CarbonMeld CarbonMeld Carbon Observatory
Tools
ProjectsDevelopersComparePortfolioCCP trackerA–Z index BuyersCORSIA supplyCheck an offerAPI & MCP Method About the System Editorial Policy Score Your Project
EN
Workbench ProjectsDevelopersComparePortfolioCCP trackerA–Z index
← All projects
Re-assessment pendingVCSAgriculture Forestry and Other Land UseUnited StatesRegistry: RegisteredVM0003

Lock Haven Improved Forest Management Project

Developer: Lock Haven City Authority

VCS-1377 ↗

Worked comparison example (English)

#211of 302 in Soil carbon#1106of 1785 in United States#1343of 1583 in Verra (VCS)#3of 5 in VM0003

Score from methodology v2.1 (analysis of 3 Sep 2026). Re-assessment under v2.2 pending.

Assessment

CarbonMeld document-based assessment

01020304 Overall 4.6 / 10
Integrity 🔒 Transparency 🔒 Claim Safety 🔒 Documentation 🔒
Dimension scores are locked — the faint arcs are empty tracks, not zero scores.

Scale 0–10 · method weights: integrity 35% · transparency 25% · claim safety 25% · documentation 15%.

Re-assessment pending · v2.1

Scored2026-09-03medium confidenceLatest monitoring period ends: 2022-10-10

evidence: 47/47 registry documents analyzed · 5 red flags

Generated by CarbonMeld Analysis Pipeline · Methodology · Editorial Policy · About the System
Download Report (PDF)

Analysis

The Lock Haven Improved Forest Management Project is a long-running VCS ALM project (since 2013) with a 12% buffer pool, no reported reversals, and a 25% quantified leakage deduction, but the 2025 verification report identifies over 20 material findings and 20 corrective actions, including an incorrectly quantified non-permanence risk rating, a stratum that initially failed its paired t-test, and a missing ERR calculations spreadsheet. The project-specific baseline and a 17.7% discrepancy between the monitoring report's verified figure (12,989) and the verification report's confirmed figure (15,282) raise meaningful over-crediting concerns. Overall, the project has structural protections in place but suffers from significant methodological and documentation quality issues that undermine confidence in the reported credit volumes.

Red Flags

5 red flags detected — Unlock with Premium

Findings

Risk Indicators

Additionality

🔒

Permanence

🔒

Leakage

🔒

Baseline

🔒

Safeguards

🔒

Double-claim

🔒

Risk indicator details are a Premium feature

Score Breakdown

Score factors per dimension are a Premium feature — Unlock with Premium

Detailed Analysis

The detailed per-dimension analysis is a Premium feature — Unlock with Premium

Evidence

Unlock the full analysis

On this page: the analysis of 3 Sep 2026, marked “Re-assessment pending”. Per-dimension scores, risk indicators, 5 red flags, score factors, detailed analysis, and 47 registry documents (47 analyzed).

€9+ VAT · 30-day pass · one-time, no auto-renewal

Every rated project, PDF reports, API access, portfolio alerts and per-dimension scores with red-flag details in side-by-side comparisons for 30 days (public-data comparison is free; fair use: 30 projects per day).

Price + VAT · By paying you accept the Terms of Use — digital content, no refunds. How Premium works

Eligibility & market

What can you claim with this credit?

Four checks buyers ask about, from the registry and the Integrity Council (ICVCM).

  • Airlines (CORSIA)

    No CORSIA label on the registry

    Not usable for airlines' CORSIA obligations.

    Source: registry label

  • Integrity label (ICVCM CCP)

    Methodology under ICVCM assessmentVM0003

    The Integrity Council has not decided on this methodology yet.

    Source: ICVCM assessment

  • Removal or reduction

    Not determined

    The registry data do not say whether these credits are removals or reductions.

  • Paris Agreement (Article 6)

    No Article 6 authorization

    No corresponding adjustment: the host country can also count this reduction towards its own target.

    Source: registry label

Information only, from public sources. Claim rules (CORSIA, SBTi, EU rules on green claims) change: check them before making a public claim. Since 27 September 2026, EU consumer rules do not allow “climate neutral” product claims based on offsets.

Registry labels last checked:2026-10-11

Credit Vintages

IssuedRetiredAvailable
2013
14,85414,8540
2014
9,2749,2740
2015
11,37311,3730
2017
15,02715,0270
2018
16,10916,1090
2019
1,0471,0470
2020
14,58714,5870
2021
2,91802,918
2022
10,071010,071
Total95,26082,27112,989

Methodology versions used

The methodology version stated in each monitoring, verification and issuance document, by period, compared with the official methodology pages.

  1. 2013–2014VM0003 v1.2since replaced by v1.3

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  2. 2014–2015VM0003 v1.2since replaced by v1.3

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  3. 2015–2017VM0003 v1.2since replaced by v1.3

    verification report + issuance document

    official page · verified on

  4. 2015–2017VM0003 v1.2since replaced by v1.3

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  5. 2017–2018VM0003 v1.2since replaced by v1.3

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  6. 2018–2019VM0003 v1.2since replaced by v1.3

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  7. 2019–2020VM0003 v1.2since replaced by v1.3

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  8. 2020–2021VM0003 v1.2since replaced by v1.3

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  9. 2020–2021VM0003 v1.2since replaced by v1.3

    verification report

    official page · verified on

  10. 2021–2022VM0003the documents for this period state different versions (v1.1, v1.2)

    monitoring report + verification report

  • VM0003: Active (Verra / Verified Carbon Standard) · official page · verified on

A version is shown only when the document's own text writes it next to the methodology code. Current versions, status and CCP ranges come from the official pages linked, checked on the date shown.

Documents on the registry

Retired by

Organisations named as beneficiaries in the registry's public retirement records.

Where to buy

Got an offer for these credits? Check it against the registry →

+ Know where to buy this?

Listing multiple projects? Send us a CSV at [email protected].

⚑ Dispute this rating

Profile & governance

Analysis ProvenanceVM0003
Methodology·Editorial Policy·About the System

Are you the project owner?

Metadata correction (free)

Name, country, marketplace or links incorrect? Let us know.

Does not modify the score.

[email protected] →

Contest this rating

Something wrong in the analysis, or a registry document we have not used? Send us the link to the public source: you get a reference and an answer within 30 days.

Contest this rating →