ESBAP Ethics Scorecard Methodology

Published methodology for the ESBAP Ethics Score. Version 1.0 | 2026
This document is public. Every organization can see exactly how they are measured.
Transparency principle: ESBAP publishes its complete scoring methodology. There are no hidden factors. Organizations know exactly what is measured, how it is weighted, and what drives their score. This is antecedent manipulation , a behavioral principle. When the target behavior is clearly defined in advance, behavior change is more likely.

1. Who Rates Organizations

Ethics Scores are computed from reviews submitted by three stakeholder groups:

Reviewer TypeWho They AreWhat They RateWeight in Score
Current EmployeesBCBAs, RBTs, admin staff currently working at the organizationAll 7 KEIs (they experience the organization daily)50%
Former EmployeesStaff who have left the organization (must provide approximate employment dates)All 7 KEIs (their departure perspective is valuable)30%
Parents / ClientsFamilies receiving or who have received servicesClient-facing KEIs: Client Outcome Focus, Billing Transparency, Management Accountability20%

Employees and parents rate on the same 1-10 scale but their perspectives are weighted differently because employees experience operational ethics (supervision, compensation, workload) that parents cannot directly observe.

2. The Seven Key Ethics Indicators (KEIs)

KEI 1: Supervision Quality and Ratios20%

Does the organization provide meaningful, protected supervision? Are ratios manageable?

Review prompt: "Rate the quality of clinical supervision at this organization. Consider: how many clients does each supervisor oversee? Is supervision time protected? Do supervisors review treatment data and provide meaningful feedback?"

Scale guidance: 9-10 = Supervision is excellent, ratios are low (under 10:1), time is always protected. 7-8 = Good supervision, manageable ratios. 5-6 = Supervision exists but is stretched. 3-4 = Supervision is inadequate, high ratios, frequently displaced. 1-2 = Minimal or no meaningful supervision.
KEI 2: Training and Professional Development15%

Does the organization invest in growing its staff beyond minimum requirements?

Review prompt: "Rate this organization's investment in your professional growth. Consider: quality of onboarding, access to continuing education, opportunities for advancement, mentorship availability."

Scale guidance: 9-10 = Exceptional training culture, generous CE support, clear career paths. 7-8 = Good investment in development. 5-6 = Meets minimums. 3-4 = Little investment. 1-2 = No training support beyond what is legally required.
KEI 3: Compensation and Benefits15%

Is staff compensation fair, transparent, and not structured to incentivize unethical behavior?

Review prompt: "Rate compensation fairness at this organization. Consider: competitive pay for your market, benefits availability, transparency of pay structure, whether bonuses incentivize quality or just hours."

Scale guidance: 9-10 = Above-market pay, full benefits, ethical incentive structure. 7-8 = Competitive and fair. 5-6 = Adequate but not generous. 3-4 = Below market or benefits-poor. 1-2 = Exploitative compensation practices.
KEI 4: Staff Satisfaction and Turnover15%

Is this a place where people want to stay and grow, or a revolving door?

Review prompt: "Rate your overall satisfaction working at this organization. Consider: work-life balance, manageable caseload, feeling valued, colleague relationships, likelihood of staying long-term."

Scale guidance: 9-10 = I love working here and plan to stay for years. 7-8 = Good workplace, minor concerns. 5-6 = Acceptable but I am looking. 3-4 = Significant dissatisfaction, actively seeking to leave. 1-2 = Toxic, burnout, would not recommend.
KEI 5: Client Outcome Focus15%

Does the organization prioritize client progress over revenue?

Review prompt (employees): "Rate how well this organization prioritizes client outcomes. Consider: are treatment decisions driven by clinical need or billing targets? Is progress data regularly reviewed? Are clients discharged when appropriate?"

Review prompt (parents): "Rate how well this organization focuses on your child's progress. Consider: are goals individualized? Is progress communicated clearly? Do you feel your child's needs come first?"

Scale guidance: 9-10 = Client outcomes are clearly the top priority in every decision. 7-8 = Strong clinical focus with occasional business pressure. 5-6 = Mixed priorities. 3-4 = Revenue clearly takes precedence. 1-2 = Client outcomes are not a real consideration.
KEI 6: Billing Transparency10%

Are billing practices honest and transparent?

Review prompt (employees): "Rate billing integrity at this organization. Consider: are you ever pressured to bill for services not fully rendered? Is billing training provided? Are billing practices transparent to staff?"

Review prompt (parents): "Rate billing transparency. Consider: are charges clearly explained? Do you understand what you are billed for? Have you experienced unexpected charges?"

Scale guidance: 9-10 = Completely transparent, no pressure, strong compliance. 7-8 = Generally good practices. 5-6 = Some concerns. 3-4 = Pressure to overbill or unclear practices. 1-2 = Serious billing ethics concerns.
KEI 7: Management Accountability10%

Is leadership accessible, responsive, and accountable to staff and clients?

Review prompt (employees): "Rate management accountability. Consider: is leadership accessible? Do they respond to concerns? Is there a safe way to report problems? Have you seen retaliation for reporting issues?"

Review prompt (parents): "Rate how responsive management is to your concerns. Consider: can you reach decision-makers? Are complaints addressed? Do you feel heard?"

Scale guidance: 9-10 = Exceptional leadership, always accessible, zero retaliation. 7-8 = Good responsiveness. 5-6 = Adequate but not proactive. 3-4 = Difficult to reach, concerns ignored. 1-2 = Leadership is absent or retaliatory.

3. How the Score is Calculated

Ethics Score = ( (KEI_1_avg * 0.20) + // Supervision: 20% (KEI_2_avg * 0.15) + // Training: 15% (KEI_3_avg * 0.15) + // Compensation: 15% (KEI_4_avg * 0.15) + // Staff Satisfaction: 15% (KEI_5_avg * 0.15) + // Client Outcomes: 15% (KEI_6_avg * 0.10) + // Billing: 10% (KEI_7_avg * 0.10) // Management: 10% ) * 10 Where each KEI_avg is the weighted average of all approved reviews: - Current employee reviews: weight = 1.0 - Former employee reviews: weight = 0.6 - Parent/client reviews: weight = 0.4 (only applicable KEIs) Recency weighting (exponential decay): - Review from last 6 months: 100% weight - Review from 6-12 months: 75% weight - Review from 12-18 months: 50% weight - Review older than 18 months: 25% weight Minimum sample: Score is NOT displayed publicly until 3+ approved reviews Ethics Leader eligibility: Requires 5+ reviews AND score >= 85
Example calculation: An organization has 5 reviews (3 current employees, 1 former employee, 1 parent). Current employee averages: supervision 8.5, training 7.0, compensation 6.5, satisfaction 8.0, outcomes 9.0, billing 8.0, management 7.5. Former employee: supervision 7.0, training 6.0, compensation 5.5, satisfaction 5.0, outcomes 8.0, billing 7.0, management 6.0. Parent: outcomes 9.0, billing 8.5, management 8.0.

Weighted KEI averages (current 1.0, former 0.6, parent 0.4): Supervision = (8.5*3 + 7.0*0.6) / (3+0.6) = 7.75. [Same for each KEI.]
Final score: Sum of (KEI_avg * weight) * 10 = approximately 76/100 = "Ethics Committed" badge.

4. Badge Thresholds

Score RangeBadgeRequirementsDisplay
85-100Ethics LeaderScore 85+ from 5+ approved reviews. Active attestation. Verified badge.Green star. Featured in ESBAP communications. Priority search.
70-84Ethics CommittedScore 70+ from 3+ reviews. Signed attestation.Blue shield. Strong positive signal.
50-69DevelopingScore 50-69 from 3+ reviews.Yellow. Visible but indicates room for growth.
Below 50No Public ScoreScore below 50 or fewer than 3 reviews.No badge displayed. Profile shows "Not yet rated" or "Insufficient data." ESBAP never publicly shames.
Design principle: ESBAP never assigns a low public score. If an organization has poor data, ESBAP simply does not display a positive badge. The absence of a badge is the signal. This avoids defamation liability while still making ethics visible. Organizations below 50 see their score privately in their dashboard with specific improvement recommendations.

5. Anti-Gaming Protections

ProtectionHow It Works
Rate limiting1 review per email address per organization per 12 months
IP limitingMaximum 5 review submissions per IP address per day
Outlier detectionReviews that deviate more than 2 standard deviations from the org average are automatically flagged for human review before inclusion in score
Minimum review lengthFree-text fields must contain at least 50 characters. Single-word reviews are rejected.
Role verificationReviewer must declare role (current employee, former employee, parent). This is displayed with the review but the reviewer's identity is not disclosed to the organization.
Pattern detectionMultiple reviews from the same IP range, same browser fingerprint, or submitted within a short time window trigger manual review
Organization responseVerified organizations can post a public response to any review, providing their perspective
Moderation queueAll reviews are held in a moderation queue before publication. Checked for: spam, clearly defamatory content, review policy violations, personal identifying information
Zero tolerance for manipulation: If an organization is found to have submitted fake positive reviews, suppressed employee reviews, or otherwise manipulated their ESBAP profile, ALL badges are permanently revoked and a public notation is placed on their profile. This is the most severe consequence in the ESBAP system and it is irreversible.

6. The Consequences Engine

The scoring system creates natural consequences through the ESBAP platform. These are not punishments , they are the behavioral contingencies that make organizational ethics visible and consequential.

Positive Consequences (reinforcement for ethical behavior)

TriggerConsequenceMechanism
Score reaches 85+ with 5+ reviewsEthics Leader badge awardedAutomatic. Badge appears on profile, embeddable on website. Featured in ESBAP directory.
Score increases by 10+ points"Improving" label displayedAutomatic. Visible on profile for 90 days. Signals to BCBAs that this org is getting better.
Organization responds to all reviews within 30 days"Responsive" badgeAutomatic. Shows families and practitioners that leadership engages with feedback.
High employee reviews + low turnoverPriority placement in "Best Employers" searchesAutomatic filter in directory search.

Natural Consequences (reduced visibility for non-participation)

TriggerConsequenceMechanism
Organization does not claim profileListed but with no badge, no priority, no response capabilityDefault state. Not a punishment , just the absence of participation.
Score drops below 50Public score hiddenAutomatic. Profile shows "Not yet rated." Organization sees score in private dashboard with improvement recommendations.
No reviews after 12 months of verificationVerified badge review promptedSystem sends notification: "Your verified organization has no reviews. Encourage your staff and families to provide feedback."

Triggered Consequences (specific violations)

TriggerConsequenceTimelineReversible?
Score drops below 50 while holding Ethics Committed badgeBadge suspended. Organization notified with specific areas to improve.Immediate suspension. 90-day remediation period. Badge restored when score recovers above 60.Yes
OIG exclusion detectedALL badges removed. Public notation: "This organization appears on the HHS Office of Inspector General exclusion list."Immediate. Automatic via weekly OIG check.Only when OIG exclusion is lifted.
Ownership change not disclosed within 90 daysVerified badge suspended.Automatic via NPI authorized official change detection.Yes , when disclosure is made.
Review manipulation confirmedALL badges permanently revoked. Public notation.After investigation. Irreversible.No. Ever.
Attestation violation confirmed (e.g., retaliation against reporter)Ethics Committed badge revoked. Attestation marked "suspended" in public directory.After investigation. 12-month minimum suspension.Yes , after remediation and re-attestation.

7. The Feedback Loops

Employee Feedback Loop

  1. Trigger: Organization claims or verifies their ESBAP profile.
  2. Outreach: ESBAP sends an invitation to rate the organization. HOW: if we have employee contacts in sl_intelligence linked to this org, they receive an email: "Your employer [Org Name] is now on ESBAP. Rate your experience anonymously." If we don't have contacts, the org receives a shareable link to give to their team.
  3. Collection: Employee submits review via esbap.org/review. 7 KEI ratings + written feedback. Anonymous by name, identified by role.
  4. Moderation: Review held in queue. Checked for spam, defamation, policy violations. Published within 48 hours if clean.
  5. Aggregation: Score auto-recomputed nightly. Recency-weighted.
  6. Organization notification: "You received a new review. Your Ethics Score is now X." With link to dashboard.
  7. Organization response: Verified orgs can post a public response within 30 days.
  8. Periodic re-survey: Every 6 months, employees who previously reviewed are invited to update their rating. "Has anything changed at [Org Name]?"
  9. Trend tracking: Score trend displayed on profile (improving, stable, declining). Visible to everyone.

Parent/Client Feedback Loop

  1. Trigger: Parent finds an organization on ESBAP and clicks "Rate This Provider."
  2. Collection: Simplified form , 3 KEIs only (Client Outcome Focus, Billing Transparency, Management Accountability) + written feedback. Asks: "How long has your child received services here?"
  3. Moderation: Same queue as employee reviews. Additional check: does the parent's location match the org's service area?
  4. Publication: Published on org profile under "Parent Reviews" section (separate from employee reviews).
  5. Impact on score: Parent reviews contribute 20% weight to the composite score, but only on the 3 parent-rated KEIs.

Improvement Feedback Loop (for the organization)

  1. Quarterly report: Verified organizations receive a quarterly Ethics Transparency Report showing:
  2. Peer benchmarking: "Your supervision score is 6.2. Ethics Leaders in Texas average 8.7. Here's what they do differently." This is the antecedent manipulation , showing organizations what good looks like.
  3. Improvement recognition: When a score improves by 10+ points, the "Improving" label appears on the profile for 90 days. This rewards effort, not just current state.

8. The Dispute Resolution Process

Organizations have the right to dispute any aspect of their ESBAP profile. The process is designed to be fair, transparent, and timely.

What Can Be Disputed

Dispute Process

StepActionTimeline
1. SubmitOrganization files dispute at esbap.org/dispute with specific grounds and supporting evidence.Anytime
2. AcknowledgeESBAP confirms receipt and assigns a case number.2 business days
3. InvestigateESBAP reviews the dispute against review data, scoring logs, verification records, and any evidence provided. May contact the reviewer (without identifying them to the org) for additional context.10 business days
4. DecisionWritten decision with explanation. If upheld: correction applied. If denied: detailed reasoning provided.Included in the 10 days
5. AppealIf denied, organization may appeal once. Appeal reviewed by an independent panel (not the original investigator).20 business days
6. FinalAppeal decision is final. No further appeals on the same matter.,

During a dispute: The disputed review/score remains as-is until the dispute is resolved. ESBAP does not pre-emptively remove content during investigation. If the dispute is upheld, corrections are applied retroactively and the organization is notified.

ESBAP Ethics Scorecard Methodology , Version 1.0 | 2026
This methodology is public. Organizations, practitioners, and families can reference it to understand how scores are computed.

Ethical Standards Board for ABA Providers
30 E. Huron Street, Chicago, IL 60611 | esbap.org | 916-264-9651