fixed-diameter bar, the same one at every retest. Scored here as work — hang time multiplied by bodyweight — so that heavier clients are not penalised for carrying more tissue. A member’s own Index records the time and does not score it.
What you need
Clear floor space. Bare feet or grippy socks.
How to do it
What counts
You start with 5 points for going down and 5 for coming up. Take off one point each time you use a hand, forearm, knee, or the side of your leg. Take off half a point if you wobble noticeably.
Common mistakes
The deduction rules are posted, and one assessor owns a client's scoring across their history.
What you need
Nothing. Stand next to a counter or wall you can grab.
How to do it
What stops the clock
The clock stops the moment your raised foot touches anything, you take hold of the support, or you reach 30 seconds. One attempt, not the best of three.
Common mistakes
The published mortality evidence uses a 10-second pass/fail; this engine scores the time on a scale that runs to 60 seconds. With the clock stopping at 30, the top of that scale is out of reach: a full 30 seconds scores 70 at age 55, 60 at 30 and under, and 82 at 80.
What you need
Nothing, but somewhere to hold on to if you need it at first.
How to do it
What stops the clock
Heels flat throughout. The clock stops when a heel lifts, you reach for support, or you stand up.
Common mistakes
This wording is a draft that has not been reviewed yet; members see the same note.
Continuous and directly trainable — it represents the very capacity the domain claims to measure.
Every raw measurement — a VO₂ figure, a grip in kilograms, a balance time — converts to a 0–100 metric score through the same anchor system, so that a score means the same thing on every test. A 55 is a 55 whether it came from a treadmill or a squat hold.
Scores between anchors are interpolated smoothly; for tests where lower is better, such as the timed sit-to-stand, the scale simply runs the other way. Thresholds are set at a reference age and adjusted continuously for the individual, so nobody gains or loses points overnight on a birthday.
The top band is named Extending in v1.1. The previous name, Compounding, borrowed a financial metaphor that implied returns accrue on their own. They do not: capacity at this level is held and pushed further only by continued work, and the name now says so.
If any single domain scores below 40, the overall Index is capped at 54 — the top of Slipping — no matter how strong the arithmetic elsewhere. A superb VO₂ max cannot buy back sarcopenic muscle. This is the methodological expression of the central claim: these are independent pathways, and they do not trade against one another. We never apply the cap silently — the report states the uncapped score, the cap, and the domain responsible.
Capacity Age is the chronological age at which your current results would be typical — the age at which they'd sit right at the median. It's the translation device: one number for precision (the Index), one for meaning (the age). It is a functional statement and nothing more — not a biological age, metabolic age or heart age. That discipline is deliberate, and it is what keeps the measure honest.
Thresholds are published at a reference age of 55 and scaled continuously from there, so the norms move with the person rather than stepping on a birthday. Lean tissue is scaled on a gentler curve than the performance tests: whole-body fat-free mass carries bone and organ tissue, which does not fall away at the rate limb muscle does, and a multiplicative curve borrowed from the strength tests would make the FFMI standard implausibly easy in the eighth decade.
Version 1.1 adds an 18–29 age group, and with it a correction to the model. Below 30 the norms plateau: an 18-year-old and a 30-year-old are scored against the same expectation. Extending the linear curve below 30 implies that capacity keeps rising through the early twenties at the same rate it falls after 55, which the population data does not support — peak capacity is reached in the late twenties and holds. Without the plateau a fit 22-year-old would be scored against a standard nobody has measured, and would be marked down for it.
Capacity Age is floored at 30 for the same reason. Below the plateau the norms are flat, so a Capacity Age of 24 would be an artefact of the arithmetic rather than a finding. Results at or beyond the plateau are reported as <30, and the Index continues to separate performance above that point.
Resting heart rate and heart-rate variability are recorded where a client has them, from a wearable or a morning reading. They are enhancement inputs: they never move the Index. Not one point, in either direction.
What they do is narrow the confidence interval reported around the Index. The composite carries a published interval of ±3 points. A single test session is a snapshot, and a snapshot of a person who slept badly, travelled, or arrived under-fuelled is a noisier estimate of their capacity than the same session backed by months of autonomic data. Continuous resting data tells us how representative the day was — so it buys precision, not score.
The narrowing is weighted by how much history a reading represents:
With both inputs supplied at 90 days the interval narrows to ±2.0 points, and no further — the remaining uncertainty belongs to the tests themselves, and no amount of wearable data removes it.
A narrower interval does not lower the threshold at which we report a change. The composite minimum detectable change stays at 4 Index points for every client, whatever their wearable history, until the test–retest study on the validation roadmap replaces the estimate with a measured figure. Tightening the reporting rule on the strength of data that never entered the score would be exactly the kind of quiet inflation this protocol exists to avoid.
The scale is anchored on established clinical and population science, then extended by Evolution's own assessment experience where the literature runs out:
The exact cut-points that convert a raw result into a score, the age-scaling that personalises them, and the precise weightings within each domain are Evolution's proprietary calibration. The method above is open — anyone can inspect and reproduce the logic, and that openness is what makes the Index citable. What is ours is the calibration those norms are tuned to, sharpened against the Evolution client dataset. You are not being asked to trust a black box; you are being shown the whole machine, minus the settings we earned.
Every metric has a stated minimum detectable change, and the composite Index carries an error of ±3 points — narrowing to no less than ±2.0 where enhancement inputs are supplied, as described above. A change of four points or more between assessments is real and reportable; anything smaller is stated as unchanged, with the reason given. Retest at twelve weeks, not sooner — the delta is the product, and a delta smaller than the error is not a delta.
The Index is publishable now as a provisional instrument. It becomes progressively more defensible — and more genuinely proprietary — through a deliberate validation roadmap:
A scoring system nobody can inspect gets ignored. One that can be inspected — and that states plainly where it is still provisional — gets trusted, and eventually cited. That is the whole idea.