Maji Safi, Maisha Bora Project

Integrity

The verification report confirms additionality through the VVB and reports no material findings or corrective actions, which supports the core project case. At the same time, the report says reversal events were not addressed, and the extracted record shows a contradiction with the monitoring report, which weakens permanence confidence. Leakage is only described as deemed negligible, with no quantified deduction in the available record, so the integrity score is held to a moderate level.

Transparency

The project has a named verifier, a clear monitoring period, and an annual survey-based usage monitoring method, which helps transparency. However, total claimed and verified emission reductions are not stated in the extracted record, limiting public comparability. The monitoring evidence is also less clean because the extracted record contains contradictions on the usage monitoring method and other core fields.

Claim Safety

Claim safety is helped by the VVB-confirmed additionality and the use of a local field method for the non-renewable biomass fraction, with a reported value of 0.76. Still, the project is marked CORSIA-eligible, which raises dual-claim scrutiny, and the record does not show a CCP status. Leakage is not quantified and is only said to be negligible, so over-crediting risk is not fully resolved.

Documentation

The record draws on several document types, including the PDD, verification report, monitoring report, and stakeholder consultation materials, which is a positive sign. Even so, one key document was extracted with medium confidence rather than high, and the record contains contradictions on the baseline approach, crediting period, usage monitoring method, and reversal treatment. Those inconsistencies reduce confidence in the completeness and reliability of the documentation set.

Overall

I privileged the verification report for the additionality finding, the local-field non-renewable biomass method, and the later crediting-period dates because it is the more recent assurance document, while noting that the PDD provides conflicting earlier values. I also privileged the monitoring report for the reported reversal issue, which directly conflicts with the verification report’s statement that reversal events were not addressed; this contradiction materially lowers reliability. Because the project is CORSIA-eligible and leakage is only qualitatively treated, the overall risk profile remains moderate rather than strong.