Installation of high efficiency wood burning cookstoves in Kenya

Integrity

Additionality was confirmed by a VVB (SustainCERT S.A.) according to the most recent issuance (2026), and the baseline was reassessed in 2025 which supports baseline validity. However, the verification raised multiple CARs/CLs and required corrective actions specifically asking the proponent to cross‑check values used in ERR calculations against raw monitoring data and to justify sampling and survey methods — this weakens confidence in additionality and ERR accuracy. Reversal treatment is inconsistent across documents: reversals are listed as 'not addressed' in recent records, and buffer pool percentage is not stated in available documents, so permanence protections are unclear.

Transparency

The monitoring period (2023-04-01 — 2025-03-31), VVB name, total ERR verified, FN/RB method and value, and leakage deduction are reported. Nonetheless, evidence_docs is listed as unknown and extraction confidence is medium, and there are explicit contradictions in core reported figures (total ERR, FN/RB method and value, usage monitoring method). These inconsistencies reduce transparency and make it hard for a third party to reproduce the ERR.

Claim Safety

There is a material risk of over‑claiming: key inputs conflict across documents (usage rate assumed reported as 71.2 in some records vs usage_rate_verified 0.594 in others; fnrb_value ranges from 0.29 to 0.9376; total ERR reported as 20,978 in some documents and 130,982 in others). The project is CORSIA-eligible and CCP‑eligible, introducing dual‑claim risk. While leakage is quantified (0.95% deduction) and justified, the contradictory FN/RB and usage data are major concerns for safe claims.

Documentation

A large number of documents were used (n=59) and the issuance record is recent (2026-02-17), which supports recency. However, the extracted evidence list is not specific (evidence_docs shows 'unknown'), extraction confidence is medium, and many corrective actions were required and only reported as closed without clear objective evidence attached in the extracted record — indicating gaps in accessible documentation quality.

Overall

I privileged the more recent values where contradictions exist (values dated 2026 or 2025) because they come from the latest issuance/verification records; specifically I treated the 2026 VVB confirmation and the 2025 baseline reassessment as authoritative. Contradictions remain for many core parameters (FNRB method and value, usage rates, total ERR, monitoring method, CCP/CORSIA eligibility and crediting period). Those contradictions and the number of corrective actions required were factored into lowering integrity, claim safety and documentation scores to reflect reduced data reliability. If the outstanding CARs/CLs are closed with transparent, auditable raw data and the evidence_docs are published, scores for integrity and claim safety could improve materially.