Service Pattern Finder

Shows which citizen responses commonly appear together across each service area.

Governance and Response
Analysis Scope Complete active dataset

Association rules are generated from all eligible records in the active dataset. Region and LGU filters do not apply to these saved patterns.

What this page shows: recurring combinations in citizen survey responses for Governance and Response. A pattern is a clue that two experiences often occur together; it does not prove that one caused the other.
Key recurring pattern

Main finding: Awareness is linked with other service experiences

Citizens who used Governance and Response had an 81.5% likelihood of also knew about Governance and Response and reporting satisfaction with Governance and Response.

Evidence strength Near Baseline Pattern appears in 2,178 of 4,163 eligible respondents (52.3%). Total active respondents: 4,500.

What the Current Pattern May Mean

What the numbers mean This pattern is mainly about whether citizens know that the service exists. When the starting responses were present, 81.5% also showed the linked outcome. The complete pattern appeared in 52.3% of eligible survey records.
What to check Readers may look closer at which barangays, age groups, or communication channels are connected with awareness of Governance and Response.
Suggested next step If some groups remain less aware, the next practical step is to improve public information and validate the areas where awareness is still weak.
Important caution: Read this as a guide for review, not as a final judgment or proof of cause and effect. Confirm the pattern using LGU records, field context, and follow-up consultation.

How to Read This View

This view looks for response patterns that often happen together. For example, it can show whether citizens who are aware of a service also tend to use it, feel satisfied with it, or still ask for government action.
  • Seen in Records (Support)
    How many eligible responses show the same pattern.
  • Observed Together (Confidence)
    How often the linked responses appear together when the first response is present.
  • Link Strength (Lift)
    How much stronger the pattern is than ordinary chance. Above 1 means the link is meaningful.

Pattern Summary

Result Area Patterns Seen in Records (Support) Observed Together (Confidence) Link Strength (Lift)
Availment 5 65.1% 1.02
Satisfaction 4 93.6% 1.00
Awareness 2 80.2% 1.02
Patterns Found
11
Observed Together (Confidence)
78.2%
Link Strength (Lift)
1.02
Meaningful Positive Links
0
Response Pattern Explorer

Compare Rules by Link Strength

Interpret a Rule

Choose a rule to connect the chart label with its evidence and practical meaning.

Rule 1 · Awareness

Citizens who used Governance and Response had an 81.5% likelihood of also knew about Governance and Response and reporting satisfaction with Governance and Response.

Support2,178 of 4,163 eligible respondents (52.3%)
Confidence81.5%
Lift1.04
Near baseline: The pattern may be common, but it occurs at about the expected baseline rate. Use it for monitoring rather than as evidence of a strong relationship.

Unified Rule Evidence and Implications

Support shows how common the complete pattern is. Confidence shows how often the linked outcome appears when the starting responses are present. Lift shows whether the link is stronger than the normal baseline.
Rule Result Area Plain Reading Seen in Records (Support) Observed Together (Confidence) Link Strength (Lift) Lift Assessment Practical Interpretation
Rule 1 Awareness Citizens who used Governance and Response had an 81.5% likelihood of also knew about Governance and Response and reporting satisfaction with Governance and Response. 2,178 of 4,163 eligible respondents (52.3%) 81.5% 1.04 Near baseline The pattern may be common, but it occurs at about the expected baseline rate. Use it for monitoring rather than as evidence of a strong relationship.
Rule 2 Availment Citizens who knew about Governance and Response, and reported satisfaction with Governance and Response had a 66.6% likelihood of also using Governance and Response. 2,178 of 4,163 eligible respondents (52.3%) 66.6% 1.04 Near baseline The pattern may be common, but it occurs at about the expected baseline rate. Use it for monitoring rather than as evidence of a strong relationship.
Rule 3 Availment Citizens who knew about Governance and Response had a 62.9% likelihood of also using Governance and Response and reporting satisfaction with Governance and Response. 2,178 of 4,163 eligible respondents (52.3%) 62.9% 1.03 Near baseline The pattern may be common, but it occurs at about the expected baseline rate. Use it for monitoring rather than as evidence of a strong relationship.
Rule 4 Availment Citizens who knew about Governance and Response, and felt a need for further action, and reported satisfaction with Governance and Response had a 66.0% likelihood of also using Governance and Response. 915 of 4,163 eligible respondents (22.0%) 66.0% 1.03 Near baseline The pattern may be common, but it occurs at about the expected baseline rate. Use it for monitoring rather than as evidence of a strong relationship.
Rule 5 Satisfaction Citizens who knew about Governance and Response, and used Governance and Response had a 95.9% likelihood of also reporting satisfaction with Governance and Response. 2,178 of 4,163 eligible respondents (52.3%) 95.9% 1.03 Near baseline The pattern may be common, but it occurs at about the expected baseline rate. Use it for monitoring rather than as evidence of a strong relationship.
Rule 6 Availment Citizens who knew about Governance and Response had a 65.6% likelihood of also using Governance and Response. 2,272 of 4,163 eligible respondents (54.6%) 65.6% 1.02 Near baseline The pattern may be common, but it occurs at about the expected baseline rate. Use it for monitoring rather than as evidence of a strong relationship.
Rule 7 Satisfaction Citizens who used Governance and Response had a 94.7% likelihood of also reporting satisfaction with Governance and Response. 2,530 of 4,163 eligible respondents (60.8%) 94.7% 1.01 Near baseline The pattern may be common, but it occurs at about the expected baseline rate. Use it for monitoring rather than as evidence of a strong relationship.
Rule 8 Awareness Citizens who felt a need for further action, and used Governance and Response had a 78.9% likelihood of also knew about Governance and Response and reporting satisfaction with Governance and Response. 915 of 4,163 eligible respondents (22.0%) 78.9% 1.00 Near baseline The pattern may be common, but it occurs at about the expected baseline rate. Use it for monitoring rather than as evidence of a strong relationship.
Rule 9 Availment Citizens who knew about Governance and Response, and felt a need for further action had a 64.4% likelihood of also using Governance and Response. 985 of 4,163 eligible respondents (23.7%) 64.4% 1.00 Near baseline The pattern may be common, but it occurs at about the expected baseline rate. Use it for monitoring rather than as evidence of a strong relationship.
Rule 10 Satisfaction Citizens who knew about Governance and Response, and felt a need for further action, and used Governance and Response had a 92.9% likelihood of also reporting satisfaction with Governance and Response. 915 of 4,163 eligible respondents (22.0%) 92.9% 0.99 Near baseline The pattern may be common, but it occurs at about the expected baseline rate. Use it for monitoring rather than as evidence of a strong relationship.
Rule 11 Satisfaction Citizens who felt a need for further action, and used Governance and Response had a 91.0% likelihood of also reporting satisfaction with Governance and Response. 1,055 of 4,163 eligible respondents (25.3%) 91.0% 0.97 Near baseline The pattern may be common, but it occurs at about the expected baseline rate. Use it for monitoring rather than as evidence of a strong relationship.