Monitoring
Module 1, Supplier Group Monitoring Program: detect, verify, attribute, assess, act.
The operating spine
Detect, Verify, Attribute, Assess, Act, counts inferred from fields we already hold
Five places where the work happens, and three things that run through all of them: Reporting is what leaves the product, Collaboration is what people add to it, Integration is what moves between it and the other modules.
- Reporting · flow · part of Monitoring & Risk Intelligence
- Collaboration · flow · current
- Integration & API · flow · proposed
LAND_CONVERSION_ALERTS.length
distinct alert ids from overlapForGroup(group) over GROUPS
cases with ID_Estate or ID_Subsidi resolved
cases with Confidence set and Area > 0
grievance cases whose status maps to Active or Open
The funnel narrows hardest between Detect and Verify: 47 of 96 detections (49%) fall inside a mapped concession. The rest never resolve to anyone's land, and that is shown rather than smoothed.
Non-compliance dashboard
The operational register, read in decision order: Extremely High first, then the seven insight figures with their movement, then concentration, then the tracker
3 cases across 3 groups, 1,046 ha: a Stop Work Order was issued, an NDPE commitment is held, and clearing continued. That is not a risk score, it is a broken undertaking, and it is the category that changes a sourcing conversation.
Cahaya Borneo Group · Gading Kencana Group · Mahkota Sawit Group
- Risk status · Extremely High, SWO issued AND NDPE commitment held AND still non-compliant
- Risk status · High, case status is Active
- Risk status · Medium, case status is Open
- Risk status · Low, compliant up to the Recovery Plan stage
The operational register shows the level. The level tells an analyst where things stand; the change tells a director whether anything is working. No per-edition snapshot exists in the register, so the change since the previous edition is derived: a case counts as new this edition when hash(Case_ID) % 12 === 0. A stored edition table would replace this derivation.
distinct ID_Estate in the register
distinct Group among cases liable under the cut-off
sum(Area x coefficient by land type)
sum(Area) of liable cases
cases whose group holds an NDPE commitment
cases with a Stop Work Order issued
cases with recovery responsibility accepted
| Land type | Coefficient | Citation |
|---|---|---|
| Forest | 500 tCO2e/ha · Mineral soil land-use change | RSPO PalmGHG Calculator, mineral soil carbon-stock change on forest conversion |
| Peat Forest, Peat | 55 tCO2e/ha · Drained peat, annual | Hergouarc'h & Verchot (2011), peat drainage emissions |
Worked example · case GT-2023-0581, Peat Forest, 785 ha × 55 tCO2e/ha = 43,181 tCO2e.
NDPE liability covers Forest, Peat Forest and Peat. EUDR liability covers Forest and Peat Forest only. Switching the cut-off therefore changes both the year and the land types counted, peat clearing carries NDPE liability and no EUDR liability.
| Land type | Cases | Hectares | NDPE liability | EUDR liability |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forest | 39 | 18,796 | Yes, all three land types | Yes |
| Peat Forest | 13 | 5,174 | Yes, all three land types | Yes |
| Peat | 0 | 0 | Yes, all three land types | No, peat is excluded |
44.1% of the 23,971 ha in this cut-off sits with the top three groups. A handful of conversations covers most of the exposure.
| # | Group | Cases | Hectares | Share |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | Sawit Lestari Group | 8 | 5,486 | 22.9% |
| 02 | Sinar Rimba Group | 6 | 2,737 | 11.4% |
| 03 | Nusantara Agri Group | 5 | 2,338 | 9.8% |
| 04 | Gading Kencana Group | 4 | 2,002 | 8.3% |
| 05 | Bumi Hijau Group | 4 | 1,788 | 7.5% |
| 06 | Selat Mas Group | 4 | 1,382 | 5.8% |
| 07 | Karya Palma Group | 3 | 1,350 | 5.6% |
| 08 | Cahaya Borneo Group | 3 | 1,323 | 5.5% |
| 09 | Puri Agro Group | 4 | 1,266 | 5.3% |
| 10 | Mahkota Sawit Group | 3 | 1,255 | 5.2% |
- Active · Non-compliant during the reporting period. → Engage or suspend
- Open · Not active when reported: no Stop Work Order, no liability, no recovery plan. → Chase for a recovery plan
- Closed · Compliant up to the Recovery Plan stage. → Verify and move on
- Dropped · Case dropped for a stated reason. → No action, reason recorded
In the guide a red entry marks a non-compliant supplier. Under our palette that red is the brand orange, and the line styles stay as they are.
| Case | Supplier group | Land type | Ha | Case status | Risk status | SWO | Recovery plan | Decision |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GT-2023-0581 | Puri Agro Group | Peat Forest | 785 | Active | Risk status: High | – | – | Engage or suspend |
| GT-2025-0337 | Selat Mas Group | Peat Forest | 779 | Active | Risk status: High | – | – | Engage or suspend |
| GT-2022-0295 | Panca Agro Group | Forest | 729 | Active | Risk status: High | – | – | Engage or suspend |
| GT-2021-0463 | Sinar Rimba Group | Forest | 647 | Active | Risk status: High | – | – | Engage or suspend |
| GT-2022-0092 | Bumi Hijau Group | Forest | 530 | Active | Risk status: High | – | – | Engage or suspend |
| GT-2021-0280 | Cahaya Borneo Group | Forest | 461 | Active | Risk status: Extremely High | Issued | – | Engage or suspend |
| GT-2023-0029 | Sawit Lestari Group | Forest | 428 | Active | Risk status: High | Issued | – | Engage or suspend |
| GT-2022-0400 | Gading Kencana Group | Forest | 379 | Active | Risk status: Extremely High | Issued | – | Engage or suspend |
| GT-2025-0160 | Nusantara Agri Group | Forest | 269 | Active | Risk status: High | – | – | Engage or suspend |
| GT-2025-0176 | Mahkota Sawit Group | Forest | 206 | Active | Risk status: Extremely High | Issued | – | Engage or suspend |
| GT-2026-0540 | Puri Agro Group | Forest | 77 | Active | Risk status: High | – | – | Engage or suspend |
| GT-2024-0470 | Sinar Rimba Group | Peat Forest | 34 | Active | Risk status: High | – | – | Engage or suspend |
| GT-2023-0043 | Sawit Lestari Group | Forest | 888 | Open | Risk status: Medium | – | – | Chase for a recovery plan |
| GT-2022-0392 | Gading Kencana Group | Forest | 790 | Open | Risk status: Medium | – | – | Chase for a recovery plan |
| GT-2023-0497 | Sinar Rimba Group | Forest | 776 | Open | Risk status: Medium | – | – | Chase for a recovery plan |
| GT-2022-0119 | Nusantara Agri Group | Forest | 775 | Open | Risk status: Medium | – | – | Chase for a recovery plan |
| GT-2021-0511 | Sinar Rimba Group | Peat Forest | 754 | Open | Risk status: Medium | – | – | Chase for a recovery plan |
| GT-2023-0434 | Bintang Palma Group | Forest | 731 | Open | Risk status: Medium | – | – | Chase for a recovery plan |
| GT-2022-0161 | Karya Palma Group | Forest | 667 | Open | Risk status: Medium | – | – | Chase for a recovery plan |
| GT-2024-0064 | Sawit Lestari Group | Forest | 611 | Open | Risk status: Medium | – | – | Chase for a recovery plan |
| GT-2023-0148 | Karya Palma Group | Forest | 578 | Open | Risk status: Medium | – | – | Chase for a recovery plan |
| GT-2025-0127 | Nusantara Agri Group | Peat Forest | 469 | Open | Risk status: Medium | – | – | Chase for a recovery plan |
| GT-2025-0041 | Sawit Lestari Group | Forest | 463 | Open | Risk status: Medium | – | – | Chase for a recovery plan |
| GT-2024-0078 | Bumi Hijau Group | Forest | 412 | Open | Risk status: Medium | – | – | Chase for a recovery plan |
- dotted · Group approach, attribution through corporate group affiliation
- solid · Trace-to-plantation approach, attribution through a traced supply link
The five surfaces
One card each, in the brief's order, what is built and what is not, without clicking
Monitoring & Risk Intelligence
currentDetection and verification of land-cover change, conservation set-asides and fire, across the landscape.
Which supplier groups and which mills cleared what, on what evidence, and where.
Which conservation set-asides are disturbed, by whom, when, and on what evidence.
GSM plots by type and evidence strength.
Land that burned and what happened next, with no claim about who lit it.
- M1 · 06High-risk landscape identification & monitoringplanned
Village and district risk classes with intervention focus.
- Bi-weekly edition reportproposed
Cases reported this edition, and what moved since the last one.
- PDF and Excel exportproposed
Exports that carry their caveat inside the document.
- SHP exportproposed
Shapefile export of case polygons.
Absent by design. Demonstration polygons in a client GIS lose the on-screen caveat. When built: disabled by default, and a watermark attribute on every feature.
Case & Evidence Workspace
proposedOne case, its polygon, its imagery, its evidence log and its uncertainty note.
- Case evidence viewproposed
Before and after imagery, polygon, source and date, boundary basis, evidence log.
Blocked on an imagery tile source with an acquisition-date record per scene. No stand-in pictures are rendered.
- Field media and permit recordproposed
Field photographs and the permit they evidence, held against the case.
No media store and no permit record exist in this build.
- Evidence log and uncertainty noteproposed
What was checked, when, by whom, and what remains uncertain.
Supplier & Corporate Attribution
currentFrom the polygon to the concession, the estate or mill, the supplier, and the corporate group behind it.
One page per group: entities, mills, liability, disclosure.
Who controls the entity behind the licence, to the beneficial owner.
- Attribution graph, concession to buyerproposed
Concession to mill to supplier to group to buyer, marked direct, indirect or disputed.
- Ownership historyproposed
Who held the entity when the clearing happened, not only who holds it now.
- Disputed-linkage handlingproposed
A linkage the supplier disputes stays visible and stays disputed.
- M1 · 09Policy analysisplanned
Policy text read against the gap-check regulations.
Not in the brief's eight. Open question: folds into Assess, or moves to another product. To be settled at the joint methodology session.
Client Workspace
currentThe client's own scope: their supply base, their areas of interest, their saved work.
If we stop buying from this mill, which mills could take its place, on what evidence.
SWAP answers a sourcing question inside the client's own supply base, so it sits here.
- General view / our supply chain onlyproposed
Toggle between the whole landscape and the client's own supply base.
- AOI upload and drawproposed
Bring or draw an area of interest and run the same analysis inside it.
- Client spatial layersproposed
Client-held boundaries rendered beside ours, kept separate from ours.
- Saved analysisproposed
A view, its filters and its edition, saved and reopenable.
Engagement & Resolution Link
currentFrom a reported case to clarification, corrective action and closure or reopening.
Policy commitment against measured performance, grower by grower.
Analyst desk on top of the same register, case triage and response.
- Engagement timelineproposed
Report, clarification, response, corrective action, closure or reopen, on one line per case.
Monitoring & Risk Intelligence, the current edition
Bi-weekly cadence · 2026-07-19 to 2026-08-01 · ED-2026-08-01
Cases passing both gates: ≥ 2 ha and confidence Medium or High.
Detections under 2 ha. Not a failure: they go on the list to monitor. Monitored-only register
Detections at Low confidence, held back as raw input. Monitored-only register
The edition count is never the total: 52 detections sit behind it in this cut-off, and 0 of them are held outside the edition.
| Format | Status | Rule |
|---|---|---|
| Search and filter in-app | current | Every table on the sub-product screens filters in place. |
| proposed | Carries its caveat inside the document. | |
| Excel | proposed | Carries its caveat inside the document. |
| SHP | proposed | Disabled by default when built, and a watermark attribute on every feature: demonstration polygons in a client GIS lose the on-screen caveat. |
Collaboration, a queue and a thread
Who owes a response, and where a comment can be left
Open cases grouped by the entity they attach to, oldest first. Age is counted in editions against 2026-08-01.
| Entity | Open cases | Statuses | Oldest received | Age (editions) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rimba Makmur Group | 2 | Engagement, Monitoring | 2019-02-13 | 194 |
| Bintang Palma Group | 2 | Monitoring, Under review | 2019-02-19 | 194 |
| Teluk Emas Group | 6 | Monitoring, Open | 2019-03-23 | 192 |
| Bumi Hijau Group | 3 | Monitoring, Engagement | 2019-03-15 | 192 |
| Sawit Lestari Group | 6 | Monitoring, Under review | 2019-04-06 | 191 |
| Mahkota Sawit Group | 3 | Engagement, Monitoring | 2019-06-11 | 186 |
| Karya Palma Group | 4 | Open, Under review | 2019-07-26 | 183 |
| Gading Kencana Group | 3 | Monitoring, Under review | 2019-08-25 | 180 |
| Selat Mas Group | 4 | Monitoring, Engagement, Open | 2020-02-10 | 168 |
| Nusantara Agri Group | 4 | Open, Under review, Monitoring | 2021-02-13 | 142 |
| Cahaya Borneo Group | 5 | Under review, Monitoring, Engagement | 2021-09-26 | 126 |
| Harum Nusa Group | 4 | Open, Engagement, Monitoring | 2021-09-22 | 126 |
| Sinar Rimba Group | 2 | Open, Engagement | 2022-04-23 | 111 |
| Panca Agro Group | 2 | Open, Monitoring | 2023-09-19 | 74 |
| Puri Agro Group | 3 | Monitoring | 2025-08-06 | 25 |
There is no comments dataset and no notification service behind this. A thread you write lives in this browser session only: it is not stored, not sent, and nobody else can see it.
Notification is proposed. What would drive it is a status change on a watched entity, a grievance moving to Closed or Dropped, or a new case attributed to a group on the watchlist.
Integration, read from the join graph
The join graph is the integration contract; the API itself stays proposed
5 inbound and 8 outbound integrations are tracked. The source-level detail returns when the live database is wired up.