SICA scoring methodology
How we create a SICA rating
A transparent, evidence-led assessment designed to help California homeowners compare solar companies more confidently.
Methodology last reviewed September 2026
01
Start here
A comparison aid—not a guarantee
The SICA rating summarizes the evidence available about a solar company at the time of review. It helps homeowners compare listings on a consistent 0–100 scale.
It is not a contractor licence decision, certification, endorsement, warranty, or prediction of a project outcome. A high score does not replace checking current licence status, insurance, contract terms, equipment, warranties, references, and project-specific proposals before hiring an installer.
02
The inputs
Five evidence dimensions
SICA reviews the evidence that is actually available for each company. These dimensions organize the assessment; they are not promises that every data point exists for every listing.
Licence and professional standing
Recorded CSLB identifiers, licence information available from public records, named professional credentials, and other qualifications that can be tied to a source.
Customer review signals
Public aggregate rating, review volume, recency, and source attribution. Review data is treated as a signal from a named third-party platform—not as a SICA endorsement.
Experience and business history
Documented longevity, company identity, operating history, service areas, and business details that help establish a consistent public record.
Service and accountability evidence
Available information about warranties, responsiveness, complaint handling, certifications, and customer support. Unsupported claims are not treated as verified facts.
Completeness and freshness
How complete, internally consistent, attributable, and recently refreshed the profile evidence is. Older data is interpreted more cautiously.
03
The process
From source to published score
-
1
Collect
We gather available company details, regulator records, official business information, and attributed third-party review signals.
-
2
Match and verify
We connect evidence to the correct legal or trading entity, prefer primary sources, and flag conflicts instead of silently combining uncertain records.
-
3
Normalize
Signals with different scales and levels of coverage are translated into a common assessment framework. Review volume is considered alongside rating so a small sample is not treated like a large one.
-
4
Review
An editorial check considers source quality, conflicts, missing information, and freshness. SICA does not present an unverified claim as fact merely because a business supplied it.
-
5
Publish and refresh
The resulting 0–100 score is stored with the profile and displayed with the latest recorded refresh date. Material new evidence can trigger a reassessment.
Evidence coverage varies across companies and sources update on different schedules. The SICA rating is a structured editorial assessment, not a simple average of star ratings and not an automated verdict. We disclose the evidence categories and limitations rather than implying that every listing has identical inputs.
04
Interpretation
How to read the 0–100 scale
Higher scores indicate a stronger overall evidence profile at the time of review. The bands make the number easier to scan, but the underlying profile evidence matters more than a one-point difference.
A low or unavailable score is not proof of poor workmanship. It may reflect limited, conflicting, or stale evidence. Check the profile’s evidence panel to see what was and was not available.
05
Data quality
How we handle gaps, conflicts, and change
Missing is not failing
If a licence number, credential, complaint record, insurance document, or other field is unavailable, we label it as not provided, not listed, pending, or unavailable. We do not convert an absence into a verified negative claim.
Sources have a hierarchy
Government and regulator records come first, followed by official first-party records, named third-party platforms, and editorially reviewed secondary sources for context.
Freshness matters
A source can change after we record it. Profiles show the latest refresh date available to SICA, and homeowners should recheck time-sensitive facts before signing a contract.
Material changes can change a score
New public records, corrected identity information, substantially changed review evidence, or newly verified documentation may result in a reassessment.
06
Accountability
Scores are editorial, not for sale
Claiming a profile, supplying information, buying an optional commercial service, or becoming a lead partner does not guarantee a score or a higher score. Commercial relationships must remain separate from SICA’s editorial assessment.
Businesses and readers may challenge a factual mismatch. Useful correction requests identify the profile, the disputed field, the proposed correction, and a primary source or business document that supports the change.
See the corrections process07
Common questions
Questions about the rating
Is the SICA rating the same as a Google star rating?
No. A third-party star rating may be one customer-review signal, but the SICA rating is a separate 0–100 assessment that also considers evidence quality, professional standing, business history, service information, completeness, and freshness.
Does SICA certify or recommend an installer?
No. A score is a comparison aid. It is not a certification, endorsement, warranty, or substitute for your own due diligence.
Why might two similar companies have different scores?
Their available evidence may differ in source quality, review volume, recency, completeness, professional records, or internal consistency. The evidence panel on each profile helps explain that context.
Can a company ask for its score to be changed?
A company can submit verifiable corrections or new evidence. SICA reviews the evidence and may update the profile or score when the underlying facts support a change. A company cannot purchase a score change.