Water is Life, Madagascar
Score Breakdown
Integrity
verified Additionality was confirmed by SustainCERT in the verification report.
missing The verification report lists numerous corrective actions, including evidence gaps and calculation corrections.
Transparency
verified The monitoring period, VVB name, and verified ER total are stated in the extracted record.
missing Extraction confidence is low and several key fields, including claimed ERs and buffer pool coverage, are not found in the available documents.
Claim Safety
verified The project uses a project baseline and reports a quantified leakage treatment in the verification report.
missing Contradictions on leakage justification and usage rate create over-crediting uncertainty.
Documentation
verified Twenty-three documents were used and the record includes a verification report, monitoring report, PDD, and stakeholder consultation materials.
missing Low extraction confidence and multiple corrective actions indicate incomplete or difficult-to-read documentation.
Detailed Analysis
Integrity
The verification report from SustainCERT confirms additionality, which is a meaningful positive for integrity. The project is an avoidance activity, so permanence risk is inherently lower than for removals, but buffer pool coverage is not stated and reversal events are not found in the extracted record. Leakage is described as quantified in the verification report, although the monitoring report later characterizes it as negligible, so the leakage treatment is not fully consistent.
Transparency
The record identifies the monitoring period, the VVB, and the verified emissions reductions, which helps transparency. However, total claimed ERs are not found, buffer pool information is missing, and the extraction confidence is low, meaning at least one key source was poorly readable. The monitoring approach for usage is described as an annual survey, but the underlying evidence is not fully complete in the extracted record.
Claim Safety
Claim safety is moderate because the project uses a project baseline and the verification report indicates quantified leakage treatment. Still, the contradiction on leakage justification, together with the discrepancy in usage rate between documents, raises over-crediting risk. The FNRB value is 0.72 using a national default method, which is not obviously weak, but the record does not provide enough detail to fully de-risk the claim.
Documentation
Documentation is mixed: the record draws on 23 documents, including the monitoring report, PDD, verification report, and stakeholder consultation materials. At the same time, extraction confidence is low and the verification report lists many corrective actions, including missing survey evidence, date corrections, and net benefit calculation fixes. The crediting period is also contradicted by another document, which further reduces confidence in the completeness and consistency of the file.
Overall
I privileged the verification report for additionality and the quantified leakage treatment because it is the most authoritative assurance document, while noting that the monitoring report later describes leakage as negligible. I also privileged the verified usage rate in the extracted record over the conflicting lower value from another document, but the contradiction itself lowers reliability. The crediting period contradiction is material because it suggests inconsistent project dating across documents, so the overall score is held to a moderate level rather than a high one.
Audit Analysis
This is a Gold Standard avoidance project with VVB-confirmed additionality and a quantified leakage treatment, which supports moderate integrity. However, the record has several documentation and reliability issues, including low extraction confidence, multiple corrective actions, and contradictions across documents that reduce confidence in the reported figures.
Project Description
Over 2 billion people worldwide lack access to safe water, and approximately 485,000 diarrhea-related deaths in low- and middle-income countries are attributable to unsafe water consumption each year.Notably, Madagascar is at the bottom of the list of 76 developing countries with the lowest access to basic sanitation and is facing a severe water crisis given its extreme vulnerability to the impacts of the climate crisis and weather shocks, such as evidence of recent cyclones. Access to basic water and sanitation services in Madagascar suffers from serious inequalities and low-quality services. 54.4% of the population has access to basic water services and only 12.3% of the population has access to basic sanitation , while 82% of urban residents have access to clean water, in rural villages this percentage drops to 34%. Over 2,100 children a year die from diarrhea due to poor water quality. Families living in isolated villages do not have access to drinking water. The wells are contaminated with bacteria and viruses and those who drink that water expose themselves to diseases. Most have no alternative to drinking the contaminated water unless the water is boiled . The scarcity of water also makes agriculture and livestock farming very difficult. For these reasons Aid4Mada launched the WATER IS LIFE project in 2018 which involved the construction of 10 manual pump wells and 19 solar energy-powered water systems , completed between 2018 and 2022, which today guarantee free and unlimited access to drinking water to over 80,000 people living in isolated rural communities without access to other safe water sources. This has led to several benefits for communities : - greater availability of safe and unlimited drinking water; - fewer illnesses and deaths linked to the consumption of non-potable water; - general improvement of health and living conditions; - less time spent on water supply; - more time to dedicate to income-generating activities and education; - j
Red Flags
- The verification report lists many corrective actions, including missing evidence for surveys and a formal grievance declaration.
- There are contradictions on leakage treatment, usage rate, and crediting period across documents, which weakens data reliability.
Credit Vintages
| Issued | Retired | Available | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 3,072 | 3,072 | 0 | |
| 2020 | 9,746 | 9,746 | 0 | |
| 2021 | 9,330 | 9,330 | 0 | |
| 2022 | 7,781 | 5,674 | 2,107 | |
| 2023 | 7,441 | 5,127 | 2,314 | |
| 2024 | 5,110 | 0 | 5,110 | |
| Total | 42,480 | 32,949 | 9,531 |
Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio
- Provide a clean, reconciled set of monitoring and verification documents that resolves the leakage, usage rate, and crediting period contradictions.
- Publish the missing evidence for surveys, buffer pool treatment, and the corrective action closures, with a clear audit trail from the VVB.
Questi suggerimenti indicano quali prove pubbliche aggiuntive potrebbero migliorare il livello di confidenza di questa valutazione. Non garantiscono un punteggio futuro più alto.
Risk Indicators
VVB-confirmed additionality
Avoidance project; buffer not stated
Leakage treatment inconsistent
Project baseline stated, reassessment timing missing
FPIC and grievance mechanism present
CORSIA/CCP status not stated
Where to buy
Marketplaces
+ Know where to buy this?
Listing multiple projects? Send us a CSV at [email protected].
⚑ Dispute this rating
Sei il proprietario di questo progetto?
Correzione metadati (gratuita)
Nome, paese, marketplace o link errati? Segnalacelo.
Non modifica lo score.
[email protected] →Rivalutazione con nuovi documenti
Hai documentazione aggiornata non ancora inclusa? Puoi richiedere un nuovo run della pipeline con i nuovi input.
Invia Documenti →