- From October 2025, the SCA’s CVA framework will replace CQI’s Q Grader programme after 20 years
- 10,000 Q Graders now have to deal with confusion over certification costs, access, and control
- Is this consolidation simply natural progress for the sector, or will a monopoly stifle innovation in coffee quality & education?
SPECIALTY Coffee Expo was one for the books this year. In a significant shift within the specialty coffee industry, the Specialty Coffee Association (SCA) announced at the event that, effective October 1, 2025, it will assume full operational control of the Q Grader programme – to be known as “Evolved Q Grader Program” – integrating it with its Coffee Value Assessment (CVA) framework.
This transition marks the end of the Coffee Quality Institute’s (CQI) two-decade stewardship of the programme, which has certified around 10,000 Q Graders globally.
The CVA, introduced by the SCA in 2023, states that it offers a holistic approach to coffee evaluation, encompassing physical, descriptive, affective, and extrinsic assessments. Proponents argue that this method provides a more comprehensive understanding of coffee quality, moving beyond traditional cupping scores under the Q Grading system that have been criticised by some.
However, the CVA form raises important questions of its own. It remains unclear for now how evaluation outcomes will be linked to pricing — a critical issue in the commercial realities of the coffee trade. Equally uncertain is how quality disputes will be resolved under this new framework, especially when compared to the arguably more objective, yet familiar, scoring system of its “unevolved” predecessor.
The industry’s response has been mixed. Many Q Graders and instructors express confusion and concern. Questions abound regarding the validity of existing certifications, the future role of CQI’s trainers, and the implications for CQI’s systems and operations, as much of their income derived from their Q Grader certification courses.
“This integration felt sudden, and seriously impacts current Q Graders – especially those still needing retakes or calibration,” says Winnie Yeh, Head of Green Exporting Department at Torch Coffee in Yunnan, China, and Q Grader. “As a Q academy, we’ve always told students they have 18 months to complete this process. But now, with the programme ending on October 1st, many are left unsure of what to do.”
“Q and CVA are very different. The Q course is six days of intense sensory training focused on quality using the SCA cupping form. The CVA has broader applications. But now, every ‘old Q’ must take the CVA course to get the ‘Evolved Q’ licence – essentially paying again. We’ve also seen ASTs sell certificates online with little oversight. This lack of regulation is worrying, especially as we shift into this new system.”
Some critics perceive the move as an aggressive consolidation in an already concentrated sector, where education costs are notably high. Some also perceive it as a breach of trust.
“While evolving quality standards can be positive, this shift risks devaluing existing Q credentials without offering a clear transition path, or one that comes with significant time pressure and disruption,” says Philipp Schallberger, Managing Partner of Kaffeemacher in Switzerland.
“Many Q Graders have invested deeply in the system: financially, professionally, and emotionally. For such a major change, a more transparent and inclusive approach would have been essential to maintain trust and continuity.”
Conversely, others in the coffee sector remain hopeful that this decision can lead to constructive change, provided it is accompanied by inclusive consultation.
“As a Q Grader and coffee producer, I deeply value the intention behind the CVA: To broaden our understanding of what makes coffee valuable beyond the cup,” says Ana Maria Donneys Correal, CEO of Café Primitivo and ED and Co-founder of IWCA Colombia.”
“I welcome this direction because numbers don’t taste like anything. What truly gives coffee its meaning and value is the story behind it, the origin, the technical decisions, the social and environmental impact. Integrating those dimensions into how we assess coffee is a necessary step forward.
That said, this transition presents a financial challenge for many of us. Those who recently calibrated under the CQI system are now being asked to take on an additional cost that wasn’t planned for. While this may seem like a small fee to some, for others it can represent several weeks, or even a full month of income. I believe transitional support, regionally adjusted pricing, or scholarships would be incredibly valuable to ensure this evolution doesn’t become a barrier to those working hardest at origin.”
This transition also underscores broader trends affecting non-profit organisations in the coffee sector. With diminishing funding from agencies like USAID, entities such as CQI and World Coffee Research face increased vulnerability to structural changes, mirroring consolidation patterns observed in the private sector.
The supporting claim behind this shift, that CQI serves producers while SCA focuses on “consumer countries” raises concerns, implying sensory analysis is the domain of traditional consuming nations – often excluding producing ones. Yet emerging markets like China, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia challenge these outdated labels. And Ethiopia, which consumes half its own coffee and has 25% of its population engaged in the sector, is still rarely counted among them. The “why” behind this forms an uncomfortable question that remains largely unaddressed in the coffee industry.
SCA & CQI: from diverging paths to “evolved”
Established in 1996, the CQI has dedicated itself to improving coffee quality and the livelihoods of producers. The Q Grader programme, launched in 2003, became a globally recognised certification, with around 10,000 professionals trained in sensory evaluation techniques today.
The SCA, formed in 2017 through the merger of the Specialty Coffee Association of America and the Specialty Coffee Association of Europe, has focused on unifying global coffee standards and promoting sustainability. Its initiatives have included educational programmes, research, and the development of tools like the CVA.
While the two organisations have collaborated over the years, their differing mandates occasionally led to divergent approaches. The integration of the Q Grader programme into the SCA’s CVA framework represents both a convergence of objectives and a strategic realignment.
This move raises questions about the balance between consolidation for efficiency and the preservation of diverse perspectives within the industry.
“I see this largely as a natural evolution,” says Ana Maria. “The way we define quality is maturing, it’s no longer just about cup score; it’s about process, context, and impact. In that sense, I believe the CVA might help strengthen our understanding of quality in a more holistic and human way.”
“At the same time, changes like this one can raise concerns about access and centralisation. While there is producer inclusion – I’ve personally had the chance to participate in dialogue and pilot experiences – I also recognise that these opportunities are still limited. Inclusion has begun, but it hasn’t yet reached all corners of origin. This is a critical moment to ensure that the evolution of our systems doesn’t just raise standards, but also creates shared tools for growth across the entire value chain.”
Despite efforts to promote inclusivity, the coffee industry remains arguably skewed towards so-called consumer or global north nations, highlighting persistent global asymmetries in access to knowledge and learning – not just linked to price but also linked to context and messaging.
“I think this decision represents a shift in how we assess quality and a consolidation of influence in the specialty coffee sector,” says Philipp. “While the CVA builds on the SCA’s legacy of standardisation, sidelining the Q system raises concerns – not so much about the CVA itself, but about the messenger.”
“SCA, intentionally or not, appears to centralise control around its own frameworks. CQI has long represented inclusivity and origin engagement. Replacing its system without a transparent rationale risks alienating key professionals and producers.”
Both the Q Grader programme and the CVA largely originate from so-called consumer countries and carry significant costs. These may be justified, but without accompanying grants or financing programmes, they potentially limit accessibility for producers in so-called developing nations.
The issue of financial accessibility in coffee education now goes well beyond producer communities in lower-income countries. In today’s climate of global inflation and economic instability, opportunity is increasingly tied to privilege – giving rise to what some have described as a form of “class apartheid.”
Many aspiring Q Graders in the past – or “Evolved G Graders” under the new system – simply lack the disposable income or savings required to access these certifications. For them, the door to advancement remains firmly closed.
Consolidation can risk stifling innovation
The adoption of the CVA as the foundation for the “Evolved Q Grader Program” signifies a shift towards a more comprehensive assessment of coffee quality.
At World of Coffee Copenhagen last year, Cup of Excellence (CoE) and Alliance for Coffee Excellence (ACE) announced a surprising new partnership with the SCA. Historically, CoE, ACE, and SCA have operated independently, occasionally collaborating on smaller projects, and CoE had its own cupping form. Now, the CVA is being integrated into CoE.
The SCA’s recent partnership with Colombia’s National Federation of Coffee Growers (FNC) underscores this direction, with plans to implement the CVA methodology across Colombian coffee processes. This collaboration aims to enhance traceability and provide producers with insights into market preferences. The success of such initiatives may influence other major coffee-producing countries, like Brazil, to consider similar integrations.
“For the CVA to fulfil its true potential, it must continue to be built with active participation from producing communities,” says Ana Maria. “It’s not just about evaluating coffee – it’s also about evaluating how we include the people who grow and process it. The regional gatherings and pilot phases that have already taken place form part of important work that must continue and deepen so that inclusion becomes the norm, not the exception.”
However, the global applicability of the CVA remains a topic of discussion. In markets like China, which has seen a surge in Q Grader certifications, the response to the transition will be indicative of the CVA’s international resonance.
“Most players in China will likely adopt the CVA,” says Winnie. “Although the government has built its own coffee training system, the industry here still holds SCA and CQI certifications in high regard. That said, there are other players like the Sustainable Coffee Institute also active in China – so we may see a mix of pathways emerging.”
“Will this ‘Evolved Q’ become just another revenue stream for the SCA? Will it truly benefit coffee farmers? Where are they supposed to find the money for another round of training? And more importantly, will this new programme actually help them improve the quality of their coffee? These are the real questions we need to be asking.”
The consolidation of certification programmes under the SCA may prompt the emergence of alternative training and evaluation platforms.
Organisations like the Sustainable Coffee Institute could play a role in offering diverse educational pathways, ensuring that the industry – and indeed its coffee education marketplace – continues to benefit from a plurality of perspectives. Regional organisations or tools could also emerge, with a focus on South-South knowledge exchange and coffee origin country empowerment.
“For the CVA to be truly inclusive, especially for producers and emerging markets, it needs to be shaped with those communities, not delivered top-down,” says Philipp. “As for its relevance, many exporters and buyers I speak with still rely on the ‘old’ score sheet.”
“If the CVA is meant to evolve, why not co-create with origin stakeholders, offer tools in multiple languages, and ensure real accessibility? That could open a much-needed, inclusive conversation. I hope it becomes a platform to build on. Otherwise, it risks losing touch with the people it’s meant to serve.”
A recent research paper, Antitrust Laws, Market Competition and Corporate Green Innovation, argues that monopolies often suppress innovation, while competitive markets incentivise companies to differentiate themselves and drive sectoral progress. A salient example is the ongoing landmark antitrust trial against social media giant Meta, in which the Federal Trade Commission alleges Meta unlawfully quashed rivals by purchasing Instagram and WhatsApp over a decade ago.
This underscores growing global concerns that increased market consolidation could hinder healthy competition and break consumer trust. However, the consolidation of global coffee education through the CVA could possibly give rise to new initiatives that might help rebalance power dynamics across the industry and boost progress at the same time.
As the coffee sector navigates this evolution, stakeholders will need to consider how best to balance standardisation with inclusivity, ensuring that advancements in evaluation methods serve the diverse needs of the global coffee community.
Coffee Intelligence
Want to read more articles like this? Sign up for our newsletter here.
