The benefits of all GHG mitigation projects - regardless of where they take place, or what they involve - are measured by what is known as “consequential greenhouse gas accounting.” This practice involves documenting how a given project changes GHG emissions compared to a baseline.
Project documentation should be rigorous enough to limit the risk of funding “hot air” projects, which provide no GHG benefits, but not so arduous as to be cost-prohibitive. Finding this sweet spot can be difficult.
In 2026, TCCP adopted a “Grading Scheme” for Evaluation, Monitoring, and Verification of projects. The Grading Scheme consists of five Grades of documentation (A through E). In general, a project that is further from your control is subject to higher EM&V requirements, because you are likely to have less primary information about the project’s outcomes.
The levels in the Grading Scheme are as follows:
Grade A
Documentation must include a project-specific verification or research report, prepared by a qualified and independent third party, using a defined methodology/protocol.
Methodology/protocol must ensure additionality, permanence, and robust quantification of emission reductions/removals
Estimated GHG reductions must be designated as either achieved (past) or expected (future)
Accepted methodologies for market-based projects are listed in the Standard
Example: carbon credit verified against a Gold Standard methodology.
Grade B
Documentation must include a project-specific verification or research report, prepared by a qualified and independent third party.
Verification or research report must provide specific assessment of the mitigation benefits of a matching project/material type in a matching geography/use case
Verification or research report must ensure additionality, permanence, and robust quantification of emission reductions/removals
Estimated GHG reductions must be designated as either achieved (past) or expected (future)
Example: an independent LCA report for a specific low-carbon material
Grade C
Documentation must include peer-reviewed determination by a qualified and independent third party that a project type provides GHG mitigation benefits.
Example: Project Drawdown cites plastic recycling projects as a climate solution
Grade D
Documentation must include an attestation form signed by an authorized representative of the certifying organization.
Example: signed form/letter from certified company or a third party, attesting to the accuracy of submissions
Grade E
Documentation must include clearly disclosed data that is publicly attributable to the certifying organization.
Example: corporate sustainability report or completed form/questionnaire
These Grades are applied to Projects as follows:
CTB Category | Form of Project | Minimum Required EM&V Documentation |
BVC | Market-traded instruments | Grade A |
BVC | Directly funded mitigation: value chain adjacent and global projects | Grade B or better |
VCA | Scope 1 and 2 reduction projects | Grade C or better |
VCA | Scope 3 Value Chain Interventions / Reductions | Grade B or better (for preferred materials projects) Grade C or better (for all other projects) |
OC | Indirect interventions | Grade D or better |