De-Risking Verification
Get audited before you're 100% sure you're ready.
If your initial audit identifies issues with your methodology or data, we document them, agree an action plan, and reaudit you at no additional fee once corrections are in place.
Short on time? This is a long, detailed page. Read the 2-minute plain-English overview instead.
The Problem
Why organisations wait too long to be audited
You've built a GHG programme. You've defined scope, gathered data, selected methodology. Then comes the audit — and with it the question that delays so many submissions: what if the verifier says it doesn't work?
The conventional verification model rewards that hesitation. Audits are treated as binary, charged in full whether issues are found or not, with no formal pathway from "not yet" to "verified." The rational response is to delay — sometimes for years — until the organisation is certain. Improvement gets postponed in the process.
Binary outcomes
A pass-or-fail verdict with no documented pathway from one to the other.
Sunk-cost penalty
If issues are identified, resubmission requires a separate engagement at full fee.
Hidden criteria
Findings emerge only when the report arrives — too late to address inside the same cycle.
Uncertainty Avoidance
Where the consequences of failure are reputational as well as financial, the safest commercial decision is often to defer.
The Guarantee
One Verification Fee. Guaranteed!
If your initial audit identifies issues, the engagement does not end. It enters its second phase — and you do not pay again to complete it.
Findings Report
Every issue documented and ranked by severity, materiality and impact on the verification opinion.
Agreed Action Plan
A documented schedule of corrective actions with explicit success criteria for each finding.
Six-Month Window
Time to implement corrections without the engagement closing or the audit fee re-accruing.
Free Reaudit
Corrected submissions are reassessed against the agreed criteria at no additional verification fee.
Transparent Criteria
You know exactly what "verified" looks like before you resubmit. No moving targets.
No Penalty for Honesty
Disclosing limitations during the audit improves the engagement. It does not increase its cost.
Audit Scope
What We Assess, and What "Verified" Means
Verification is not a judgement of intent or ambition. It is an opinion on whether your reported emissions data is materially accurate, methodologically defensible, and transparently disclosed. We assess four dimensions.
Methodology
Scope boundaries, calculation approaches and emissions factors are evaluated against ISO 14064-3, the GHG Protocol and the relevant DESNZ / DEFRA guidance. Deviations must be documented and justified.
Data Quality
Primary data is expected for material sources. Secondary data and proxies must be traceable, justified and consistently applied. Gaps must be identified and addressed openly.
Controls & Governance
Responsibilities, audit trails and change-management for methodology updates are reviewed. The reporting process must be repeatable and reconstructable.
Transparency
Material limitations, uncertainty estimates and methodological assumptions must be disclosed. Reported figures must be reconcilable to the underlying records.
"Verified" does not mean perfect. It means your methodology is sound, your data is credible, your limitations are disclosed, and your improvement pathway is realistic.
Severity ratings
Critical
Must be addressed before certification can be issued.
High
Address within the six-month improvement window.
Medium
Address within twelve months.
Low
Consider in the next reporting cycle.
Suitability
Who Is this Approach Designed For
Our approach to verification is intended for organisations that take their reporting obligations seriously but are not yet certain their methodology will satisfy a formal audit. The four scenarios below are the most common.
First Comprehensive Baseline
Emissions have been calculated, but the methodology has not been externally tested. The de-risk model identifies methodological gaps and confirms readiness for ongoing annual verification.
Scope 3 Data Quality Concerns
Scope 1 and 2 are settled, but spend-based factors, supplier data or category allocations in Scope 3 are uncertain. The audit isolates the specific weaknesses and the actions required to close them.
Boundary or Structural Change
An acquisition, divestment or change in accounting boundary has shifted the inventory. The audit validates the transition methodology and flags any allocation or restatement issues.
Preparing for Scheme Submission
A specific compliance deadline is approaching — ISO 14068-1, Gold Standard, BVCM or similar. The audit identifies gaps against the scheme criteria with time to address them before formal submission.
Independence
What We Do — and What We Do Not
Our value to you depends on our independence. A verifier who also offers paid remediation cannot reliably opine on the same methodology they helped construct. We hold that line absolutely.
YES
-
Audits methodology, data and controls against ISO 14064-3 and the relevant scheme criteria
-
Issues a structured findings report ranked by severity and materiality
-
Agrees an action plan with explicit success criteria for each finding
-
Holds the engagement open for six months while corrections are implemented
-
Reaudits the corrected submission at no additional verification fee
-
Clarifies what a finding means where interpretation is unclear
NO
- ❌ Build, rewrite or recommend specific calculation methodologies
- ❌ Source, collect or transform emissions data on your behalf
- ❌ Draft controls documentation or governance frameworks
- ❌ Provide paid methodology consultation outside the audit scope
- ❌ Recommend specific carbon-accounting platforms or commercial products
- ❌ Offer reduction strategy, supply-chain engagement or pathway planning
Where to get help implementing corrections
If your findings report identifies work that requires external expertise, you will need an independent carbon advisory firm to assist. We do not maintain a preferred-supplier list and we receive no referral consideration from any consultancy.
Where corrections are implemented with the help of a third party, we audit the resulting submission on its merits. The identity of the advisor has no bearing on the verification opinion.
Standards
Rigorous, Not Lenient
Our approach removes the financial penalty for honesty. It does not lower the technical bar for verification. Our opinion is issued against the same standards regardless of how an engagement is structured.
Our Approach means
- Findings are documented in detail rather than summarised in a refusal letter.
- You have time and a structured pathway to address identified issues.
- Resubmission carries no additional verification fee.
- Disclosing a limitation strengthens the engagement rather than weakening it.
Our Approach does not mean
- An opinion will be issued on data that does not meet ISO 14064-3 or GHG Protocol standards.
- Methodological gaps will be overlooked because corrective intent has been expressed.
- Deliberate misstatement or concealment will be treated as a remediable finding.
- Repeat reaudits will continue indefinitely where the original action plan has not been implemented.
Assessment Criteria
What "passing" actually means
Verification is not an attestation of perfection. It is an opinion that your methodology is sound, your data is credible, your limitations are transparent, and your improvement pathway is realistic. Four areas drive that opinion.
Methodology soundness
Scope boundaries clearly defined and defensible. Emissions factors aligned with DESNZ, DEFRA and GHG Protocol guidance. Calculation approaches following ISO 14064-1 principles. Any deviation documented and justified.
Data quality and completeness
Primary data collected for material sources. Secondary data traceable and justified. Gaps identified and addressed transparently. Controls in place to maintain accuracy.
Internal controls and governance
Clear ownership for GHG data collection. Records and audit trails maintained. Methodology documented and consistently applied. Methodology changes tracked and justified.
Transparency and limitations
Material limitations disclosed. Uncertainty estimates reasonable. Assumptions documented. Improvement plans credible.
Prefer to Talk First?
If you are at an earlier stage — exploring what verification involves, understanding whether your data is ready, or simply want to talk through your options — book a 20-minute discovery call.
No obligation · No sales pressure · Just expert answers