🌊Blue Pacific

How we evaluate

Blue Pacific scores ocean-protection charities on six dimensions. The goal is a defensible, repeatable rubric — not a black-box trust score. Scores are editorial judgments backed by cited evidence, and the methodology is public so anyone can check our work.

Our principles

Maximum transparency

Every data point should be traceable to a public, citable source. If we can't source it, we don't show it. Where a charity is not transparent, that absence is itself reported.

Impact over intentions

A compelling mission statement is not impact. We privilege measurable, independently-verifiable outcomes over activity counts and marketing language.

Fairness

Comparisons are evidence-based and applied consistently across organizations. We don't editorialize beyond what the sources support.

The six dimensions

Financial transparency
Are full, recent, ideally audited financials publicly available?
20%
Program efficiency
Share of spending reaching the mission vs. overhead and fundraising.
15%
Impact evidence
Are outcomes measured, reported, and ideally externally verified?
25%
Mission focus
How directly does the organization's work protect the ocean?
15%
Governance & accountability
Independent board, conflict-of-interest policies, accountability.
10%
Reporting openness
Cadence and depth of public reporting.
15%

Each dimension is scored 0–100 with a written justification and at least one source link. The overall score is the weighted average of the disclosed dimensions; missing data is recorded as “not disclosed” and never silently treated as average.

Data integrity rules

Current status: the scores on this site are illustrative placeholders to demonstrate the platform. They will be replaced with sourced assessments before being presented as authoritative.