How is the non-permanence risk rating for a forestry or agroforestry project scored?

Under Verra's AFOLU Non-Permanence Risk Tool, you score internal, external and natural risks from the tool's tables, take off points only for documented mitigation, and add the three into one rating. That rating is the percentage of each verified stock gain held in the buffer pool, never below the tool's minimum; above 60 the project cannot be credited.

Internal risk: the project itself

• Project management: track record of the team, how much of the area is actually under its control, and whether a management plan with monitoring is in place.
• Financial viability: how long until the project breaks even and how much of the funding is already secured.
• Opportunity cost: how the project's returns compare with the most profitable other use of the land, such as a cash crop. A large gap scores high risk unless landholders are bound by agreement.
• Project longevity: how many years the landholders legally commit to keep the carbon in place. Short or unenforceable commitments score worst.

External risk: land, people and government

• Land and resource tenure: who holds title and use rights, whether rights are disputed, and whether agreements run for the full project life.
• Community engagement: whether affected households were consulted and share in benefits.
• Political risk: scored from country governance indicators, so Indian projects share the same starting point and differ mainly on tenure and community factors.

Natural risk: hazards at the site

For each hazard type, such as fire, pests and disease, extreme weather and geological events, the tool asks how often a damaging event happens (likelihood) and how much carbon it would destroy (significance). The two combine into a score per hazard, reduced where you show prevention, such as fire lines, grazing control or species mix, then summed. Since version 4.2 the natural risk assessment also takes in projected climate change and, for coastal sites, sea-level rise.

From scores to a buffer

1. Add internal, external and natural scores to get the overall rating.
2. If it falls below the tool's minimum, use the minimum; take the minimum from the version that applies to you.
3. A rating above 60 must be brought down to 60 or less, by reducing documented risks, before the project can be credited.
4. Apply the rating as a percentage of the net carbon stock change at each verification, and redo the assessment at each verification as conditions change.

Evidence that lowers an Indian project's score

• Record of Rights extracts or lease deeds for every parcel, matched to the project map.
• Signed farmer agreements that run for the full project longevity, with benefit sharing written down.
• Fire history from forest department or satellite fire data, with a fire plan.
• Audited accounts or a funding letter showing the project can pay for monitoring through its life.

Illustrative effect of better tenure records

• Before: internal 12 + external 8 + natural 10 = 30, so 30% to the buffer
• After documented land rights and longer farmer agreements: internal 9 + external 3 + natural 10 = 22, so 22% to the buffer
• On a verified stock gain of 10,000 t CO2e: buffer falls from 3,000 to 2,200 credits
• Credits issued rise from 7,000 to 7,800

Scores are illustrative, not taken from the tool's tables. Your rating comes from the version of the tool that applies to you and the validation body's review; if it is below the current minimum, the minimum applies.

What Senseible does here

Senseible's carbon credit eligibility signals, drawn from your measured records, show whether a project looks ready for a methodology. They are not credits or a risk rating: the rating comes from Verra's tool and the validation body's review, and credits are issued by registries such as Verra.

• How much goes to the buffer pool
• Soil carbon credits for Indian farmers
• Carbon credits

Sources: Verra, Procedure for Applying the AFOLU Non-Permanence Risk Tool v5.0 (16 December 2025), and AFOLU Non-Permanence Risk Tool v4.2 (12 October 2023), Gold Standard, Land Use and Forests requirements, ICVCM Core Carbon Principles (permanence)

Last reviewed 2026-10-16. Verra moved the tool to a v5.0 procedure under VCS Version 5 in December 2025; check its factor tables, category limits and minimum rating, and which version applies to your next verification.