How We Evaluate Providers
The Neurovetted scoring rubric assesses six critical dimensions of provider integrity, competence, and accessibility. Each category has specific evidence requirements and automatic deductions. Reviewers apply consistent standards across all applicants, ensuring fairness and transparency.
This category evaluates whether the provider operates with honesty, financial transparency, and clearly defined professional limits.
Public pricing pages, refund and cancellation policies, terms of service and disclaimers, scope of practice statements, client contracts or intake agreements, sales copy language across platforms.
| All prices clearly listed, no hidden fees | 0–5 pts |
| Refund, cancellation, and dispute policies clearly stated | 0–5 pts |
| No deceptive urgency, fear baiting, guilt selling | 0–5 pts |
| Clear boundaries of service scope | 0–5 pts |
This category verifies that the provider is actually qualified to deliver the services they sell.
Certificates, licenses, or degrees, Issuing institutions and accreditation status, Years of experience, Supervision or mentorship (where applicable), Continuing education records.
| Relevant formal education or certification verified | 0–8 pts |
| Issuing institutions are legitimate and recognized | 0–5 pts |
| Ongoing professional development within last 24 months | 0–4 pts |
| Supervision or peer oversight (if applicable) | 0–3 pts |
This category assesses whether the provider's marketing and delivery practices minimize psychological, emotional, and financial harm.
Website language, Sales funnels, Email marketing, Waitlists and application processes, Testimonials placement, Crisis disclaimers and safety language.
| No coercive persuasion tactics | 0–6 pts |
| Appropriate disclaimers for high-risk topics | 0–5 pts |
| No ND shaming, fear exploitation, or trauma baiting | 0–5 pts |
| Clear consent and autonomy emphasized | 0–4 pts |
This category evaluates how accessible the provider's services are to neurodivergent clients. ND accessibility is required even if the provider does not serve ND clients exclusively.
Website readability, Form complexity, Communication options, Support accommodations, Course layouts or service delivery formats.
| Plain language communication | 0–5 pts |
| Flexible communication methods offered | 0–5 pts |
| Sensory considerate design | 0–5 pts |
| Accommodations offered without penalty | 0–5 pts |
This category reflects external validation and community impact.
Written reviews, Video testimonials, Third-party platforms, References (if supplied), Professional standing in their field.
| Verified testimonials present | 0–5 pts |
| No unresolved public complaints | 0–3 pts |
| Positive professional reputation | 0–2 pts |
This category ensures legal and professional accountability.
Business registration, Professional liability insurance, Regulatory status by jurisdiction, Code of ethics adherence, Continuing education.
| Business properly registered | 0–3 pts |
| Insurance verified (if applicable) | 0–3 pts |
| Regulatory compliance | 0–2 pts |
| Code of ethics and ongoing education | 0–2 pts |
Final Scoring Results
| Score Range | Decision |
|---|---|
| 85–100 points | Approved for Directory. Provider is listed and can begin serving clients through Neurovetted. |
| Below 85 points | Rejected from Directory. Provider receives detailed feedback and a reapplication eligibility date. |
Reapplication & Appeals
All applicants receive a category-by-category score breakdown and a list of specific deficiencies.
Providers may reapply only after:
- Submitting documented corrective actions
- Waiting the minimum reapplication period (typically 30–90 days)
- Passing full re-review, not partial review
Reviewer Ethics & Bias Safeguards
All reviewers are trained to apply the rubric consistently and without bias. We use:
- Blinded review processes where possible
- Dual-reviewer verification for borderline cases
- Regular calibration meetings across reviewer teams
- Appeals process for disputed scores