Methodology
We publish our full process so voters can judge our work. Everything below is open to challenge and correction.
Scoring criteria
Candidates are assessed against a fixed set of published criteria covering housing, community safety, schools, health, transparency and record of service. Weightings are disclosed and unchanged during an election cycle.
Evidence standards
Every claim used in scoring must be linked to a named public source with a verified date. Anonymous claims are not used. Statements are quoted in context.
Recommendation process
A recommendation is issued only where evidence is sufficient. Each carries a confidence level (low / medium / high) and a written explanation. Where evidence is insufficient, we say so.
Right of reply
Candidates receive the evidence and provisional score in writing before publication, with at least 14 days to respond. Factual corrections are applied and logged.
Conflicts of interest
Team members declare any political affiliations, memberships or relationships that could be perceived as a conflict. Anyone with a material conflict recuses from that candidate's assessment.
Corrections policy
Errors are corrected promptly and transparently. Every correction is dated on the page and logged in a public changelog.