> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.clearlinecarbon.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # What "Auditable" Actually Requires - URL: https://www.clearlinecarbon.com/what-auditable-actually-requires/ - Published: 2026-08-25T07:17:36.000Z - Updated: 2026-08-25T07:17:36.000Z - Description: Collecting the right data is step one. Whether it holds up under scrutiny is what actually determines if your inventory is defensible. - Author: Clearline Carbon - Tags: Guides Collecting the right data is step one. Whether that data holds up under scrutiny is a separate question, and it's the one that actually determines whether your inventory is defensible, not just whether the total looks reasonable. ### Document methodology as you go, not after The instinct is to collect the numbers first and write up the methodology later, if at all. That's backwards, and it's also the reason methodology write-ups tend to be vague or incomplete. By the time someone sits down to document it, they've forgotten exactly which emission factor they used for which facility, or why a particular estimate was made. Write down your approach for each category as you calculate it: what data source you pulled from, what calculation method you applied, and any judgment call you made along the way. This takes minutes in the moment and hours to reconstruct later. ### Every number needs a receipt "Auditable" means someone unfamiliar with your process could trace any number in the inventory back to its source: an actual invoice, meter reading, or purchase log. If a figure exists only because someone remembers it being "about right," it isn't auditable, regardless of how close it turns out to be. Keep source records filed against the specific data point they support, not in a general folder you'd have to search through later. ### Emission factors need a documented source and vintage Emission factors change year to year: grid emission factors get updated, global warming potential values get revised between IPCC assessment reports. Using a factor without recording which version and which year you pulled it from is a common way inventories become indefensible later: two categories calculated using emission factors from different years, with no record of which was used where, is very hard to reconcile after the fact. Note the source and the vintage for every factor you use, at the time you use it. ### Handle estimates and gaps transparently Real inventories have gaps: a meter reading that's missing, a facility where actual data wasn't available in time. The problem isn't having an estimate; it's having an undocumented one. If you had to estimate a number, write down that it's an estimate, what method you used to generate it, and why actual data wasn't available. An inventory with three clearly-labeled, defensibly-estimated data points is far more credible than one that looks complete but has silently interpolated numbers buried in it. ### Have someone else look at it before it leaves the building Whoever builds the inventory is the worst-positioned person to catch their own errors. They've been looking at the same numbers long enough that mistakes stop looking like mistakes. A second set of eyes, even someone without deep GHG expertise, can catch obvious inconsistencies (a facility that shows zero electricity use, a fuel total that's an order of magnitude off from last year) before they show up in front of an external reviewer. ### Decide your recalculation approach now At some point you'll need to restate a prior year's numbers: you'll acquire a facility, improve your data quality, or discover an error. Deciding now how you'll handle that (what triggers a restatement, how far back you'll go) means you're not making that call under pressure later, when a reviewer is asking why this year's number doesn't line up with last year's. --- None of this replaces actually collecting the data. That's what the [checklist](https://www.clearlinecarbon.com/get-the-checklist/) is for. This is the layer on top of it: the difference between an inventory that has the right numbers and one that can survive someone asking where they came from.