How to Vet a Tree-Planting Charity: 7 Things to Check
Updated:
Key takeaways
- Find out who plants the trees and where they go, then confirm those partners and sites in sources outside the organization’s own website.
- Trees funded, purchased, planted and surviving are different numbers, so check which one a charity is reporting.
- A survival rate is only useful with a date, the name of the assessor and the planting season it covers.
- A forester confirming that trees were planted is a separate check from a carbon standard verifying credits.
- BGPP’s May 2025 planting at Devil’s Lake recorded 99% survival in an independent fall assessment by NFMC, and BGPP doesn’t sell carbon credits.
A dollar can put a tree in the ground. Proving what happens after that is harder.
If you’re deciding where to fund tree planting, don’t start with the organization’s biggest number or best photo. Look for the details behind them: who does the planting, where the trees go, whether anyone checks on them, and what the organization is willing to say it can’t prove.
Here are seven checks you can run on any tree-planting charity before you give.
| Check | What a good answer looks like | Red flag |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Who plants the trees? | Named partners you can look up independently | “Local partners” with no names |
| 2. Where did the trees go? | A named project, location, maps or planting records | Large tree counts with no named locations |
| 3. Is survival published? | Survival assessments with a date, an assessor and a scope | Guaranteed survival, or no follow-up at all |
| 4. What does “verified” mean? | An explanation of what was checked and by whom | “Verified” with no detail |
| 5. Is there outside evidence? | Coverage or records from partners, funders, media or government | Nothing outside the organization’s own website |
| 6. What happens if trees die? | A monitoring and management plan beyond planting day | No information after planting |
| 7. What won’t it claim? | Clear limits on carbon and other environmental claims | Every benefit presented as guaranteed and measurable |
Why tree-planting claims can be hard to verify
Planting a tree is easy to understand. Verifying a large-scale tree-planting program isn’t.
An organization might report trees funded, seedlings purchased, trees planted, hectares restored, or trees expected to survive. Those aren’t necessarily the same number.
| The number | What it tells you | What to ask |
|---|---|---|
| Trees funded | How many trees donations have paid for | Have they been planted yet, and when? |
| Seedlings purchased | How many seedlings were ordered from a nursery | Where were they planted? |
| Trees planted | How many seedlings went into the ground | Who counted them, and where? |
| Hectares restored | How much land was planted | At what density? |
| Trees surviving | How many seedlings were alive at the last assessment | When was it done, by whom, and for which planting? |
There are also questions that don’t fit neatly into a counter on a website. Were the right species planted for the site? Who actually put them in the ground? What happens after the first planting season? Did an independent person ever visit the site?
You shouldn’t need to be a forester to find basic answers. A credible organization should be able to show you what happened to your contribution and be clear about the limits of what it can prove.
1. Can you find out who actually plants the trees?
Look past phrases like “local partners” or “communities on the ground.” Who are they?
A credible organization should be able to name the people, businesses, Nations, non-profits, forestry companies, or other organizations responsible for delivering its projects.
Then check those partners independently. Do they have their own website or public presence? Do they describe the same project? Does their role match the way the charity describes it?
This matters because the organization collecting your money isn’t always the organization doing the planting, and that’s not necessarily a problem. In many cases, local organizations are far better positioned to lead the work. The important part is being clear about who does what.
2. Can you find out where the trees went?
“Trees planted in Canada” isn’t very specific.
Look for a named location or project. Better still, see whether the organization provides maps, planting areas, project updates, photos, or other records that connect the number on its website to an actual place.
Specificity makes a claim easier to check. If an organization says it planted one million trees, you should be able to ask where those trees went and find a meaningful answer.
If that information isn’t available publicly, ask before donating.
3. Does it publish survival data?
A tree going into the ground isn’t the end of the story.
Seedlings can die because of drought, wildfire, disease, poor site conditions, planting problems, animal damage, or other factors. Some mortality is a normal part of reforestation, which is why a promise of 100% survival should prompt more questions rather than fewer.
What’s more useful is evidence that someone goes back and checks.
Ask whether survival assessments are conducted, how long after planting they take place, who performs them, whether the results are published, and whether the reported figure applies to one project, one planting season, or the organization’s entire planting history.
Pay particular attention to that last point. A survival rate from one site shouldn’t be presented as though it applies to every tree an organization has ever funded.
4. What does “verified” actually mean?
“Verified” sounds reassuring, but it needs an explanation.
A planting project can be verified in several different ways. Someone might verify that seedlings were purchased. A forester might verify that a stated number of trees were planted. A later assessment might measure how many survived.
| What was verified | What it confirms | What it doesn’t confirm |
|---|---|---|
| Seedlings purchased | An order was placed and filled | That the seedlings were planted, or where |
| Trees planted | Seedlings went into the ground at a stated density and location | How many will survive |
| Seedling survival | How many seedlings were alive at the time of assessment | Long-term growth, or carbon stored |
| Carbon credits | A quantified reduction or removal under a named standard and registry | Anything unless the credits are issued and retired under that standard |
Those are useful checks, but they don’t prove every environmental claim that could be made about those trees.
Carbon verification is a separate issue. Programs that issue verified carbon credits generally operate under defined methodologies and standards, such as Gold Standard or Verra’s Verified Carbon Standard. Our guide to corporate carbon offsetting in Canada explains how credit verification works.
A charity saying its tree planting is independently verified doesn’t automatically mean its carbon claims are independently verified or that your donation purchases a carbon credit.
Whenever you see the word “verified,” ask two follow-up questions: what exactly was verified, and by whom?
5. Is there evidence outside the organization’s own website?
An organization will naturally show you its strongest work, so look beyond its own pages too.
Search the charity’s name alongside its project names and partners. Look for reporting from news organizations, government agencies, First Nations, forestry organizations, funders, or other groups involved.
If an organization says it’s a registered charity, you can confirm that on the Canada Revenue Agency’s list of charities. Independent resources such as Charity Intelligence Canada also review Canadian charities.
Independent coverage isn’t proof that every claim an organization makes is correct, and a lack of media coverage doesn’t automatically make a smaller organization untrustworthy. Think of it as another layer of evidence. The more parts of the story you can confirm somewhere else, the less you’re being asked to take on faith.
6. What happens if the trees die?
This is one of the least glamorous questions you can ask a tree-planting charity, which makes it one of the most useful.
Forests aren’t controlled environments. Some seedlings won’t survive.
A credible organization should be able to explain what happens next. Does it monitor the site? Does another organization take responsibility for long-term forest management? Are failed areas replanted? How are wildfire and other losses handled?
There may not be a simple promise that every dead seedling will be replaced one-for-one. Forest management is more complicated than that. What you’re looking for is evidence that the organization and its forestry partners have thought beyond planting day.
7. What does the organization decline to claim?
This one is easy to overlook.
Transparency isn’t only about what an organization tells you it does. It’s also about where it draws the line.
Tree planting can support forest restoration, but that doesn’t automatically mean every planted tree is a verified carbon offset. Funding trees doesn’t automatically make a person or business carbon neutral, and an estimate of how much carbon a tree might store isn’t the same as a verified carbon credit.
Look for organizations that make those distinctions clear. If every environmental benefit is presented as guaranteed, measurable, and attributable to your donation, ask for the evidence behind it.
A credible organization should be willing to tell you when the evidence supports a claim, when something is an estimate, and when it simply doesn’t have enough evidence to make the claim at all.
Red flags to watch for
No single red flag proves an organization isn’t legitimate, but several together should make you look more closely.
Be cautious when you see:
- Large tree counts with no named planting locations
- No information about who does the actual planting
- “Verified” with no explanation of what was checked or by whom
- Carbon-offset claims without a named methodology, standard, or registry
- Guaranteed survival language
- No information about monitoring after planting
- Photos with no clear connection to a named project
- Indigenous partnerships mentioned without naming the Nation or explaining its actual role
- Tree counts that don’t make clear whether they refer to trees funded, purchased, planted, or surviving
- Environmental claims that are much more specific than the evidence provided
A useful test is to take the organization’s biggest claim and trace it backwards. If it says five million trees were planted, can you find out where they went, who planted them, over what period, who counted them, and what happened next?
The answers don’t all need to fit on the homepage, but they should exist.
How Blue Green Planet Project answers these questions
You should apply the same checks to us.
Blue Green Planet Project funds and coordinates tree planting, including planting at Devil’s Lake Kistike’win in central Manitoba and the Bell Fire Restoration project in Saskatchewan’s Pasquia Hills. Our seedling reports refer to the Devil’s Lake project as the Interlake Wildfire Restoration project.
The Devil’s Lake Kistike’win project is led by Nekote LP. Nekote LP originated the project following the 2021 wildfires and works with First Nations involved in planting and the long-term stewardship of the land.
Blue Green Planet Project helps fund the planting, but the trees are planted by crews on the ground: one Indigenous crew that BGPP hires directly, alongside around 80 planters hired through a planting contractor, a mix of young people from all over the world. We think that distinction is important, particularly when talking about Indigenous-led projects. Our role is to support the work, not take ownership of it.
| Check | Our answer | Where to check it |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Who plants the trees? | One Indigenous crew hired by BGPP, plus around 80 planters hired through a planting contractor; Shoal Lake Cree Nation leads Bell Fire | Indigenous Partnerships |
| 2. Where did the trees go? | Named project sites in central Manitoba and Saskatchewan, with block maps, tree-quality plots, and photos and video from planting | Devil’s Lake Kistike’win, Bell Fire Restoration |
| 3. Is survival published? | Yes, by season. The 2025 Devil’s Lake planting showed 99% survival at its fall assessment | 2025 Survival Assessment |
| 4. Who verifies the planting? | Independent forestry professionals at NFMC and Dunkley Lumber Limited | Seedling reports on our Annual Reports page |
| 5. Is there outside evidence? | Coverage on CBC’s The National, May 28, 2026 | Watch the segment |
| 6. What happens if trees die? | Survival is assessed after each season and sites are reviewed with NFMC before the next one | 2026 Spring Update |
| 7. What won’t we claim? | That funded trees are carbon credits or offset anyone’s emissions | See “What doesn’t BGPP claim?” below |
Tracing one of our own numbers
Here is the backwards test from the red flags section, applied to our 2025 planting season at Devil’s Lake.
| Question | Answer | Source |
|---|---|---|
| How many trees? | 3 million seedlings, planted in May 2025 | 2025 Survival Assessment |
| Where did they go? | 1,250 hectares of burned land in the Devil’s Lake area of central Manitoba, mapped by harvest block | Block maps in the same report |
| Who planted them? | Members of the Nekote LP Nations, with Summit Reforestation | 2025 Survival Assessment |
| What was planted? | 95% jack pine and 5% black spruce, grown from seed collected nearby, at 2,400 seedlings per hectare | 2025 Survival Assessment |
| Who checked them? | A forest technician from Nisokapawino Forest Management Corporation, at the end of September 2025 | 2025 Survival Assessment |
| What did they find? | 99% survival, with under 1% of seedlings found dead | 2025 Survival Assessment |
| What happens next? | NFMC and BGPP reviewed the ground in October to plan the 2026 season | 2026 Spring Update |
Can you find out who plants the trees?
Yes. We name the organizations and communities involved in our projects rather than describing them only as “local” or “Indigenous” partners.
For the Devil’s Lake Kistike’win project, that includes Nekote LP, the Indigenous planting crew BGPP hires, and the planters hired through our planting contractor. At Bell Fire, the project is led by Shoal Lake Cree Nation, with Summit Reforestation as the tree-planting partner. You can learn more about how these partnerships work on our Indigenous Partnerships page.
Can you find out where they go?
Yes. We publish information about the projects we support and where planting takes place, including Devil’s Lake Kistike’win in Manitoba and Bell Fire Restoration in Saskatchewan.
We believe a tree count is more useful when it’s connected to an actual project and place, so contributors can understand what their contribution is helping make possible. Our reporting includes maps of the planting areas, plot surveys that grade the quality of the planted trees, professional photos and video from the planting season, and geotagged photos on request.
Does BGPP publish a survival rate?
Yes. Seedling survival is documented through our fall seedling report and assessed by a third party, Nisokapawino Forest Management Corporation (NFMC).
That context matters. Rather than treating one survival percentage as a universal number for every tree we’ve helped fund, survival reporting should be understood in relation to the specific project, planting season, and assessment it comes from.
Our most recent assessment covered the 3 million seedlings planted at Devil’s Lake in May 2025. An NFMC forest technician assessed the site at the end of September 2025 and recorded 99% survival, with under 1% of seedlings found dead. That figure applies to the 2025 planting season only. You can read the 2025 Survival Assessment, along with earlier years’ reports, on our Annual Reports page.
Who verifies the planting?
Our planting projects are independently assessed by forestry professionals. Blue Green Planet Project works with foresters at Nisokapawino Forest Management Corporation (NFMC) and Dunkley Lumber Limited in Edgewood, Saskatchewan, providing an independent layer of forestry expertise beyond our own organization.
It’s also important to be precise about what we mean by verification. In this context, we’re talking about independent forestry assessment of planting and seedling survival. We’re not saying that these assessments verify carbon credits or certify the projects under a carbon-offset standard.
Is there independent evidence?
Our work has also received independent media coverage, including a segment on CBC’s The National on May 28, 2026. You can watch the segment on CBC.
Media coverage isn’t a substitute for project reporting or independent forestry assessment, but it provides another source readers can use when checking our work for themselves.
What happens if trees don’t survive?
Some seedling mortality is expected in forestry projects, which is one reason survival is assessed after planting through the fall seedling report.
We’d rather document that process accurately than make a general promise that may not reflect how forest management decisions are actually made.
What doesn’t BGPP claim?
Blue Green Planet Project isn’t a carbon-credit provider. Trees funded through our programs don’t generate carbon credits that contributors can use to offset their own emissions, and BGPP isn’t registered under a carbon-offset standard or registry.
Blue Green Planet Project also isn’t a registered charity, so contributions don’t come with a charitable tax receipt.
Trees absorb and store carbon as they grow, but the amount varies according to species, age, growing conditions, survival, and other factors. We don’t currently have the project-specific substantiation required to tell a contributor that funding a particular number of trees has offset a specific amount of carbon, so we don’t make that claim. Our guide to corporate carbon offsetting in Canada explains the difference in more detail.
Instead, we focus our reporting on what we can substantiate: how many trees were funded and planted, where they went, who was involved in planting them, and the results of the project monitoring available to us.
Compare before you choose
You don’t have to choose Blue Green Planet Project.
Compare us with other tree-planting organizations. Ask them these seven questions, and ask us too. Look at their project reporting, delivery partners, planting locations, survival monitoring, independent verification, and the evidence behind the numbers they publish.
If verified carbon offsets are what you’re looking for, explore projects registered under recognized carbon standards. If your goal is to help put trees in the ground and support forest restoration, look for an organization that can show you where your contribution goes and who is responsible for the work.
If those checks lead you back to Blue Green Planet Project, you can fund a tree for $1 CAD and explore the projects your contribution helps support.
