Our Verification Programme
The Framework That Governs Every Engagement. At Every Stage.
ISO/IEC 17029 requires every verification body to operate a defined verification programme — the rules, procedures and management that govern how verification activities are carried out. This page describes the programme under which Carbon Verification Limited conducts all engagements, and sets out what happens at each stage from initial enquiry to the issuance of your verification statement.
Short on time? This is a long, detailed page. Read the 2-minute plain-English overview instead.
Foundation
What a Verification Programme Is — and Why It Matters
A verification programme is not a marketing document. It is the operational framework that defines the scope of our verification activities, the competence requirements for our personnel, the evidence-gathering procedures we deploy, the materiality thresholds we apply, and the basis on which verification statements are issued or declined.
ISO/IEC 17029 Clause 8 requires that every verification body shall apply one or more verification programmes that are consistent with, and do not exclude, the requirements of the standard. Our programme is designed to meet this requirement while reflecting the specific demands of organisational GHG verification to ISO 14064‑3.
The programme described below applies to all verification engagements conducted by Carbon Verification Limited, regardless of client size, sector or complexity.
Coverage
Scope of Verification Activities
Carbon Verification Limited provides independent third-party verification of organisational greenhouse gas inventories. Our verification scope encompasses the following:
Standards. We verify GHG inventories prepared in accordance with ISO 14064‑1 and the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard. Our verification methodology follows ISO 14064‑3.
Emissions scope. We verify Scope 1 (direct emissions), Scope 2 (indirect energy emissions using both location-based and market-based approaches), Scope 3 (value chain emissions) across all fifteen GHG Protocol categories, and Scope 4 (Avoided Emissions).
Organisational boundaries. We verify inventories prepared under either the operational control or financial control consolidation approaches, and across single-site operations, multi-site domestic operations, and multi-entity international operations.
Levels of assurance. We provide both limited assurance and reasonable assurance engagements, as defined by ISO 14064‑3 and the applicable programme requirements.
Reporting periods. We verify inventories covering any defined reporting period, including annual reporting years, financial years, and baseline years for target-setting purposes.
ISO/IEC 17029 Clause 9
The Verification Process
Every verification engagement follows the process stages defined in ISO/IEC 17029 Clause 9. No stage may be omitted, and no engagement proceeds to the next stage until the current stage is complete. The seven stages below set out what happens from your initial enquiry through to the issuance — or non-issuance — of your verification statement.
Carbon Verification Limited conducts verification engagements remotely by default, in accordance with ISO 14064‑5. Remote delivery is our standard operating model — not a contingency measure. Our verification teams retain full authority to require in-person activities where professional judgement or programme requirements demand it. For the risk-based framework governing remote and on-site activities, see How We Work: Remote Verification →
Pre-Engagement Review
Clause 9.2
Before we accept an engagement, we need to understand your organisation, your inventory, and your requirements. We ask you to provide your organisation’s name, sector and operational structure; the GHG inventory you wish to have verified, including reporting period, organisational boundary, and scopes; the standard or standards against which the inventory has been prepared; the reporting framework you are targeting (for example, CDP, CSRD, SBTi, CBAM, PPN 006); your required level of assurance; any previous verification history; and your target timeline.
We then conduct a pre-engagement review to confirm that we understand the claim, that an applicable verification programme exists, that we have the necessary competence and resources, and that the engagement can be completed within a realistic timeframe. We will either accept the engagement and provide a formal proposal and fee quotation, or decline and explain why. We will never accept an engagement that we do not have the competence or capacity to deliver properly.
The Verification Agreement
Clause 9.3
Every engagement is governed by a legally enforceable agreement that specifies the scope and objectives of the verification, the applicable standard and programme requirements, the level of assurance, the materiality threshold, the responsibilities of both parties, the fee and payment terms, and the rules governing reference to the verification in your external communications.
The agreement requires you to make all necessary arrangements for the conduct of the verification, including providing access to relevant processes, records, data and personnel, and to comply with our rules regarding how verification statements and marks may be used externally.
Planning
Clause 9.4
Once the agreement is in place, we assign a verification team with the appropriate competence for your sector and inventory type. We assess the risk of material misstatement, determine the evidence-gathering activities required, and produce a documented verification plan covering objectives, scope, team composition, timeline and specified requirements. You will be informed of the names and roles of team members with sufficient notice for any objection to be raised. The verification plan will be communicated to you before verification activities begin.
Verification Execution
Clause 9.5
During the verification, we collect objective evidence by examining your GHG inventory, calculation methodologies, emission factors, activity data and supporting documentation. We trace data from the reported totals back to source documentation. We test calculations, review methodology, assess boundary completeness, and — where required — conduct interviews with key personnel and site assessments. We identify misstatements, assess their materiality (individually and in aggregate), and assess the overall conformity of your inventory with the specified requirements.
If the verification plan needs to be revised during execution — for example, because additional data sources are identified or because a particular emission category proves more complex than initially assessed — we document the reasons and communicate the changes to you.
Independent Review
Clause 9.6
Before any decision is made on the verification claim, the work of the verification team is subject to independent review by personnel who were not involved in the execution. The review confirms that verification activities have been conducted in accordance with the programme, that the evidence gathered is sufficient, and that findings are appropriately supported.
Decision and Verification Statement
Clause 9.7
The decision on whether to confirm your GHG inventory claim is made by personnel who were not involved in the verification execution. This structural separation, required by ISO/IEC 17029, ensures that the decision is based solely on the evidence and the findings of the review.
If the decision is positive, we issue a formal verification statement and — where applicable — a verification certificate. If the decision is negative, we inform you of the reasons and the steps that would be required to achieve confirmation. The verification statement is your document. You may share it with your board, your investors, your procurement panels, your CDP submission, and any other party that requires independent assurance of your emissions data.
Post-Issuance Monitoring
Clause 9.8
Our obligations do not end with the issuance of the statement. If new facts or information come to light after issuance that could materially affect the verification statement, we will contact you, discuss the matter, and — if necessary — revise or withdraw the statement.
Thresholds and Rigour
Materiality and Level of Assurance
Our verification programme requires that materiality and the level of assurance are agreed with the client during the pre-engagement phase and documented in the verification plan.
Materiality is the concept that misstatements — individually or in aggregate — could influence the decisions of intended users of the verified inventory. Materiality may be quantitative (a percentage threshold applied to total reported emissions) or qualitative (the omission or misrepresentation of information that could affect stakeholder understanding). Our standard quantitative materiality threshold is 5% of total reported emissions for limited assurance and 2% for reasonable assurance, unless a different threshold is required by the applicable reporting framework or agreed with the client.
Level of assurance determines the depth and rigour of evidence-gathering activities. Limited assurance engagements use inquiry, analytical procedures and targeted data testing to provide a moderate level of confidence. Reasonable assurance engagements deploy substantially more extensive testing, including source-level cross-checking and detailed methodology review, to provide the highest level of confidence.
The level of assurance is determined by the client’s reporting obligations, stakeholder expectations, and the level of scrutiny the data will face. Limited assurance is appropriate for the majority of voluntary reporting, CDP submissions, and ESG disclosures. Reasonable assurance is most often used for mandatory compliance, cap and trade schemes (e.g. UK-ETS, CORSIA).
Transparency and Commitment
Risking, Findings and Our Re-Verification Commitment
Every verification engagement begins with a structured risk assessment — a process defined in ISO 14064‑3 as risking. During risking, the verification team identifies where material misstatements are most likely to occur in your inventory, based on the size, complexity and data quality of each emission category. This assessment shapes the evidence-gathering plan for the remainder of the engagement.
Where the risking process identifies issues that would prevent the issuance of a confirming verification statement — data gaps, methodology errors, boundary inconsistencies, emission factor misapplications, insufficient audit trail — we report them to you in a detailed findings document before the verification proceeds to conclusion. You are then given the opportunity to correct those issues.
We do not prescribe how you should fix the issues — that would constitute consultancy — but we do clearly identify what each issue is and what the standard requires. You will always know exactly what we found and why.
Our Re-Verification Commitment
Once you have addressed the findings raised during risking, we conduct the subsequent verification exercise at no additional charge. A single agreed fee covers the initial risking, the findings report, and the verification of your corrected inventory. We do not invoice clients twice for the same engagement simply because corrective actions were needed along the way, see De-Risking Verification →
At the conclusion of the verification, we issue the final findings report documenting all material and non-material misstatements, non-conformities with the applicable standard, data quality issues, and areas for improvement. This report is provided to every client — whether the engagement concludes with a confirming or a non-confirming verification statement.
Our People
Competence Requirements
Our verification programme specifies competence criteria for all personnel involved in verification activities, in accordance with ISO/IEC 17029 Clauses 7.2 and 7.3.
All verification team members are required to demonstrate competence in the application of generic verification concepts, including evidence gathering, risk assessment, misstatement identification, materiality, and levels of assurance. They must have knowledge of the type and typical content of organisational GHG inventories, and knowledge of the applicable programme requirements.
For GHG verification specifically, our competence criteria additionally require demonstrated experience in ISO 14064‑1 inventory preparation and boundary assessment, ISO 14064‑3 verification methodology, GHG Protocol Corporate Standard and Scope 3 calculation methodologies, emission factor sources and application (including DESNZ/DEFRA and international equivalents), and sector-specific emission source categories relevant to the engagement.
Where verification activities are conducted remotely, team members must additionally demonstrate competence in the use of information and communication technology, remote sensing technologies, and the risk assessment framework defined in ISO 14064‑5.
Competence is documented, monitored and reviewed. Personnel are formally authorised for specific functions within the verification process. No individual conducts verification activities beyond their demonstrated and authorised competence.
Methodological Posture
Professional Scepticism and the Evidence-Based Approach
ISO 14066 Annex A — the international standard specifying competence requirements for validation and verification teams — requires that verification is conducted with an attitude of professional scepticism. This is not a turn of phrase. It is a specific methodological requirement that governs how our team approaches every piece of evidence gathered during an engagement.
Professional scepticism means making a critical assessment, with a questioning mind, of the validity of evidence obtained, and remaining alert to information that contradicts or brings into question the reliability of documents or representations provided by the responsible party. We do not take assertions at face value. We test them.
Our programme applies the evidence reliability hierarchy set out in ISO 14066 Annex A. Evidence obtained from independent external sources is generally treated as more reliable than internal representations. Documentary evidence in original form — whether paper or electronic — is treated as more reliable than photocopies, screenshots or oral descriptions. Evidence obtained directly by our team is treated as more reliable than evidence obtained by inference. Consistent evidence from multiple sources carries more weight than evidence from a single source.
Where evidence is insufficient, we gather more. Where sources contradict one another, we investigate the inconsistency until it is resolved. Where a document cannot be corroborated, we say so in the findings report. The sufficiency and appropriateness of evidence — its quantity and its quality — is a matter of professional judgement, and our team exercises that judgement in every engagement.
What You Receive
Verification Reporting and Statements
Upon completion of the verification process, we produce the following outputs:
Verification findings report — a detailed document identifying all findings, misstatements (material and non-material), areas for improvement, and corrective actions required. This report is provided to every client, regardless of the outcome of the engagement.
Verification statement — a formal declaration of the outcome of the verification process, issued in accordance with ISO/IEC 17029 Clause 9.7.2. The statement includes the client name, verification body identity and type (third party), scope and objectives, programme and standard references, level of assurance, the decision on the claim, and the date and unique identification of the statement.
Verification certificate — confirming verification to the applicable standard.
Verification statements may be confirming or non-confirming. Where a statement is non-confirming, the client is informed of the reasons and the steps that would be required to achieve confirmation.
Where remote activities and techniques have been used during the engagement, the verification report and statement disclose the extent of their use and confirm their effectiveness in achieving the verification objectives. This transparency is a standard element of every engagement report.
Audit Trail
Records and Document Retention
In accordance with ISO/IEC 17029 Clause 9.11, Carbon Verification Limited maintains records of all verification activities, including pre-engagement information, scope documentation, verification plans and any revisions, evidence gathered and analysis performed, findings reports, verification statements, and any complaints and appeals relating to the engagement. Records are maintained securely and confidentially and are retained for a minimum of seven years.
Your Role
What We Need From You
The timescales of the verification process depends significantly on the quality and readiness of your data. To help the process run smoothly, we ask that you provide a complete GHG inventory report, with calculations and methodology clearly documented; that you make source documentation available for the emission categories within the verification scope; that you identify a primary contact who understands your data collection and calculation processes; that you respond to requests for information and clarification within the agreed timeframes; and that you inform us promptly of any changes to the inventory or supporting data after submission.
Well-prepared data saves time and cost
Organisations with well-prepared data and clear documentation move through the verification process significantly faster — and at lower cost — than those that require extensive follow-up.
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
