How we verify a project

Where projects come from

Only from organizations already reviewed by independent evaluators (for example GlobalGiving, which runs its own due diligence on partner organizations). Projects found only on social networks or on sites without a verifiable registration are not considered.

Admission rules (applied by the code, word for word)

1. Only from platforms that vet organizations with their own due diligence: globalgiving
2. Theme hunger and food security
3. The project is active and still needs funds
4. Published on the platform for at least 365 days
5. At least 3 progress reports published
6. Last report no older than 12 months
7. The organization has already managed at least 2 projects
8. Goal not higher than 50,000 USD
9. At least 10 donations from other donors
10. No warning from the platform (for example about delayed payments)

Rules for organizations found by the agents

Besides the platforms, the agents look on their own for organizations already rated by Charity Navigator, an independent evaluator. Even stricter rules apply to them, enforced by code:

1. The organization has a full Charity Navigator rating (being listed is not enough)
2. Top rating: 4 out of 4 stars and at least 90%. The code reads the rating on the public page and checks it again every week: if it drops during the public review, the committee withdraws the project
3. US tax ID (EIN) verified in the official IRS records
4. At least 3 years of official financial filings (Form 990)
5. Hunger and nutrition as the official IRS category or in the organization's name
6. Geographic balance: our fundraising pages on Every.org require a US tax ID (EIN), so the agents look for organizations registered in the United States that work in the poorest countries. An organization counts as working abroad if its official IRS category starts with Q (international), if it is registered outside the United States, or if its name contains one of these words: international, global, worldwide, overseas, without borders, africa, asia, india, latin america, kenya, uganda, ethiopia, malawi, nepal, bangladesh, guatemala, honduras, sahel, sudan, yemen, afghanistan, madagascar. Any other organization becomes a candidate only if at least 50% of the open projects and of the candidates found by the agents and still under verification work abroad
7. The independent evaluator's page is among the evidence downloaded by the agents

Committee: 3 AI verifiers from 3 different model families, unanimous, score at least 85/100; then 72 hours of public review.

The checks

The rules applied by the code, not by the AI

1. The evidence is downloaded by the software (source page, progress reports, official financial filings, the organization's website). The AI can cite only this evidence; a check without valid evidence becomes "uncertain".
2. A critical check that fails or is uncertain discards the project, whatever its score.
3. Three verifiers from different model families must all agree. If one is unavailable, the project waits.
4. Conflicts of interest are checked against the list of sponsors and known ties.
5. The database itself refuses to mark a project as approved without the recorded unanimous decision of the committee of agents.
6. Texts read from the web or from emails are treated as data, never as instructions to the agents.
7. All projects are equal: the same space on the site and in emails, the same search for benefactors for all of them, and an order that rotates every day, so no project always stays on top.

39candidates examined by the agents

25discarded by the checks