Skip to main content

How TEA Scores Work

75 criteria, three axes, zero tricks. Every score auditable, every data source public.

← Back to TEA Grades
  • T Transparency
  • E Efficiency
  • A Affordability

The TEA score averages all three axes. No weighting, no tricks — a system that asks politicians to be transparent must be transparent itself.

The Three Axes

T

Transparency

Can people monitor, participate in, and hold government accountable?

E

Efficiency

Does government deliver results with as little waste as possible?

A

Affordability

Is the representative making it more likely that hard work equals buy house?

How Each Axis Is Scored

1
25 criteria per axis

10 structural criteria, 10 policy-area criteria, and 5 accountability criteria. The same structure for all three axes.

2
4 dimensions per criterion

Each criterion is scored on four questions: Does a position exist? Is there a concrete plan? Are there specifics? Has there been real impact?

3
Max 4 points per criterion

The four dimensions combine for a maximum of 4 points on each of the 25 criteria.

4
Drop the lowest score

We drop the single lowest-scoring criterion per axis. Everyone gets one blind spot. That leaves 24 scored criteria (max 96 raw points).

5
Rescale to 0–100

The raw score out of 96 is rescaled to a 0–100 axis score. The final TEA score is the average of T, E, and A.

The Four Dimensions

Every criterion is evaluated on four dimensions. Together, they capture the full picture: from basic awareness all the way to real-world results.

Dimension 1 0 or 1 point

Has Position

Have they said something about this issue? A public statement, a platform mention, a vote. Anything on the record.

Dimension 2 0 or 1 point

Names Mechanism

Do they have a concrete plan? Not just "I support affordable housing" but "I will co-sponsor the XYZ Act to fund 500,000 new units."

Dimension 3 0, 0.5, or 1 point

Provides Specifics

Are there real details? This is a 3-level scale: None (no specifics), Some (partial detail), or Full (numbers, timelines, funding sources).

Dimension 4 0 to 1 point (5 levels)

Impact

Have they actually done something? This is a 5-level ladder from "nothing" to "drove real change." The levels differ for incumbents and non-incumbents to reflect their different starting positions.

Why the impact ladder differs: Incumbents can cast votes, pass laws, and deliver constituent services. Non-incumbents demonstrate impact through prior experience, campaign behavior, and platform depth. Both are measured on the same 0–1 scale, but the evidence looks different.

Score Labels

Every candidate 70+ receives an automatic TEA Endorsement from the Democratic TEA Party PAC. Candidates 85+ earn a Committed TEA Endorsement, which means the PAC is putting extra operational effort (fundraising, volunteers, strategic support) behind their election.

85+

TEA Champion

Committed TEA Endorsement · PAC actively working to elect

70–84

TEA Endorsed

Automatic TEA Endorsement

55–69

Steeping

Promising, not yet endorsement eligible

40–54

Lukewarm

Below expectations

25–39

Weak Tea

Significant gaps

<25

Empty Cup

Little to no engagement

Two Pathways

Incumbents

Scored on their record in office: votes cast, bills sponsored, oversight actions, and constituent services. Real actions, real outcomes.

Non-Incumbents

Scored on their platform, prior experience, and campaign behavior. What have they committed to, and how seriously?

Both pathways use the same 0–100 scale and the same 75 criteria. No artificial adjustments between the two. New members (under 2 years in office) receive a blended score that draws on both their early record and their campaign commitments.

The 75 Criteria

Each axis has 25 criteria: 10 structural (how the candidate operates), 10 policy-area (specific issue domains), and 5 accountability (follow-through and consistency). Click each axis to see all 25.

T Transparency (25 criteria)

Structural (T1–T10)

  1. Access and Availability: Holds open town halls, office hours, and public forums accessible to all constituents
  2. Financial Disclosure Beyond Legal Minimums: Files disclosures early and publishes them proactively
  3. Stock Trading / Conflict of Interest Prevention: Divests from individual stocks or uses blind trusts to avoid conflicts
  4. Campaign Finance Transparency: Rejects dark money and discloses donor information beyond legal requirements
  5. Donor Visibility: Makes fundraising sources and bundler relationships publicly accessible
  6. Voting Rationale Communication: Explains major votes publicly through newsletters, press, or official channels
  7. Willingness to Face Independent Scrutiny: Engages with independent fact-checkers, debates, and editorial boards
  8. Alignment with Outside Organizations: Discloses organizational endorsements and any conditions attached
  9. Constituent Communication Frequency: Maintains regular, substantive communication with constituents
  10. Communicates Clearly: Uses plain language and avoids jargon when explaining positions and votes

Policy-Area (T11–T20)

  1. Healthcare Price Transparency: Supports policies that make healthcare costs visible before treatment
  2. Housing/Cost-of-Living Transparency: Pushes for clear data on housing costs, rents, and development pipelines
  3. Consumer Cost Transparency: Advocates for upfront pricing and elimination of hidden fees
  4. Government Spending Transparency: Supports open data on how public money is spent
  5. AI/Technology Use Transparency: Discloses and regulates government and corporate use of AI and automated systems
  6. Law Enforcement Accountability: Backs public reporting of police conduct, use of force, and disciplinary records
  7. Immigration System Transparency: Supports clear, accessible data on processing times, backlogs, and enforcement
  8. Education Transparency: Advocates for visible school funding, outcomes, and resource allocation data
  9. Electoral/Democratic Process Transparency: Supports audit trails, public ballot access, and election security reporting
  10. Government Accountability: Backs inspector general independence and public release of oversight findings

Accountability (T21–T25)

  1. Responsiveness to Press and Public Inquiries: Answers questions from journalists and constituents in a timely manner
  2. Pattern of Honesty vs. Misleading: Track record of accurate public statements versus documented falsehoods
  3. Whistleblower and Accountability Protection: Supports legal protections for those who expose government wrongdoing
  4. Open Government Records: Advocates for FOIA reform and reducing classification overreach
  5. Platform vs. Action Alignment: Does what they say match what they do?
E Efficiency (25 criteria)

Structural (E1–E10)

  1. Proposals with Built-in Evaluation: Includes sunset clauses, performance metrics, or mandatory reviews in legislation
  2. Evidence-Based Policymaking: Relies on data, research, and expert analysis when crafting policy
  3. Government Effectiveness Evaluation: Supports measuring whether government programs actually work
  4. Constituent Service Effectiveness: Runs an efficient office that resolves constituent issues promptly
  5. Technology Modernization: Pushes to update outdated government IT systems and digital services
  6. Operational Execution Capability: Demonstrates ability to manage staff, budgets, and projects effectively
  7. Cross-Stakeholder Collaboration: Works across party lines and with outside experts to solve problems
  8. Implementation Feasibility Awareness: Proposes policies that can realistically be implemented, not just messaged
  9. Demonstrated Effectiveness in Any Context: Track record of getting things done in government, business, or community roles
  10. Process Reform: Supports streamlining government procedures to reduce bureaucratic delay

Policy-Area (E11–E20)

  1. Healthcare System Efficiency: Reduces administrative overhead and improves healthcare delivery speed
  2. Housing Supply Efficiency: Removes barriers to building and speeds up permitting for new housing
  3. Energy System Efficiency: Supports policies that maximize energy output while minimizing waste and cost
  4. Immigration System Efficiency: Reduces backlogs and processing times across the immigration system
  5. Education System Efficiency: Directs education dollars toward classrooms and outcomes over administration
  6. Public Safety Efficiency: Funds interventions that measurably reduce crime rather than symbolic gestures
  7. Workforce/Jobs Efficiency: Connects training programs to actual employer needs and open positions
  8. Government Spending Efficiency: Eliminates duplicative programs and consolidates overlapping agencies
  9. Infrastructure Delivery Efficiency: Builds roads, bridges, and broadband on time and on budget
  10. Cost-Effective National Security: Prioritizes defense spending based on strategic value, not political favors

Accountability (E21–E25)

  1. Government Speed and Responsiveness: Pushes agencies to deliver services faster and with less red tape
  2. Fiscal Responsibility: Offsets new spending, avoids unfunded mandates, and respects budget constraints
  3. Acting on Audit and Oversight Findings: Follows up on GAO and Inspector General reports with concrete action
  4. Reform When Things Don't Work: Willing to fix or end programs that fail to deliver results
  5. Agency Oversight: Conducts meaningful oversight of executive agencies and holds them accountable
A Affordability (25 criteria)

Structural (A1–A10)

  1. Cost Awareness and Constituent Economic Engagement: Actively listens to how costs affect real families in their district
  2. Economic Data Literacy: Uses real economic data (not vibes) to inform affordability positions
  3. Affordability-Focused Constituent Service: Helps constituents navigate benefits, tax credits, and cost-saving programs
  4. Pro-Competitive Economic Stance: Supports competition and opposes monopoly pricing that hurts consumers
  5. Consumer Cost Impact Transparency: Discloses the projected cost impact of legislation on working families
  6. Cost-of-Living Responsiveness: Adjusts policy priorities as costs shift in their district
  7. Redirecting Resources Toward Affordability: Prioritizes affordability in budget and appropriations decisions
  8. Corporate Cost Accountability: Holds corporations accountable for price gouging and anticompetitive behavior
  9. Working Family Economic Framing: Centers working families (not donors or corporations) when discussing the economy
  10. Affordability Prioritization in Legislative Agenda: Makes cost-of-living a top legislative priority, not an afterthought

Policy-Area (A11–A20)

  1. Healthcare Affordability: Supports drug price negotiation, coverage expansion, and out-of-pocket caps
  2. Housing Affordability: Pushes for more supply, down payment assistance, and anti-speculation policies
  3. Education Affordability: Supports student debt relief, tuition reduction, and affordable childcare
  4. Tax Policies for Working Family Economic Security: Expands tax credits and reduces the burden on households under $150K
  5. Consumer Protection: Backs enforcement against junk fees, predatory lending, and deceptive pricing
  6. Wage and Income Growth: Supports minimum wage increases, overtime protections, and pay equity
  7. Food and Grocery Affordability: Addresses grocery costs through supply chain reform and anti-consolidation action
  8. Utility and Energy Affordability: Reduces energy bills through efficiency programs, rate protections, and clean energy investment
  9. Transportation Affordability: Lowers commuting costs through transit investment, fuel pricing reform, and EV access
  10. Broad Cost-of-Living Strategy: Has a comprehensive plan that connects housing, healthcare, childcare, and wages

Accountability (A21–A25)

  1. Affordability Voting/Action Consistency: Votes align with stated affordability commitments
  2. Protection of Existing Affordability Programs: Defends programs like SNAP, Medicaid, and housing vouchers from cuts
  3. Affordability Reach and Accessibility: Ensures benefits actually reach the people they are designed for
  4. Breadth of Benefit: Supports policies that help a broad population, not narrow interest groups
  5. Affordability Alignment with External Organizations: Positions align with consumer advocacy and affordability-focused nonprofits

Pledge Badges

TEA Pledges

Candidates can sign the TEA Transparency, Efficiency, or Affordability pledge for a small score bonus. Each pledge is a public commitment to specific, measurable standards. Signed pledges are displayed as badges on the candidate's profile.

Third-Party Pledges

Badges like PIP (Political Integrity Pledge) reflect commitments to outside organizations. These show up on candidate profiles as informational badges. They may carry a small score bonus when the pledge aligns with TEA criteria.

Our Commitment

We publish the full methodology because a system that asks politicians to be transparent must be transparent itself.

Every score can be audited. Every criterion is documented. Every data source is public.

If you see something that could be better, we want to hear about it. Reach out at info@democraticteaparty.com.

Support Us