Surdatics is the research platform where teams run their own studies and real, verified people get paid to answer them.
The platform today, read from its own records.
Real studies from research teams, answered by real people. You are paid in SURDA once your answer is approved.
Describe the research goal and Surda AI drafts the instrument, checked for leading and confusing wording. Edit it, set who you need, launch.
Online, on video, or offline through ODK Collect. The Proof of Personhood facial liveness check confirms every paid respondent is one real, unique person.
Responses are charted and summarised as they arrive, anomalies flagged, and the dataset sealed with a fingerprint anyone can check. List it if you want to.
A study’s report comes as a Proof Report: the answer in one sentence, three findings and what to do about them, then the evidence underneath, for anyone who has to act on it or check it.
Type the research goal in plain words. You get a draft instrument checked for bias, translated for every market, and aimed at exactly the people you need to hear from.
Data collected on Surdatics comes from real people who agreed to take part, and is sealed when its study closes. Check a dataset before you buy it, or list your own and earn every time it sells.
A few short questions, answered from a QR code or a link on the person’s own phone. Thank them with a gift they redeem with you if you like, and hear straight away when someone is unhappy.
Paste the SHA-256 fingerprint from any Surdatics dataset. We look it up on the ledger and tell you when it was sealed, how many responses it holds, and whether it has changed since. No account needed.
A panel to find people, a field agency to reach the ones who are offline, a payments provider to pay them and an analytics team to make sense of it. None of them can vouch for the others, so the study ends in a dataset nobody can verify and nobody reuses.
You don't need a panel vendor, a field agency, a payments provider and an analytics team. You get all of them in one service. Pay per study, scale when you need to, and every dataset comes with proof of where it came from.
Web links, video, offline ODK or your own site. However people answer, each response is checked and fingerprinted the moment it lands, and arrives in one dataset.
Surdatics speaks OpenRosa, the open standard behind ODK Collect and KoboCollect, so either app connects on any Android device. Submissions save on the device and sync when the signal returns.
Twelve sectors, and the gap each one feels most. Where a sector has a page of its own, the card takes you to it.
Health studies, patient experience, treatment adherence
Gap · Patients want a say in who uses their answers, and for what
See how it works →Citizen satisfaction, service audits, policy evidence
Gap · Procurement needs evidence it can check, which most vendors cannot produce
See how it works →Engagement pulses, 360 reviews, exit surveys
Gap · Staff are only candid when anonymity is provable
Concept tests, pricing, brand tracking
Gap · Panels are thinnest in the fastest-growing markets
Inclusion, product fit, credit behaviour
Gap · Standard payout rails exclude the unbanked
Baselines, monitoring and evaluation
Gap · Funders want methods they can verify, not just claims
See how it works →Fieldwork, longitudinal studies, course feedback
Gap · Grant budgets rarely stretch to a field agency
See how it works →Preference data, annotation, model evaluation
Gap · Scraped data now carries real legal risk
See how it works →Public opinion, election studies
Gap · Speed and defensibility usually trade off
Yield, input use, market access
Gap · Farmers are remote and rarely online
Access, adoption, resilience
Gap · Impact claims need evidence that survives scrutiny
Client studies at scale
Gap · Margins vanish when four vendors each take a cut
Real people who used Surdatics, quoted in their own words and with their permission.
The new AI feature is very nice — I just gave the description and it generated all the questions, very similar to what I had already created. I commend you and your team for the good work.
Your subscription pays for the platform. Contributor rewards come from a separate budget you set and control, and it goes to the people who answer.
Plans are loading. If they do not appear, see the pricing page.
Commentary on the research industry, and short briefs from studies we ran ourselves.
A new development-effectiveness report points to a persistent gap between commitments to country ownership and the information used to manage aid. Research teams should treat that gap as a question about who can inspect, challenge and use the evidence.
56.8% of respondents who answered the storage-access question said they lacked access to proper storage or cold rooms. Respondents also frequently selected bad roads as a transport challenge and better storage as a way to reduce waste.
Afrobarometer’s survey puts everyday service and livelihood concerns beside the agendas of development-cooperation experts. The useful lesson is not to discard long-term reform, but to test whether it answers the problems citizens actually name.
Run your own study today, or get paid to answer one.
