CRAAP Test Evaluator
Answer guided questions about a source's Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy and Purpose, and get a score for each criterion, a total out of 50, a plain verdict and a flag for any weak spot — then print the filled-in worksheet or copy a summary for your notes. Runs entirely in your browser. Free, no sign-up.
CRAAP Test Worksheet
The source
CRAAP judges a source on its own terms. Fact-checkers also read laterally: they leave the page and see what other sources say about its author and claims. The SIFT moves — Stop, Investigate the source, Find better coverage, Trace claims to their origin — take minutes and catch what a checklist misses.
CurrencyThe timeliness of the information.
RelevanceHow well it fits your needs.
AuthorityWho is behind it, and whether they know the subject.
AccuracyHow reliable, supported and correct it is.
PurposeWhy it exists.
Scores
0 of 24 questions answered
–
Currency, out of 10
–
Relevance, out of 10
–
Authority, out of 10
–
Accuracy, out of 10
–
Purpose, out of 10
–
Total, out of 50
Answer at least one question for each criterion to see the total and a verdict.
Bands: 40–50 strong · 30–39 usable with care · 20–29 weak · under 20 unreliable. The scores and bands are this tool's convention — the CRAAP Test itself is a list of questions.
The CRAAP Test was created by Sarah Blakeslee at Meriam Library, California State University, Chico, in 2004.
How to Use the CRAAP Test Evaluator
- 1. Describe the source. Title, author or publisher, the link or citation, and — because relevance depends on it — your own topic or research question.
- 2. Answer each question. Yes, Partly or No. Choose N/A when a question does not apply, such as working links for a printed book; it is then left out of the score.
- 3. Note your evidence. A line per criterion on what you checked and where makes the worksheet useful later, and it is what an instructor wants to see.
- 4. Read the verdict. Each criterion scores out of 10 and the total out of 50. Any criterion under 5 is flagged as a weak spot and caps the verdict.
- 5. Print or copy. Print the completed worksheet — the page prints the worksheet only — or copy a short summary into your research notes.
The Five Criteria
| Criterion | Meaning | Typical questions |
|---|---|---|
| Currency | How timely the information is | When was it published or updated? Does your topic need recent work? Do the links work? |
| Relevance | How well it fits your needs | Does it answer your question? Is it pitched at the right level? Would you cite it? |
| Authority | Who is behind it | Who wrote or published it? What are their credentials? Is there contact information? |
| Accuracy | How reliable and supported it is | Where does the information come from? Was it reviewed? Can you confirm it elsewhere? |
| Purpose | Why it exists | Does it inform, sell or persuade? Is the purpose stated? Is it fact or opinion? |
Sarah Blakeslee of Meriam Library at California State University, Chico, coined the acronym in 2004 while teaching a first-year course, and Chico's handout still lists the questions under each letter. The handout also makes a point worth keeping: the criteria matter more or less depending on your need. A 1960s court ruling scores badly on Currency and can still be exactly the right source.
How the Scores Work — With an Example
The CRAAP Test is a list of questions, not a scale, so the numbers here are this tool's convention for comparing sources. Each answer earns 2 points for Yes, 1 for Partly and 0 for No; a criterion's score is its share of the available points, out of 10; the five scores add up to a total out of 50. Totals of 40–50 read as strong, 30–39 as usable with care, 20–29 as weak, and under 20 as unreliable.
Take a polished, recent blog post about blue light and sleep, published by a company that sells blue-light glasses. It scores well where you would expect — Currency 8.8, Relevance 8.8, Authority 8, Accuracy 7.5 — but its purpose is to sell, and the Purpose answers (No, Partly, Partly, No, No) give it 2. The total is 35, which alone would read as usable with care; because Purpose sits under 5, the verdict is capped at Weak. A high total cannot buy back a source whose reason for existing is to persuade you.
CRAAP, Lateral Reading and SIFT
Checklists have a known blind spot: they judge a page by what it says about itself, and a professional-looking site can pass most of them. Research by Sam Wineburg and Sarah McGrew at the Stanford History Education Group found that professional fact-checkers judged websites more accurately than historians and students because they read laterally — leaving the page early to see what other sources said about it. Mike Caulfield's SIFT method turns that habit into four moves: Stop; Investigate the source; Find better coverage; Trace claims, quotes and media to their original context.
- Use both. Run SIFT first to decide whether a source deserves your time, then CRAAP to document why it is usable.
- Treat domain names as weak evidence. Anyone can register a .org, and a .edu page may be a student's coursework.
- Check the claim, not just the source. A reliable outlet can still get one fact wrong; trace key numbers to where they first appeared.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What does CRAAP stand for?
- Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy and Purpose — five questions to ask of any source: how timely it is, how well it fits your need, who is behind it, how reliable and supported its content is, and why it exists.
- Who created the CRAAP test?
- Sarah Blakeslee, a librarian at Meriam Library, California State University, Chico. She coined the acronym in 2004 for a first-year course she taught, and the test has since been adopted by libraries and schools around the world.
- What is a good CRAAP test score?
- The original test has no official score; it is a set of questions. In this tool, a total of 40 or more out of 50 with no criterion under 5 reads as a strong source. Treat any number as a summary of your judgment, and keep the notes that explain it.
- Is the CRAAP test still useful?
- Yes, as a structured record of why you trust a source, but not on its own. Because it examines a page on its own terms, it works best alongside lateral reading — checking what independent sources say about the author, the publisher and the claims.
- Do I need to CRAAP-test peer-reviewed articles?
- Peer review answers part of the Accuracy question, not all of it. Relevance, currency and purpose still vary between peer-reviewed papers, and retractions, predatory journals and industry funding are all worth a check. A quick pass is usually enough.
- What is the SIFT method?
- SIFT is a fast source-checking routine developed by Mike Caulfield: Stop before you react or share; Investigate the source; Find better coverage of the claim; and Trace claims, quotes and media back to their original context. It formalises the lateral reading that professional fact-checkers use.