How Destination Score™ Works

---

Destination Score™ is built on the principle that trust requires consistency. 

This charter defines the boundaries that govern how scores are produced, interpreted, and applied across all uses of the platform. This charter applies equally to public users, destination partners, and platform integrations.

Destination Score uses a single, standardized scoring methodology across all applications:

• Public Travel Intelligence
• Destination Diagnostic Engagements
• AI Trust Integration
   

Scores are never recalculated, optimized, or selectively adjusted for individual clients, destinations, partners, or use cases.

Destination Score does not:

• Modify scores in exchange for partnerships, funding, or participation
• Offer score improvements as a service
• Guarantee favorable outcomes, narratives, or positioning
   

Analytical engagements use the same underlying scores available publicly, interpreted through comparative and normative analysis — not altered.

Destination Diagnostic Engagements are interpretive, not prescriptive.

They are designed to:

• Clarify where expectations and on-the-ground conditions diverge
• Provide comparative and contextual insight
• Distinguish structural factors from operational ones
   

They do not:

• Recommend marketing strategies
• Prescribe policy actions
• Advocate specific interventions
   

This separation preserves neutrality and decision-maker autonomy.

Destination Score prioritizes:

• Clear documentation of data sources
• Consistent normalization and weighting logic
• Explicit discussion of limitations and uncertainty
   

Methodology changes, when they occur, are:

• Versioned
• Documented
• Applied globally — never selectively
   

Scores reflect the best available data and methodology at the time of calculation.

Destination Score does not:

• Re-score destinations retroactively to align with narratives
• “Correct” scores in response to reputational concerns
• Adjust historical outputs to satisfy stakeholders
   

This ensures longitudinal integrity and comparability.

Destination Score does not act as:

• A marketing agency
• A promotional partner
• A lobbying or advocacy firm
   

The platform exists to improve understanding, not persuasion.

Use of Destination Score in:

• Reports
• Diagnostics 
• AI systems
• Research partnerships
   

does not imply endorsement of a destination, property, or strategy.

The role of Destination Score is to provide structured context — not validation.

Travel decisions are emotional, political, and economically consequential.
Without firm analytical boundaries, even good data becomes distorted.

This charter exists to ensure that:

• Trust compounds over time
• Scores remain meaningful across contexts
• Applications scale without compromising integrity

Travel data is inherently uneven. Visitor counts vary by source, safety statistics differ by jurisdiction, infrastructure maps are incomplete, and traveler priorities are deeply personal.

Destination Score™ is designed with this reality in mind.

Rather than claiming objectivity or precision where it isn’t warranted, the system applies consistent rules, clear bounds, and explicit guardrails so imperfect data does not turn into false authority.

In practice, this means:

• Data inputs are treated as signals with limits, not exact facts 
• Scores prioritize consistency and interpretability over false precision
• No single data source is allowed to dominate results
• Missing or uncertain data is not silently backfilled
• Methodology changes occur only through explicit version updates
   

To preserve clarity and reduce noise, Destination Score intentionally does not use:

• user reviews or star ratings
• social media sentiment
• influencer content
• real-time feeds
• proprietary black-box indices
• predictive or prescriptive models
   

Variable-Specific Spatial Frames

Destination Score™ applies a consistent default spatial radius for the ingestion and normalization of certain place-based datasets, specifically:

• OpenStreetMap (OSM) points of interest (amenities, transit, services, accessibility indicators)
• Climate and weather data used for Seasonality (e.g., Open-Meteo)
   

These datasets are inherently spatial and are evaluated within a fixed-radius reference frame to ensure consistency, comparability, and resistance to analyst discretion across destinations.

Non-Spatial or Jurisdiction-Based Data

Other inputs used in Destination Score™ are not constrained to the default radius, because they are not meaningfully defined at that spatial scale. These include:

• Crime and safety data (reported by administrative or policing jurisdictions)
• Cost-of-living and affordability indices (e.g., Numbeo)
   

For these inputs, Destination Score uses the most granular, authoritative reporting unit available, rather than attempting artificial spatial clipping that would reduce accuracy or introduce bias.

Interpretive Implication

As a result, different pillars within Destination Score may rely on different underlying spatial reference frames, reflecting the nature of the source data rather than inconsistent treatment. This is an intentional and transparent design choice.

All destinations are subject to the same data-handling rules within each category, preserving internal consistency and cross-destination comparability.

Governance Principle

Destination Score does not force all inputs into a single spatial boundary when doing so would compromise data integrity. Instead, it applies:

• Fixed spatial frames where spatial comparability is required
• Jurisdictional frames where data is reported and governed administratively
   

This hybrid approach balances methodological rigor with real-world data constraints.