GS1247 VPA 153 Improved Kitchen Regimes: Gatsibo District Borehole Project, Rwanda

Integrity

The monitoring report dated 2020-06-16 reports no reversal events during the monitoring period, which supports permanence for this avoidance-style project. But the extracted record does not state the baseline method, the additionality test type, or any VVB confirmation of additionality, so the integrity case is only moderate. Leakage is described as quantified, but the actual deduction percentage is not available in the extracted facts.

Transparency

Transparency is limited by missing core reporting details: the VVB name is not found, and total claimed versus verified emission reductions are not stated. On the positive side, the monitoring report gives a clear monitoring period and uses an annual survey for usage monitoring, which improves traceability. The absence of the actual emissions figures keeps the disclosure quality below strong-project standards.

Claim Safety

Claim safety is mixed. The monitoring report shows a verified usage rate of 100% versus an assumed 80%, which is favorable, and it also indicates quantified leakage treatment. However, the baseline method is not stated, and the record does not show CORSIA ineligibility or CCP approval status, so dual-claim and over-crediting risk cannot be ruled out confidently.

Documentation

Documentation quality is moderate because two official document types are present and extraction confidence is high. Still, several important fields are missing from the extracted record, including the baseline method, additionality test, VVB name, and emissions totals. The crediting period also differs between the monitoring report and the PDD, and I privilege the more recent monitoring report for the period statement because it is later and operationally current.

Overall

Overall, this is a mid-quality file with some solid operational evidence but important gaps in the crediting logic. I privileged the monitoring report over the older PDD where the documents conflict on the crediting period, because the monitoring report is more recent and reflects the latest project status; the monitoring report says 2014-11-06 to 2024-02-05, while the PDD says 2017-02-05 to 2024-02-04. The contradiction reduces reliability, and the lack of stated baseline and additionality evidence prevents a higher score.