$557bn
Estimated US charitable giving in 2023. The scale of giving makes trust matter.Giving USA 2024
Independent charity verification · In development
Good work.Clearevidence.
Beyond the surface.
A clearer view of the evidence.
Give funders a clearer reason
to believe in your work.
The case for clarity
Charities do extraordinary work. The evidence should speak just as clearly.
Givmark is building an independent verification standard for charities. Professional document review, augmented by AI, to make your financials, governance and programme claims easier to assess.
Every finding should lead back to its source. Every determination should show its limits. A public record designed to support more informed funding conversations.
34%
Of organisations in one US nonprofit study showed Benford non-conformance. A screening signal, not proof of fraud.Qu, Steinberg & Burger, 2020
One scandal
Misconduct news can reduce willingness to help beyond the charity involved. A study of willingness, not actual donations.Yin et al., 2021
A fuller picture Five dimensions of verification
Givmark / Working paperFictional example
01 / Source
Annual accounts · note 7
Restricted income: £120,00002 / Cross-reference
Programme schedule: £112,000 allocated
03 / Reconciliation question
Reconcile the £8,000 difference before a determination.
Financialintegrity
Follow the figures.
Accounts, reserves and financial ratios, cross-referenced for consistency. Benford screening helps identify questions for professional review.
Proposed review scope
Accounts · ratios · anomaly screening
Givmark / Working paperFictional example
01 / Source
Trustee interests · entry 04
A trustee declares a supplier connection.02 / Cross-reference
Board minutes: trustee absent from the decision
03 / Governance cross-reference
Check the declaration against the approval record.
Governance
Know who is accountable.
Board oversight, declared conflicts, executive remuneration and compliance. A clear picture of how decisions are made.
Proposed review scope
Trustees · conflicts · remuneration
Givmark / Working paperFictional example
01 / Source
Programme report · page 12
Reported: 240 participants completed training.02 / Cross-reference
Attendance register: 240 completion records
03 / Evidence and its limits
Completion is documented. Employment impact needs separate evidence.
Programmeplausibility
Put claims in context.
Reported outcomes checked against budgets, delivery assumptions and relevant research. Evidence is assessed within its limitations.
Proposed review scope
Outcomes · budgets · research
Givmark / Working paperFictional example
01 / Source
Adverse-media screening · result 03
A similar organisation name appears in a report.02 / Cross-reference
Registration number and location do not match
03 / Context before conclusion
Record the mismatch; do not attribute the report on name alone.
Organisationalintegrity
See the wider picture.
Adverse media, sanctions and substantiated misconduct reviewed in context, with a route for the organisation to respond.
Proposed review scope
Media · sanctions · responses
Givmark / Working paperFictional example
01 / Source
Wallet trail · illustrative transfer
Wallet A → Wallet B · 10 units02 / Cross-reference
Ledger entry: programme payment
03 / Trace and corroborate
Confirm the counterparty and purpose. A transfer alone does not prove impact.
On-chainfundflows
Trace the transaction.
Where cryptoassets are involved, wallet trails and counterparties add another layer of visibility. Fund movement alone does not prove impact.
Proposed review scope
Wallets · counterparties · fund trails
Scroll to explore the evidence
Scope agreed before every engagement
A complementary perspective
Different questions.
Better-informed giving.
Deep impact research, broad ratings and professional document review each serve a different purpose.
OrganisationPrimary lensApproach
GiveWell
Impact & cost-effectivenessIn-depth research to identify outstanding giving opportunities.
Charity Navigator
Charity ratingsRatings across accountability, finance, impact and organisational practice.
Givmark
Professional document verificationAI-assisted evidence review with human sign-off. In development.
From evidence to confidence
A clear process.
A human decision.
Designed to make professional scrutiny accessible, with the scope and limitations visible at every step.
01Submit
Bring your evidence.
Submit your accounts, governance documents and programme evidence. Agree the scope of review before analysis begins.
02AI-assisted analysis
Connect the details.
AI assists with gathering, cross-referencing and screening. Sources stay attached to findings; unresolved questions come back to you.
03Professional sign-off
Earn a public record.
A chartered accountant reviews the evidence and makes the determination. Eligible charities receive a badge linked to the scope and findings.
A mark with something behind it
Illustrative specimen
Givmark Verified
Sample date · DD MMM YYYY / Scope to be defined
Verification ID
Design example. No verification issued.GM–DEMO–0001Badge design specimen. The public verification register will launch with the service.
Know what
the mark means.
The badge will link to a dated verification record: the scope, the evidence reviewed, the professional determination and its limits.
The agreed document layer: financial integrity, governance, programme plausibility and organisational integrity, with on-chain review where relevant. It is not a field evaluation or a guarantee of impact.
Professional accountability
Technology does the groundwork.
Experience makes the judgement.
Founded by a PwC-trained chartered accountant and Fellow of ICAEW, with two decades of experience across institutional finance, fund services and financial reporting.
Professional foundation
PwC · ACA · FCA
Trained at PwC from 2001 to 2004. ACA-qualified in 2004 and a Fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales.
Institutional experience
Bear Stearns · RBS · Citco
Experience includes venture-capital fund work at Bear Stearns, senior transfer-pricing and finance-change roles at RBS, and Senior Vice President at Citco from 2014 to 2021.
Technology and evidence
Finance meets applied AI.
Hands-on work with blockchain and AI systems informs Givmark’s approach: use technology to examine documents, then bring professional judgement to the findings.
Founding waitlistFor charities ready to make their evidence clearer.
Help shape clearer
charity verification.
Join for pilot and launch updates.
An expression of interest, with no commitment to apply.