RICA Metrics Reporting Standard
The RICA Metrics Reporting Standard defines how project metrics are selected, reported, reviewed, and carried into portfolio and note disclosure. It gives sponsors a practical reporting discipline, gives reviewers a common basis for testing evidence quality, and gives investors a consistent view of asset-level outcomes across projects, frameworks, geographies, loans, and notes.
RICA metrics are not a marketing layer. They are part of the open project account: the continuing operating record that connects project design, monthly submissions, evidence, verification status, financing behavior, and investor-facing disclosure.
Status And Scope
Section titled “Status And Scope”| Field | Current Standard Position |
|---|---|
| Standards layer | Impact and assurance |
| Applies to | RICA projects, project loans, portfolio reporting, and note monitoring |
| Primary system of record | Atlas open project account |
| Reporting cadence | Monthly unless a later standard permits a different cadence |
| Review model | Sponsor submission, reviewer assessment, platform approval, and retained audit trail |
| Version | Draft v0.1 for market-architecture development |
This standard governs project-level metric reporting. It does not replace a project financial model, project loan servicing record, external audit, regulated offering document, or local legal compliance requirement.
Why Metrics Matter In RICA
Section titled “Why Metrics Matter In RICA”RICA treats distributed adaptation infrastructure as investable only when operating performance and impact evidence remain visible after financing. Metrics make that visibility practical. They show whether projects are producing food, supporting livelihoods, conserving water, restoring landscapes, avoiding emissions, sequestering carbon, adapting farmland, creating jobs, and directing distributions toward nature stewardship.
The standard is designed for institutional use. It separates definitions from evidence, reported values from approved values, and project-level observations from rollups. This makes it easier to compare projects without pretending that every project, framework, and geography has identical evidence conditions.
Metric Reporting Chain
Section titled “Metric Reporting Chain”Core Requirements
Section titled “Core Requirements”| Requirement | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Defined metric | Each reported value must link to an approved RICA metric definition or an explicitly labeled project-specific metric. |
| Defined period | Each value must identify the reporting period it represents. RICA uses monthly reporting as the baseline. |
| Defined unit | Values must use the unit in the metric definition unless the platform records an approved project-currency translation for currency metrics. |
| Evidence trail | A value should be traceable to a file, system export, log, meter, survey, ledger, or reviewer note. |
| Review status | Investor-facing values should distinguish reported, reviewed, approved, rejected, superseded, and missing states. |
| Non-destructive correction | Corrections should preserve earlier submissions and mark superseded values rather than silently replacing history. |