Each protected area is scored 1 to 5 across nine dimensions covering ecology, operations, finance, and community outcomes. Scores combine into a composite rating and a letter grade. PACE answers a specific question: is this place being run well enough to merit long-horizon conservation capital.
Coverage starts at 38 of Africa's most operationally significant PAs across African Parks managed sites, Peace Parks landscapes, SANParks flagships, Kenya Wildlife Service parks, partnership-run reserves, and major state-managed icons. Coverage expands only as data quality allows defensible scoring.
PACE splits its nine dimensions into two tiers based on data availability. This is an honest reflection of what is measurable from public sources and what requires editorial synthesis.
| Dimension | Tier | Primary data sources |
|---|---|---|
| Biodiversity protection | T1 | IUCN Red List species presence, operator wildlife census data, species trend statements in annual reports |
| Ecosystem services (carbon and water) | T1 | Global Forest Watch forest cover and carbon flux, water catchment studies, Verra or Gold Standard registry data where the PA hosts a carbon project |
| Security and anti-poaching | T2 | Operator anti-poaching reports, rhino and elephant poaching statistics, news coverage of major incidents |
| Ecotourism infrastructure | T1 | Lodge and camp listings, park authority websites, TripAdvisor and Booking.com inventory, road and airstrip accessibility |
| Ecotourism revenues | T2 | Park authority financial disclosures where available, operator annual report income statements, state tourism ministry data |
| Community development | T1 | Annual report disclosures on schools, clinics, employment, and skills programmes. Operator community investment data. Independent evaluations where available |
| Political and community leadership | T2 | Government and community statements, conflict and dispute history, leadership continuity, press coverage of governance |
| Budget | T1 | Operator audited accounts, park authority budgets, 990-PF filings for US-registered operators, IATI data for donor-funded PAs |
| Fundraising performance | T1 | Audited income growth, 990-PF grants received, announced multi-year funding commitments, donor diversification |
Each dimension is rated 1 to 5 against a published rubric, where 5 represents best in class and 1 represents severely deficient. The composite score is the simple average of all nine dimensions. Where a dimension cannot be scored due to insufficient data, it is marked "insufficient data" and excluded from the composite rather than scored conservatively.
| A+ | 4.60 - 5.00 - exemplary across most dimensions, a reference case for the sector |
| A | 4.20 - 4.59 - strong performance, well-run operation with minor gaps |
| B+ | 3.80 - 4.19 - above average, credible operation |
| B | 3.40 - 3.79 - solid but with identifiable weaknesses |
| C+ | 3.00 - 3.39 - mixed performance, meaningful operational gaps |
| C | 2.50 - 2.99 - significant concerns across multiple dimensions |
| D | Below 2.50 - severely underperforming on core conservation outcomes |
Every published PACE score passes human review before going live. Tier 2 dimensions - where public sources are thinner and editorial synthesis is required - receive particular scrutiny. Every score carries a source trail and a scoring date, because the strongest rating is one that can be audited.
Corrections are welcomed. Operators, funders, or researchers spotting a factual error should email corrections@canopy.africa. We commit to responding within 14 days. Where a correction is accepted, the change is logged and the scoring date updated. Where we disagree, we publish our reasoning.
PACE scores are refreshed when underlying data changes. Annual report releases, major news events, leadership transitions, and registry updates all trigger review of affected dimensions. A scoring date is displayed on each PA record. No PA score is published older than 18 months without re-review.
PACE scores are informational only. They are not conservation partnership recommendations, grant-making advice, or a solicitation for any financial transaction. Canopy makes no warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of the underlying data. All philanthropic or investment decisions should be made on the basis of independent due diligence.