Our CTC Scoring System Explained
The Client Technical Competency framework scores what a grade list can't — recency, environment, role, conditions, and psychological readiness, calibrated to your specific objective. Here is exactly how it works.
Ascents Team
March 20, 2026
The CTC is a structured scoring framework that produces a competency profile for any client against any planned objective. It takes three sources of evidence, weights them by reliability, applies context multipliers, and outputs a score and profile that reflects current, demonstrated ability — not just peak historical grade.
Before getting into the mechanics: two things the CTC is not.
It is not a decision-maker. The CTC does not tell you whether to take a client on an objective. It gives your judgment better raw material — more complete, more structured, and more durable than a grade list. The call is still yours.
It is not a client-facing score. Clients never see their CTC profile, score, or flags. They see only a questionnaire. The assessment output is for the guide and guide service only.
01 — The three evidence sources
The CTC draws on three sources of information about a client. Each has a different reliability weight, because each tells you something fundamentally different.
Logbook entries — 55% weight (65% without guide observation)
Objective, timestamped, graded route records. The most reliable source because it is documented evidence, not self-report. Each entry carries context: grade, environment, recency, role, and conditions.
Client questionnaire — 30% weight (35% without guide observation)
24 questions across six domains. Completed by the client before the trip. Weighted lower than logbook because it is self-reported — but it captures dimensions the logbook cannot, including psychological readiness.
Guide observation — 15% weight (when available)
Direct observation by a guide in the field or on a prior trip. Highest quality per entry, but rarely available at the pre-trip assessment stage. When present, it carries the most weight per datum.
When guide observation is absent — the most common pre-trip situation — the weights renormalise: logbook evidence becomes 65% and questionnaire becomes 35%. The system adapts to whatever evidence is actually available.
On the questionnaire and the logbook together: The system watches for mismatches between sources. If a client’s questionnaire responses suggest significantly higher competency than their logbook supports, a flag is raised automatically. This is the most common form of unintentional self-report inflation — not dishonesty, but genuine overestimation of current ability relative to documented evidence.
02 — The five scoring dimensions
Every logbook entry scores across five technical disciplines. The questionnaire adds a sixth: psychological readiness, which is assessed through its own dedicated question domain rather than inferred from grades.
Ski — S1–S7 / slope angle / resort descriptions
Scored from S1 / green / ≤25° (1.0) through S7 / extreme / >58° (5.0). Accepts S-grade notation, degree angles, and resort descriptions. Ski backcountry entries carry a higher environment multiplier than resort skiing.
Water ice — WI1–WI7 / Scottish grades I–VII
WI1 maps to 1.0 (low-angle, introductory) through WI7 at 5.0 (overhanging, extreme). Scottish winter grades accepted and mapped. WI4+ with a lead multiplier scores considerably higher than WI4 seconded at a roadside venue.
Mixed — M3–M10+
M3 at 1.0 through M10+ at 5.0. A discipline where the gap between gym/indoor performance and outdoor on-route performance is particularly significant, and where environment multipliers matter most.
Rock climbing — YDS / French sport / UIAA / British tech
5.0–5.7 at 1.0 through 5.13c+ at 5.0. Accepts YDS, French sport (6a, 7b+), UIAA (VI, VIII+), and British tech grades with automatic conversion. A gym 5.10 scores at 60% of an outdoor alpine-context 5.10.
Alpine mountaineering — French commitment grades F–ED
F at 1.0 through ED at 5.0, with full +/− modifier support (PD−, PD, PD+, etc.). Also accepts NCCS grades (Class 1–6). The alpine column is the highest-weighted discipline for most objective types.
The sixth dimension — exposure and psychological readiness — is scored separately through five questionnaire questions: comfort with exposure, stress self-management, prior high-consequence experience, judgment and conservatism, and self-regulation. It produces an independent composite that feeds directly into the final profile alongside the five technical disciplines.
03 — How multipliers work
This is the core of what makes the CTC different from a simple grade average. Every logbook entry score is not just a normalised grade — it is a grade multiplied by a chain of context factors before being included in any calculation.
Recency multiplier
| Last active at this grade | Multiplier | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Within 12 months | 1.00 × | Full weight — current demonstrated ability |
| 12–24 months | 0.92 × | Minor degradation expected |
| 24–36 months | 0.83 × | Meaningful detraining likely |
| 36–48 months | 0.75 × | Significant gap — should be verified |
| Over 48 months | 0.68 × | Historical evidence only — flag raised |
Environment multiplier
| Where the grade was achieved | Multiplier |
|---|---|
| Alpine / committing (remote, serious consequence) | 1.00 × |
| Ski backcountry | 0.95 × |
| Multi-pitch outdoor | 0.90 × |
| Single-pitch outdoor | 0.80 × |
| Ski resort / piste | 0.72 × |
| Gym / indoor | 0.60 × |
Additional multipliers
| Factor | Condition | Multiplier |
|---|---|---|
| Conditions | Challenging (poor visibility, wind, wet, heavy snow) | 1.05 × |
| Conditions | Variable | 1.00 × |
| Conditions | Ideal | 0.92 × |
| Lead / follow | Client led the pitch or route | 1.08 × |
| Lead / follow | Client followed / seconded | 0.95 × |
| Guided | Trip was professionally guided | 0.92 × |
| Guided | Independent ascent | 1.00 × |
| Completion | Successful completion | 1.00 × |
| Completion | Attempted, did not complete | 0.70 × |
A worked example: A client logs a WI4 route. WI4 normalises to 3.5/5. They seconded it (0.95×), at a roadside venue in ideal conditions (0.80×, 0.92×), and it was 2.5 years ago (0.83×). The entry score is 3.5 × 0.95 × 0.80 × 0.92 × 0.83 = 2.03. The same WI4 led at an alpine venue in challenging conditions last month would score 3.5 × 1.08 × 1.00 × 1.05 × 1.00 = 3.97. Same grade. Almost double the adjusted score.
04 — Objective-type weighting
The composite CTC score is not a simple average of the five discipline scores. Each discipline is weighted by the objective type you are planning. This means the same client will produce a different profile depending on what you are actually doing together.
| Objective type | Primary weights |
|---|---|
| Alpine ice | Alpine 35%, Water ice 30%, Psych 10%, Mixed 10%, Ski 10%, Rock 5% |
| Alpine rock | Rock 40%, Alpine 35%, Psych 10%, Water ice 5%, Ski 5%, Mixed 5% |
| Ski mountaineering | Ski 35%, Alpine 35%, Psych 15%, Water ice 5%, Mixed 5%, Rock 5% |
| Glacier travel | Alpine 50%, Psych 15%, Ski 15%, Water ice 10%, Mixed 5%, Rock 5% |
Full objective type table (including Technical alpine, Mixed/ice, and General mountaineering) is in the CTC scoring spreadsheet.
05 — Profiles and what they mean
The adjusted composite score — after all multipliers and objective weighting — produces one of five profiles. The score is on a 1.0–5.0 scale. Profile bands are deliberately wider in the middle than at the extremes, where the distinctions matter most.
| Profile | Adjusted score | What it means in the field | Guide management approach |
|---|---|---|---|
| Novice | < 1.60 | Little or no technical experience. Requires full instruction on all skills. | Direct instruction throughout. 1:1 or max 1:2. Objective must be introductory. |
| Intermediate | 1.60 – 2.59 | Some experience in one or more disciplines. Basic rope competence but not independent. | Moderate supervision. Guide leads all technical sections. Pre-trip briefing critical. |
| Advanced | 2.60 – 3.59 | Good technical competency in primary disciplines. Beginning to develop sound judgment. | Supervised independence. Client can be trusted on established terrain between checkpoints. |
| Expert | 3.60 – 4.39 | High competency across multiple disciplines. Independent movement on serious terrain. | Largely independent. Guide focuses on route selection and objective hazard management. |
| Elite | ≥ 4.40 | Professional or equivalent. Independent on extremely committing terrain. | Peer relationship. Guide provides local knowledge and objective hazard management. |
The profile is generated from the adjusted score — after all multipliers are applied. A client with a high raw grade but stale, gym-only experience will produce a lower profile than their peak grade suggests. That is intentional. The profile should reflect current capability on your objective, not historical achievement in the most flattering context.
06 — Flags and what to do with them
Alongside the profile, the CTC generates flags for conditions that warrant specific attention before committing to an objective. Flags are not decisions — they are prompts for direct conversation or a modified plan.
Block — client score below minimum requirement for a primary discipline
The guide has set a minimum score for a specific discipline on this objective, and the client’s adjusted score does not meet it. Address before committing to the objective. Example: alpine ice objective requiring WI score ≥ 2.5, client scores 1.8.
Warning — low or concerning psychological readiness score
Psych composite below 2.0. Requires a direct conversation before departure. Consider whether the objective scope is appropriate, and plan field management strategy in advance.
Warning — medical consideration indicated
Client answered below 3 on the medical conditions question. Requires direct conversation — not to pry, but to understand whether anything affects performance or safety at altitude or in strenuous conditions.
Caution — stale grades on primary discipline
Recency multiplier average below 0.80 on a discipline that carries significant weight for this objective. Current ability may be lower than peak grade suggests. Consider a warm-up objective or a direct conversation about recent activity.
Caution — self-report significantly above logbook evidence
Questionnaire responses are more than 1.2 points above logbook scores in one or more disciplines. Verify with specific questions about recent activity. Common cause: drawing on observed rather than led experience, or remembering grades from peak fitness.
Info — all significant entries are guided
Every technical logbook entry above grade 2.5 was completed under professional guidance. Independent capability is undemonstrated. This is not a problem for guided objectives, but is relevant context if you are assessing the client for any degree of independent movement.
07 — Reading the output
Here is what a full CTC output looks like for a single client on a specific objective — an alpine ice day:
Discipline scores (alpine ice objective):
- Alpine: 3.8 / 5.0 — 35% weight
- Water ice: 2.8 / 5.0 — 30% weight
- Psych: 3.2 / 5.0 — 10% weight
- Mixed: 2.0 / 5.0 — 10% weight
- Ski: 1.8 / 5.0 — 10% weight
- Rock: 1.4 / 5.0 — 5% weight
Adjusted composite: 3.11 / 5.00 — Profile: Advanced
Note that the rock score (1.4) barely moves the needle on an alpine ice objective because it carries only 5% of the weight. The same client assessed for a technical alpine rock objective would look meaningfully different — rock would carry 40% and that 1.4 would drag the composite down significantly. The CTC is objective-specific by design.
“The profile should reflect current capability on your objective — not historical achievement in the most flattering context. That is the whole point.”
— CTC design principle
The CTC scoring spreadsheet and client questionnaire are available as a free download from the Ascents platform — no account required. Enter your email and we will send both directly to you. The spreadsheet includes all objective types, automatic grade conversion, profile output, flag generation, and a how-to guide for your first assessment.