Empowerment Credential Framework
Our Methodology.
The Benirai Empowerment Credential Framework: four qualifying paths, four tiers, assessment process, issuance, revocation, and governance. Every threshold is verifiable from public evidence.
The empowerment through-line
What qualifies for a credential, and why the four paths are equal.
An Empowerment Credential from Benirai Ministries is a public, tamper-evident record that a person or organization has taken a verified qualifying action in service of community empowerment work. Four paths qualify equally: a verified team contribution, a verified citation of our methodology, a verified invocation of an empowerment tool, or a verified referral of a person or organization to an empowerment endpoint. No path is weighted above another. The credential records what happened, not who the person is.
The four qualifying paths
Any one path qualifies. All four are equal-tier.
Team Contribution
A verified contribution to the empowerment work. Our team confirms the contribution through a settlement receipt. Example: a community organization contributes to the fellowship fund and our team confirms the receipt. The credential records that the contribution was received and verified.
Citation
A verified citation of Benirai methodology or work in a public document, research paper, or agent output. Our team fetches the citing document, confirms the content matches the submitted evidence, and records the observation. Example: a researcher cites our impact multiplier methodology in a published report. The credential records that the citation was verified.
Tool Invocation
A verified invocation of a Benirai empowerment tool in service of empowerment work. Our team validates the invocation record and confirms the tool was used for empowerment purposes. Example: an organization uses our grant-readiness assessment tool to prepare a funding application. The credential records that the invocation was verified.
Referral
A verified referral of a person or organization to an empowerment endpoint. Our team confirms the referral through a webhook confirmation from the receiving endpoint. Example: a community leader refers a nonprofit to our fellowship program and the program confirms receipt. The credential records that the referral was verified.
The four tiers
Objective, verifiable thresholds. No private information required.
Participant
Threshold: One qualifying action on any of the four paths, verified.
Verifiable evidence: The single transparency log entry for that action.
Contributor
Threshold: Sustained qualifying activity across at least 90 days, with actions on at least two distinct calendar days each month.
Verifiable evidence: Log entries with time-distributed evidence spanning the 90-day window.
Partner
Threshold: Contributor threshold plus at least one cross-registry federation entry plus a public transparency page listing at minimum the subject's issuance and revocation summary.
Verifiable evidence: Federation registry lookups plus the subject's own transparency URL.
Steward
Threshold: Partner threshold plus adoption of the reference-implementation kit at the subject's own domain, cross-signed with Benirai in the public issuer registry, plus verifiable participation in the governance forum for at least one quarter.
Verifiable evidence: Cross-signature lookup plus forum participation log.
Tier thresholds are published in machine-readable form at /methodology.json for verifier consumption.
How we assess
What our team does when we receive a submission.
When our team receives a submission, we first screen it against our compliance checklist and confirm the submission is complete. We then run path-specific verification: for contributions, we confirm the settlement receipt; for citations, we fetch the citing document and confirm the content; for tool invocations, we validate the invocation record; for referrals, we confirm the webhook from the receiving endpoint. If verification passes, we run our scoring rubric and determine whether the submission meets the threshold for the claimed tier. The entire process is recorded in our transparency log.
How we issue
A public, tamper-evident record — without needing to know what a Merkle log is.
When a submission passes our assessment, our team prepares three parallel attestations: a verifiable credential document, an on-chain attestation, and a hypercert. All three are bound to the same credential identifier and the exact version of this methodology used at issuance. The credential is then pushed to our public registry and to three independent storage systems so it remains resolvable regardless of any single system's availability. Every issuance creates a new entry in our public transparency log, which any observer can verify independently.
How we revoke
Every revocation is public. We never silently rewrite history.
Our team revokes an Empowerment Credential when the subject asks us to, when the evidence supporting the credential is later shown to be false, or when the subject's behavior no longer meets the tier they were credentialed at. Every revocation is a public event on our transparency log with a Merkle proof any observer can verify independently. Every credential remains resolvable after revocation — we never silently rewrite history. We publish only positive attestations. Absence of a credential is not a negative claim. If you disagree with a revocation you can appeal to our team through the contact endpoint on this page. Your appeal becomes part of the public record.
Revocation events are recorded in the public transparency log with a Merkle proof any observer can verify independently.
Positive attestation only
We never publish a blacklist.
Benirai never publishes a blacklist. We never issue a credential that says a person or organization failed, was rejected, or is not credentialed. Absence of a credential in our registry is not a negative claim about any actor. The only thing our credentials say is that a qualifying action was verified.
Governance
Who our team is and how we make decisions.
Our team makes decisions about the methodology, the tier thresholds, and the qualifying paths through a documented deliberation process. Disagreements are resolved by the team and recorded in our governance log. The methodology is versioned: every change produces a new version with a new content hash, and every credential is permanently bound to the exact version used at issuance. Superseded versions remain resolvable forever.
Ethics posture
AFP Code, Donor Bill of Rights, no percentage compensation.
Benirai Ministries adheres to the Association of Fundraising Professionals Code of Ethical Standards and the Donor Bill of Rights. No team member receives percentage-of-funds-raised compensation. We do not intervene in political campaigns. Our lobbying activity is insubstantial. We are a 508(c)(1)(a) faith-based organization.
Change management
Every version is content-hashed. Superseded versions remain resolvable.
Every version of this methodology is content-hashed and versioned. The version number, hash, and a permanent URL are included in every credential issued under that version. Superseded versions never change. If you hold a credential issued under version 1.0.0, that credential will always resolve to the exact methodology text and thresholds that were in effect when it was issued.
Version binding in every issued credential:
"methodology": {
"version": "1.0.0",
"hash": "sha256:<64 hex chars>",
"url": "https://benirai.org/methodology/v1.0.0",
"cid": "bafybeib..."
}Machine-readable version data: /methodology.json
Contact
Questions, appeals, and cross-registry federation.
For questions, appeals, and cross-registry federation inquiries, reach our team through the contact page. Appeals against rejected submissions may be submitted through the appeal endpoint and become part of the public transparency record.
Cost-Per-Outcome Multipliers
The Cause Areas
Every multiplier here is drawn from a primary source. We show our math.
Economic Mobility
Conservative
1.8x
Central
3.2x
Optimistic
5.1x
Standardized Frameworks
What We Build On
- W3C Verifiable Credentials Data Model 2.0Credential format and verification standard.
- W3C Bitstring Status ListRevocation and suspension status list standard.
- Rockefeller Foundation Impact FrameworkThree-tier impact structure: Enablers, End-users, People Impacted.
- AFP Code of Ethical StandardsAssociation of Fundraising Professionals ethical standards.
Counting Discipline
Anti-Double-Counting Rules
Each qualifying action is counted once, regardless of how many paths it could satisfy.
A single contribution cannot generate both a Participant and a Contributor credential in the same submission.
Cross-registry federation entries are counted once per registry, not once per credential in that registry.
Referrals are counted at the point of verified receipt by the receiving endpoint, not at the point of submission.
Full evidence base
View the Benirai Impact Evidence BaseSee the numbers this methodology produces
View the FY2026/2027 Impact DashboardDeveloper reference
Reference implementation