# Cookstove Project Field Data: From Distribution to Verification

Last updated: 2026-10-23

> Run a cookstove programme's field data: the stove and household register, distribution records, usage surveys, KPT samples, stove sensors and verification.

Date: October 23, 2026

A cookstove carbon programme lives or dies on its records. Credits depend on showing that each stove reached a real household, that it is still there, that it is still used, and that the households you measured stand for the rest. This guide walks through the field data that carries that proof, from the first distribution to the verifier's visit.

It is written for the operations and MRV teams running thousands of stoves across distributors and regions. Which methodology asks for what is in the companion guide: [cookstove carbon projects and the rules in 2026](https://restorationscope.com/blog/cookstove-carbon-methodologies).

**Where Restoration Scope fits:** we keep the household and stove register, distribution and visit records, and surveys in one place, captured offline in the field. Checks, sampling, sensor feeds and calculations are set up with each programme. [More on where we fit](#software).

## Build the stove and household register

The register is the list every other record points to. One row per stove, with:

- **A stove ID** printed or engraved on the stove itself, so a field officer can read it years later.
- **The household:** a household ID, the name of the person responsible, a phone number where you have consent, and the village or area.
- **Where:** a GPS point at the kitchen, not at the distribution point.
- **What:** stove model, batch or serial range, and fuel.
- **Who and when:** the distributor or partner, and the dates of sale, delivery and installation.

Verra's VM0050 and the Article 6.4 methodologies ask for the ID on the stove itself, and Article 6.4 ties each ID to one stove and one household. [The methodologies compared](https://restorationscope.com/blog/cookstove-carbon-methodologies#field-records) lists what each one asks for.

Keep the stove ID and the household ID separate. Households move, stoves get replaced and some families receive two. If the stove is the only key, a replacement looks like a new household; if the household is the only key, a second stove disappears.

## Record distribution and installation

Distribution is where most register errors start: a shared spreadsheet, a paper list from a distribution day, a partner's own form. Record each installation where it happens:

- A photo of the installed stove with its ID visible, taken in the kitchen.
- The GPS point, recorded on the phone at the moment of the visit.
- The household's details, checked against any earlier list rather than typed again.
- The household's agreement to transfer its carbon rights, which Gold Standard RECH and Article 6.4's AMM-004 ask for.

An offline app matters here. Many households are far from mobile signal, and an installation recorded on paper and typed up later loses its photo and its point.

## Run baseline surveys

Baseline surveys describe how a household cooked before the project: which stove, which fuel, how much, and for how many people. Your methodology decides which of these values you measure and which come from defaults. The baseline is also what later usage surveys are compared against, so ask the same questions the same way, and keep each answer joined to the household's ID.

If your team already collects surveys in KoboToolbox, ODK or SurveyCTO, keep the forms. Add the stove or household ID as a required field, and bring each submission into the register instead of leaving it in a separate export.

## Draw samples for usage surveys and kitchen performance tests

You can't visit every household every year, so most methodologies let you measure a random sample and apply it to the rest. A sample only holds up if:

- It is drawn from the full register of stoves distributed, after duplicates and errors are cleaned out. Keep unused and missing stoves in it: leaving them out inflates usage.
- It follows the sample size and precision your methodology sets: 90/10 under VM0050 and Gold Standard RECH, 95/10 under the Article 6.4 methodologies.
- It is random, and you keep the method, the seed and the list drawn.
- Replacements for households you can't reach come from a reserve list drawn at the same time, not from whoever is nearby.

Kitchen performance tests (KPTs) weigh the fuel a household uses over several days, before and after the new stove. They take the most field time per household, so their sample is the one that most needs to be right. Groups that differ, such as distributors, regions or stove models, can be sampled as separate strata.

## Monitor use with surveys, sensors and meters

Usage is one of the numbers [over-crediting studies](https://restorationscope.com/blog/cookstove-carbon-methodologies#over-crediting) challenge most, and the one your field team measures directly. VM0050 calls stove use monitors the preferred method, and the Article 6.4 methodologies make them the basis for usage from 2028 or 2029. There are three ways to measure it:

| Method | What it measures | Watch for |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Usage survey | Whether the stove is in use and whether the old one still is (stacking) | Households tend to say what the visitor hopes to hear |
| Stove use monitor | When the stove is lit, from a temperature logger fixed to it; the old stove needs its own | Loggers fall off, run out of battery or get moved to another stove |
| Meter | Fuel or energy used, for example LPG, electric or ethanol | Each reading has to match the right stove ID |

Sensor data only counts when it is tied to a stove in the register. Record the logger or meter ID on the stove's record when it is installed, and again when it is swapped.

## Check the data while the season runs

Errors found in the field can still be fixed by the person who made them. Errors found at verification can only be explained. Check every record as it arrives:

- **Duplicate households or stoves:** the same stove ID twice, or the same name, phone and village under two IDs.
- **Copied GPS:** many households on exactly the same point, usually typed from a list rather than recorded.
- **Impossible places:** points outside the programme area or in the sea.
- **Missing evidence:** installations without a photo, or a photo where the stove ID can't be read.
- **Impossible order:** a usage survey dated before the installation.

Send each issue back to the field officer or distributor who owns the record, with the record attached. For the same checks applied to field points and photos, see [why field photos lose their GPS](https://restorationscope.com/blog/field-photos-missing-gps).

## Keep many distributors in one view

Large programmes rarely distribute through one team. Each partner arrives with its own form, spreadsheet or app, and its own way of naming villages. Agree on the IDs and the minimum fields before the first distribution, then bring every partner's records into the same register.

That lets you see, per distributor: stoves delivered against plan, records with open issues, and households due for follow-up. One developer we work with brought an ODK list of about 11,000 farmers into one register. [Acción Andina](https://restorationscope.com/blog/accion-andina) runs its 16 partners' restoration records the same way.

## Prepare for what verifiers ask to see

Verifiers test whether the numbers in your monitoring report come from records they can trace. Expect to show:

- The register, with every stove's ID, household, location, dates and distributor.
- The sampling plan, the sample actually drawn, and what happened to each household in it.
- Raw survey, KPT and sensor data, not only the summaries.
- Photos and GPS points for the installations they pick.
- A record of what changed after collection, who changed it and why.

Ask your verifier early which formats they want. A register they can filter and a sample they can re-draw make for a shorter visit.

## Where Restoration Scope fits

Restoration Scope is digital infrastructure for nature projects. For a cookstove programme, we connect the register, field visits and surveys in one system and set it up hands-on with your team.

| Cookstove need | How we cover it |
| --- | --- |
| A register of every household and stove, with GPS point, photo and stove ID | Records with their points and photos |
| Distribution, installation and follow-up visits, offline | An offline field app, with visits linked to each household |
| Baseline and usage surveys, KPTs | Surveys with skip logic that we set up with you, or your KoboToolbox or ODK forms kept and their records brought in |
| Random samples for usage surveys and KPTs | Set up per programme |
| Stove use monitors and meters | Sensor data brought in per programme |
| Usage rates, fNRB and emission-reduction calculations | Set up per methodology |
| Data checks for duplicate households, shared GPS points and missing photos | Rule-based checks we set up with you, run on every record |
| Many distributors or partners in one view | Programme views, as for Acción Andina's 16 partners |
| Exports for your verifier | Tables as CSV |

[One Acre Fund](https://restorationscope.com/partners) uses Restoration Scope to import field data, find issues and organize field officers to fix them as it scales its carbon projects. We don't issue credits or replace your methodology expert or verifier. See [Restoration Scope for carbon projects](https://restorationscope.com/solutions/carbon).

More guides: [cookstove carbon projects and the rules in 2026](https://restorationscope.com/blog/cookstove-carbon-methodologies), [what dMRV means](https://restorationscope.com/blog/what-is-dmrv) and [the records funders and verifiers ask for](https://restorationscope.com/blog/restoration-monitoring-system-funders).

> **Disclosure:** Restoration Scope makes field and monitoring software for carbon projects. We are not a validation or verification body, and we don't issue credits.

## Questions cookstove teams ask

### What does a cookstove carbon project need to record for every stove?

A unique stove ID, the household it went to, where and when it was installed, and evidence that it arrived, usually a photo and a GPS point. Every later survey, test and sensor reading points back to that ID.

### How do you choose households for usage surveys and kitchen performance tests?

Draw a random sample from the full register of stoves distributed, after duplicates and errors are cleaned out, using the sample size and precision your methodology sets. Keep unused and missing stoves in it, and keep the draw, the seed and the replacement list so a verifier can repeat it.

### What is a stove use monitor?

A small temperature logger fixed to a stove that records when it is lit. It measures use directly, instead of asking the household. To see whether the old stove is still used, that stove needs its own monitor or a kitchen check.

### Can we keep using KoboToolbox or ODK?

Yes. Many programmes collect surveys in KoboToolbox, ODK or SurveyCTO. What matters is that every submission carries the stove or household ID, so it joins the register instead of sitting in a separate export.

### What does a verifier ask to see?

Usually the register with its IDs, the sampling plan and the sample actually drawn, the raw survey and test data, any sensor data, photos, and a record of what changed and why. See [the methodologies compared](https://restorationscope.com/blog/cookstove-carbon-methodologies).