Monopoly, Change, and the Q Grader Dilemma

The specialty coffee world is facing a turning point. With the SCA's unexpected integration of the Q Grader program and the rise of the Coffee Value Assessment system, educators, trainers, and cuppers worldwide are left navigating uncertainty, frustration, and opportunity. As an active Q Grader and AST, I share my perspective from inside the shift.

Let me begin by saying that I’ve been a Q Arabica Grader since 2021. In 2024 — over a year ago — I underwent recalibration and received a Coffee Quality Institute license, now valid through 2027. At that point, I intended to renew it and perhaps begin working toward becoming a Q Instructor.

I’ve also been an Authorized SCA Trainer (AST) since 2019. My current license expires this June, which is approaching quickly. I’ve been weighing whether to renew it, and I’ll share some of that hesitation in this piece.

I’ve been familiar with the Coffee Value Assessment (CVA) since its inception. I had the opportunity to brew coffee as a volunteer during the first public presentation of this quality assessment system by Mario Roberto Fernández Alduenda in 2022 at the Sensory Summit in Zurich. I haven’t yet completed the CVA for Cuppers Course, although I had planned to when the opportunity arose.

When the SCA announced its “historic partnership,” I felt... confused. Judging by the community’s reactions — both public and private — I know I’m not alone.

From Q Grader to Evolved Confusion

Let’s quote in full one of the comments posted on Instagram under the SCA's announcement of its “merger” with the Q Grader program. Marty Pollack wrote:

„As a Q instructor and a former SCAA trainer and former AST. This is one of the most misguided things that I have seen in my 15 years working in coffee education. It shows a complete lack of respect for the 10,000 Q Graders around the world. If CVA is a good tool or not is yet to be proven and to force monopoly of thought on us is going to be damaging to the industry especially at the producer level. I have been living at origin for the last 11 years this is a nightmare for small growers. In midst of historic price volatility, EU regulations that harm small growers, tariffs that one thing you guys choose to spend your time and money on is finding a way to fleece the Q Grader community and force CVA on us. It’s shameful.”

Another commentator, Sweet Science Coffee, put it more bluntly:

„Brilliant. Here‘s the trickster mind at work: we are, quote: entering a historic partnership … okay, CQI is not involved in the operations any longer …. okay, and we will be hosting this on our platform … oh and all Q Training Center licenses will be automatically transferred to us … but hey, you can now become a (wait for it) „Evolved Q Grader“. This is a non-profit that charges a premium for education and now holds a global monopoly on what good taste is.”

CVA or Bust? The Shaky New Foundation

Negative comments dominate — pointing to the arbitrariness of the decisions, the monopolization, and the “clever” coercion to adopt the Coffee Value Assessment, which doesn’t yet appear to be widely used by coffee roasters or green coffee producers. Some speak of the “end of the Coffee Quality Institute,” or the “takeover of the CQI by the SCA,” while others highlight the CEO earnings of the most influential NGO in the coffee sector.

Let’s pause here, in the heat of criticism.

CVA has become an integral part of SCA education, and SCA programs are now built around its use — from the Introduction to Coffee to professional-level modules. The scale of the changes currently taking place in SCA education is, in many ways, impressive. We’re seeing not just new courses, exams, and certifications, but also an expansion into areas that were previously underdeveloped in the organization’s educational efforts.

All you need to know is the principles of sensory analysis to evaluate coffee, even without a form.

For example, the Coffee Sustainability Program has been split into four focused modules, rather than being a three-tier catch-all for everything that didn’t quite fit into the Coffee Skills Program — and that’s a step in the right direction. There are also new workshops on topics like management and “leadership,” and the Coffee Technician Program is clearly gaining traction.

Trainers, Titles, and the Trouble with Fast Tracks

As an AST, I find it genuinely difficult to keep up with all of it. We now have the Introduction to Cupping Workshop, where anyone who pays a symbolic $25 and registers as an SCA Instructor (does this mean an Authorized SCA Trainer only for CVA-based cupping?) can lead the training. And let’s not forget the rebranding of the Q Arabica and Robusta Program — now called the “Evolved Q Grader Program.”

The SCA’s educator pool will now include current CQI Instructors, who will go through onboarding, alongside an influx of new trainers.

In my case, as an AST teaching Sensory Skills courses where CVA is already required, completing the CVA for Cuppers course seems sufficient. But here’s the twist: if someone completes CVA for Cuppers Trainers, they automatically become a Q Instructor — even if they’ve never been a CQI Q Grader (sic!). “Congratulations!” Meanwhile, those of us who’ve been conducting Q calibrations for years — to ensure you’re actually qualified — are now required to take the CVA for Cuppers Course.

Okay, let’s ask the question: is this just a bizarre way to sell a new course on CVA? Not because it's truly necessary or the knowledge will be especially useful in practice, but simply because you have to take it — and by December 31, 2025, no less. Why? Because it’s “Fast Track,” and of course, everyone loves an Early Bird offer, right?

Until October, CQI will technically continue to oversee the Q Grader program. But honestly, we were rarely engaged in any formal capacity anyway. That said, I suspect that — though unannounced — the Specialty Coffee Association will soon find a way to integrate Q Graders into its new framework.

Let’s take a look. You’ve completed the Sensory Skills Professional course, for example, and you know how to evaluate coffee. (If you’ve done it recently, you’re also compliant with the new CVA.) You’re a Q Grader at the SCA — surely not just to be able to evaluate coffee?

Question for the board: what exactly will be the difference between a Pro and a Q?

At CQI, we could — at least theoretically — participate in the legendary blind tasting of coffees for the Q Arabica or Q Robusta database, judged by three Q Graders, with formal quality implications. Is something similar planned now?

If you’re a Sensory Pro, you’ve already got the skills — so, use them. But if you’re a Q? Then there’s a formal task for you: determine whether a coffee qualifies as specialty (Q) or not, using CVA.

Who Decides What Coffee Is Worth?

This feels like a shift toward a centralized entity — the SCA — having the power to both define and enforce what qualifies as "specialty" coffee. While there are certainly potential benefits to this direction, I also see serious risks for the industry.

As I mentioned in the article “The Paradigm is Collapsing,” one of the defining characteristics of “specialty coffee” is that anyone can use the term freely — and the average consumer has no reliable way to assess whether that claim is accurate. There has never been an authority to certify or restrict the use of the term “specialty.”

That’s why, at The Better Coffee, as outlined in The Better Coffee White Paper, I introduced a different rule: if our coffee meets the required quality, we can call it better — but only if it meets specific, externally audited criteria.

In the coffee industry, there are similar but different systems based on the analysis of coffee beverage.

On one hand, if the SCA is now moving in the direction of monopolizing the term “specialty,” we could applaud it. Bravo! No more misuse. We have our own Q Graders. If they decide a coffee qualifies as “specialty,” you can use the term. If not — and you use it anyway — our lawyers may come calling. (And who knows? Maybe U.S. law does allow NGOs to trademark “specialty coffee” or something similar.)

A brilliant transformation happening right before our eyes? 

A bigger question still — but I don’t expect an answer.

The problem, however, is that the CVA offers little value beyond the sensory perspective. It tells us relatively little about overall value and mainly indicates whether we like a particular coffee — which is nice, of course, but limited in scope. I’ll definitely take a closer look at this system on the Red Ink Coffee blog another time.

As an alternative, I propose a system I developed as part of The Better Coffee framework: the „multi-stage ranking method”. This approach evaluates not only sensory quality through descriptive and affective analysis, but also integrates analytical measurement results and — most importantly — a sociological assessment that includes economic factors. It also ensures transparency in coffee production through distributed information across the system, rather than control by a single organization.

If you're interested, I encourage you to read the The Better Coffee White Paper and join us in developing the final guidebook for this method, which I plan to release this summer. Given the recent changes to the Q Grader system, I feel the need to accelerate work on this solution, one that will be developed with a significantly smaller budget than some larger non-governmental organizations and companies can manage.

Human dignity, freedom, equality, mutual aid (or human brotherhood), and economic self-defense are the core principles of The Better Coffee. I believe the STYLE of changes to the Q Grader program demonstrate a lack of social sensitivity on the part of both the Coffee Quality Institute and the Specialty Coffee Association. Without proper consultation or consent, many Q Graders (and Instructors) have been abruptly informed of how things will be and told that we must comply. We are being asked to pay for a “non-mandatory” course unless we've already taken it by chance — even though, as ASTs, many of us are already using CVA. Many in our community feel that their competence is being undermined, others feel coerced, and still, others are voicing their disagreement.

However, I remain hopeful that this move by the leading organizations, despite its unfortunate announcement and implementation, will ultimately have a positive impact on our community. I truly wish that, especially for us educators, the confusion surrounding the myriad of courses, certificates, badges, and trainer types within SCA education will eventually settle and evolve into something more meaningful.

Hope Beyond the Glossy Diplomas

In the meantime, I invite you to explore The Better Coffee Curriculum. It consists of ten ungraded courses — no flashy titles, no glossy diplomas — just honest education about coffee as it really is. Each course is grounded in a Standard that moves beyond vague missions, pointwashing and greenwashing, focusing instead on human dignity and real economic conditions. Course pricing is adapted to students’ financial means — and thanks to the Pay-It-Forward system, you might even join for free.

As for continuing my path as an educator and Q Grader within the SCA, I still have time to think about it. I appreciate what is good, acknowledge the potential, and express my criticism and concerns. As I wrote in “The Paradigm is Collapsing,” the role of those who seek a new paradigm is to engage with the current one. Not out of obligation to any single organization, but to all of us who work with coffee of all qualities.

***

Call to Action

Thanks for reading. If this post resonated with you, share it — and help us reach others who care.

Want to dive deeper into coffee, power, flavor, or systems?

Follow the Red Ink Coffee blog, join The Better Coffee course, explore our e-learning, implement the Standard, or become part of The Places.

Red Ink Coffee — Read. Think. Act.