European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN)

VERIFIED MEMBERS

Membership in the EFCSN signifies an organisation’s rigorous commitment to provide accurate information ethically and transparently, without bias or prejudice and focus on matters in the public interest as well as a proven track record of excellence, integrity and accountability as definied in the European Code of Standards for Independent Fact-Checking Organisations.

← Return to organization page

Lead Stories

Website

https://leadstories.com

Date

29/11/2024

Please, answer the following questions:

Applicant

Date: 06/05/2024

We run and maintain Trendolizer, a software web service that detects viral content online. As part of this we provide non fact-checking related consultancy services regarding trend monitoring & news alerts.

Eva Vajda (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 05/09/2024

Can you provide more information about your clients?

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 12/09/2024

The client for those consultancy services (Google LLC) is listed on our website: https://leadstories.com/financial-information-funding-sources.html

As our 'about' page says:

No individual Trendolizer™ user accounts for more than %0.15 of our average monthly company revenue. Most users are fact checking organizations and media companies.

In fact all of them are. Th

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 17/09/2024

As required by the EFCSN we list our sources of income on our financial disclosure page, this includes our major clients: https://leadstories.com/financial-information-funding-sources.html

We have half a dozen much smaller clients we invoice for Trendolizer accounts, all of them are media organisations or fact checkers. None of them are platforms or governments. The fact checkers are all IFCN and/or EFCSN signatories.

We take steps to avoid possible conflicts of interest, see the note (https://leadstories.com/about.html#note) on our about page that says:

The Trendolizer™ Terms of Service have a clause we take very seriously that reads:

Usage of the Trendolizer Website or Service does not grant you any influence, say or preferential treatment with regards to the selection of the content we choose to write about, the content of the articles we publish or the rating or conclusions Lead Stories draws about any such content.

No individual Trendolizer™ user accounts for more than %0.15 of our average monthly company revenue.

The actual figure is closer to %0.1 per user. Even the total of all Trendolizer subscriptions combined does not reach the 1% of our annual budget required for disclosure under article 4.2.A.

Eva Vajda (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 19/09/2024

Thanks for the explanation, all clear and looks good

Applicant

Date: 06/05/2024

Besides our normal fact-checking work involving various elections, wars and global health misinformation, we have plans to significantly boost our reach and distribution through technical changes and improvements.

Over the past half-year we have been experimenting and developing a workflow using our human written fact checks along with AI voices and graphical elements taken from the fact checks to automatically turn them into short videos suitable for vertical viewing, along with a longer daily summary video containing the day’s fact checks. This has allowed us to drastically scale up the number of videos we can publish in a given day and we have sharply increased the number of channels where we publish them (currently Instagram, Facebook, WhatsApp, YouTube, X, TikTok & Threads).

We intend to continue these experiments and to start publishing these videos in more of the languages we publish in. To this end, we’ve just undertaken a major overhaul of the structure of our websites by switching to a unified template and translation file system for each language version of the site instead of copying, translating and separately maintaining the entire site for each language we write in. This makes it much easier for each site to have the same technical features available in terms of feeds, data files and custom pages, etc., needed for video production and other purposes while at the same time allowing for a much deeper level of localization.

At the same time, we’re switching over a number of subdomain names that were a mixture of local language names (for example espanol.leadstories.com) and language names in English (for example ukrainian.leadstories.com) to a system purely based on names in the local language itself. Sites for languages spoken in multiple countries will have categories for fact checks relevant to those countries in their top navigation bar.

Currently, we have fully localized versions of our websites in English, Hungarian, Romanian, Bulgarian, Russian, Slovak, Ukrainian and Spanish, using local journalists, writers and researchers to produce fact checks, using the same standardized methodology and tools.

We are planning to launch Dutch, Italian and Bosnian versions of our site, as well, to take advantage of the language knowledge of our staffers.

We also are in talks with two media organizations in Belarus about potentially syndicating and translating some of our Russian-language fact checks in Belarusian.

We are actively seeking funding for a project to provide IFCN (and EFCSN) fact checkers with free access to Trendolizer along with hands-on support and training, something we see as quite important given the planned end of CrowdTangle.

Applicant

Date: 06/05/2024

We didn’t really change any policies but we did add some information about them to our website that wasn’t documented there yet.

For example, we already had at least three people go over each story (the writer and two editors) but it wasn’t mentioned on our “How We Work” page yet.

We had some internal discussions to clarify what “undue attention” meant in terms of the publishers of user generated misinformation. Since we typically only check viral misinformation that means there usually already has been plenty of attention for posts like these before we even get to them, so citing and linking them is definitely not “undue” and is part of normal journalistic good practices when it comes to providing sources.

We also added language about anonymous staff bylines to our “About” pages where needed, as we have a legitimate concern for the personal safety of journalists, writers, and researchers and, in some cases, their families. We have a handful of journalists, writers and researchers, who are in exile, whose families remain in the country. In other cases, our fact-checkers are working in countries where they are subjected to potential detention, arrest or violence. For example, one of our fact-checkers in Hungary was assaulted covering a rally, and another journalist lives under threat of arrest if they return home. As a result, we have chosen to keep their identities private.

Eva Vajda (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 05/09/2024

I jave checked the Hungarian version of the policies and it looks good

Article 2.2: Methodology

In order to be recognised as a verified member of the European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN), operations must:

Best Practices:

In addition to the required standards listed above, the Code identifies the following as a best practice that is encouraged but not required to join the EFCSN.

Article 3.1: Non-Partisanship and Impartiality

In order to be recognised as a verified member of the European Fact-checking Standards Network (EFCSN), operations must:

Applicant

Date: 06/05/2024

Eva Vajda (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 05/09/2024

Hungarian version of all these would be ideal to have

Eva Vajda (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 06/09/2024

I found all Hungarian language documents

Applicant

Date: 06/05/2024

Eva Vajda (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 05/09/2024

Code of Principles shall be translated into Hungarian too

Eva Vajda (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 06/09/2024

We have it so please ignore my previous coment

Applicant

Date: 06/05/2024

Eva Vajda (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 05/09/2024

I can see in English that the policy is compliant but as I said a Hungarian version of all policies would be useful

Eva Vajda (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 06/09/2024

we have all so please ignore my previous comment

Applicant

Date: 06/05/2024

https://leadstories.com/code-of-principles.html
https://български.leadstories.com/code-of-principles.html
https://espanol.leadstories.com/code-of-principles.html
https://magyar.leadstories.com/code-of-principles.html
https://română.leadstories.com/code-of-principles.html
https://русский.leadstories.com/code-of-principles.html
https://slovensky.leadstories.com/code-of-principles.html
https://українська.leadstories.com/code-of-principles.html

We've fact checked deep fakes and manipulated video of people on all sides of the political spectrum:

https://български.leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2024/03/fact-check-video-does-not-show-mixed-footage-of-macron-dressed-as-woman-in-his-youth-club-dancing.html
https://slovensky.leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2023/10/fact-check-nahravka-manzelky-igora-matovica-nie-je-prava.html
https://romanian.leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2023/06/fact-check-protesting-pilots-are-not-holding-posters-showing-so-called-chemtrails.html
https://русский.leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2024/05/проверка-факта-илон-маск-не-высказывал-свою-поддержку-путину-и-россии-в-интервью-дону-лемону.html

In all these cases, we apply the same technical standards of evidence and/or sourcing.

Additionally, we have fact-checked both government and opposition claims about leaders and candidates. For example, we fact-checked false claims about Hungary Prime Minister Viktor Orban, while we also fact-checked false claims made by opposition.

https://magyar.leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2024/04/tenyellenorzes-magyar-peter-nem-mondta-hogy-a-cia-es-az-amerikai-nagykovet-all-mogotte.html
https://magyar.leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2024/03/fact-check-hungarian-prime-minister-orban-did-not-pose-with-a-nazi-flag.html
https://magyar.leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2023/12/fact-check-german-chancellor-did-not-expel-orban-from-ukraine-talks.html
https://magyar.leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2023/09/fact-check-repatriating-hungarians-did-not-outnumber-emigrants.html

We've debunked false stories that would benefit Ukraine and/or Russia:

https://русский.leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2024/04/проверка-факта-интернациональный-легион-территориальной-обороны-украины-не-выпускал-эротическую-рекламу-во-франции.html
https://русский.leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2024/03/fact-check-video-does-not-show-russian-troops-in-ukirainian-kharkiv-in-february-2024.html
https://русский.leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2024/02/fact-check-%20lukashenko-does-not-send-belarusians-to-fight-in-ukraine.html
https://русский.leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2023/11/fact-check-video-does-not-show-lukashenko-discussing-war-with-zelenskyy-urging-him-to-negotiate.html

For all these stories we went looking for the ultimate source of the claim and sought to confirm it.

As our "How we work" page (https://leadstories.com/how-we-work.html and equivalent in other languages) explains, we pick viral stories and claims to debunk without taking political slant into account. That means we will sometimes debunk false claims or stories harming the reputation of the very same people, causes or ideologies that we have debunked claims from. In all cases our methodology is the same (as described on our "How we work" page) and we try to put in enough original sources, quotes, evidence etc. to allow readers to repeat the fact check for themselves so they can see how we came to our conclusion.

Applicant

Date: 06/05/2024

Eva Vajda (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 05/09/2024

More information needed in Hungarian about the edtiors and contributors who work on Hungary

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 17/09/2024

We have translated all the biographies on the page.

Eva Vajda (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 19/09/2024

I have read that and also the explanation that that some people could be affected if their identities are discovered. All good from my side

Applicant

Date: 06/05/2024

https://leadstories.com/how-we-work.html
https://български.leadstories.com/how-we-work.html
https://espanol.leadstories.com/how-we-work.html
https://magyar.leadstories.com/how-we-work.html
https://română.leadstories.com/how-we-work.html
https://русский.leadstories.com/how-we-work.html
https://slovensky.leadstories.com/how-we-work.html
https://українська.leadstories.com/how-we-work.html

In addition to our “How we work section,” our staff and freelancers/contractors are required to sign a statement, similar to an MOU but legally actionable, that outlines our practices and standards. On the document, it states we follow guidelines set by Lead Stories, the International Fact Checking Network and, now, the European Fact-Checking Standards Network.” Under the IFCN and EFCSN guidelines/requirements, we work to mitigate conflict of interest from experts or organizations cited.

As our "How we work" page (https://leadstories.com/how-we-work.html) explains, we pick viral stories and claims to debunk without taking political slant into account. That means we will sometimes debunk false claims or stories harming the reputation of the very same people, causes or ideologies that we have debunked claims from.

In all cases, our methodology is the same (as described on our "How we work" page) and we try not to just to take any expert or source on their word: we will look for multiple sources, quotes, evidence etc. to allow readers to repeat the fact check for themselves so they can see how we came to our conclusion.

To quote from "How we work":

"Are there experts or local sources who can confirm or disprove the claim? When quoting experts or sources we prefer named ones with disclosed affiliations and qualifications and we prefer not just to take their word for it but to look for additional verifiable evidence where possible."

In cases where the fact check involves a claim about one of our own clients we add a disclaimer, for example here: https://leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2020/09/Fact-check-a-made-up-legal-notice-does-not-supersede-the-terms-of-service.html

Eva Vajda (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 05/09/2024

We need the Hungarian version

Eva Vajda (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 06/09/2024

Please ignore my previous comment as we have all documents in Hungarian

Article 3.2: Privacy and Safety

In order to be recognised as a verified member of the European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN), operations must:

Applicant

Date: 06/05/2024

As we are dealing mostly with viral misinformation, the identity of subjects in our articles is generally already out there and the concern for their safety is caused by the misinformation about them (“This photo proves X is a pedophile!”). In such cases, naming the person and debunking the claim actually reduces the risk to their safety.

Ironically enough in such cases not naming them and not showing the photo (or an unrecognizable version of it) in the fact check would undo the beneficial effect as it would make it essentially unfindable by people searching for the truth (“Fact Check: Some photo we can’t show does not prove a person we can’t name committed an act we can’t mention”).

So there is a balance to be struck there. Our “How We Work” page has following guideline for our writers which applies here too:

“Stick to the facts that are important for (dis)proving the claim and avoid giving too much background info that is not relevant.”

Too much personal information, precise locations, contact info, etc. is usually not relevant for proving or disproving a claim. As such we tend not to include it if it is not needed. The same goes for information about “innocent bystanders” (for example people in a manipulated photo don’t need to be exhaustively identified as long as we can point out the way in which the manipulation was done).

Eva Vajda (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 06/09/2024

The sample I checked did not contain such information. The explanation of the organisation is clear and compliant.

Best Practices

In addition to the required standards listed above, the Code identifies the following as a best practice that is encouraged but not required to join the EFCSN.

Applicant

Date: 06/05/2024

Our single most important countermeasure is daily contact with editors and managers. Our leadership team draws on decades of newsroom and field experience, often in difficult and extremely dangerous situations, in creating a culture of support for journalists who face fear and stress. We make time to listen, to talk and to step away from the work, if necessary. By resorting to kindness, we learn what people need.
Because of what we learned from the 2020 U.S. election, the Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Hamas-Israel war, when we were targeted by lawsuits, doxxed, threatened with violence and even death, we warn all candidates during the hiring process of the specific risks so that they can opt out if they are not prepared for the stress; We connect them to veteran staff if they have questions about how to traverse rough ground.
During the hiring and training process, we audit the social media accounts and websites of new staff and counsel them how to reduce risk by taking down personal information, pictures of their house front, etc;
Emphasis on ethics and excellence in reporting and writing is our best protection and we frame it in those terms when starting new staff.
Senior staff routinely provide to the writers and researchers revised training materials such as the International Women's Media Foundation's mental health guide and the International Journalism Festival's materials on self-care and safety. During particularly hard times, we use conference calls or zoom meetings to help our dispersed staff feel less alone.
Lead Stories managing editor Dean Miller is in the pilot group taking the IFCN's "Mental Health Leadership for Fact Checkers" seminars, a program that is helping him develop better questions to ask of staff in helping them get the help they need;
Where available and necessary, we provide staff with VPN training, "Delete Me" services and other ways to reduce avenues by which improper approaches can be made.
Although a byline is an important element of journalistic accountability, where we judge it unsafe, we insist that articles bear a "Lead Stories staff" byline. We just don't chance it in countries where press crackdowns are underway, such as Belarus, Hungary, Slovakia, Bulgaria and Romania.
We do not put direct contact information for writing staff on the site, instead we use a generic “reporters” email alias that we use so management can filter out abusive messages before they are forwarded to the appropriate person.

Applicant

Date: 06/05/2024

Download File

Eva Vajda (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 06/09/2024

Very good and thorough

Article 3.3: Honest corrections

In order to be recognised as a verified member of the European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN), operations must:

Best Practices:

In addition to the required standards listed above, the Code identifies the following as best practices that are encouraged but not required to join the EFCSN.

Article 4.1: Organisational transparency

In order to be recognised as a verified member of the European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN), operations must:

Applicant

Date: 06/05/2024

https://leadstories.com/about.html
https://български.leadstories.com/about.html
https://espanol.leadstories.com/about.html
https://magyar.leadstories.com/about.html
https://română.leadstories.com/about.html
https://русский.leadstories.com/about.html
https://slovensky.leadstories.com/about.html
https://українська.leadstories.com/about.html

Eva Vajda (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 06/09/2024

As I wrote above, more and transparent information would be needed who is responsible for the Hungarian content

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 17/09/2024

Responsibility (and editorial control) rests with the Global Management Team and the editors on the International Operations Management Team, as is explained in Hungarian on the Hungarian “about” page: https://magyar.leadstories.com/about.html

The EFCSN board provided us with following instructions in their reply letter when we applied for an anonymity waiver for certain of our writers (which they rejected for our Hungarian staffers):

As part of your application you submitted a waiver request for article 4.1.F which asks applicants to “[m]ake available and easily accessible on their website regularly updated information about the positions held by all staff involved in the fact-checking operation’s editorial output, including any relevant previous roles”. Please note, that the article does not require every article to be signed with a byline but that a list including short bios of fact-checkers, editors etc. must be provided.

As we understood it, the EFCSN code does not require breakdowns by language or region, it requires a disclosure of all staff involved in the editorial output of the entire fact checking operation.

4.1.F. Make available and easily accessible on their website regularly updated information about the positions held by all staff involved in the fact-checking operation’s editorial output, including any relevant previous roles.

All of the writers/fact checkers listed can potentially contribute to any fact check on any of our websites as they swap and share research. They are all involved in the editorial output of the organisation as a whole.

In preparing this application we looked at dpa’s site as an example. It also doesn’t list locations or languages for several of their staffers even though dpa publishes in multiple languages and countries as well.

Note that the other assessor has marked us “Compliant” on this question.

We want to follow all mandatory transparency rules while at the same time offering our staff a maximum level of protection to avoid the sort of harassment that was recently experienced by our AFP colleague for Hungary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thSZlfguJU4.

If we overlooked any rule or article that specifically requires a breakdown by language or country, please let us know and we will make the necessary changes.

Eva Vajda (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 19/09/2024

Other assessor is another person. It does not influence my opinion. Although I accepted the explanation above, I still believe it would be more credible if we the local contributors. Hungary is still not Riussia.

Eva Vajda (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 19/09/2024

But a small market

The information disclosed under this standard is confidential and is only disclosed to the assessors and the Governance Body of the EFCSN.

Article 4.2: Financial transparency and conflicts of interest

In order to be recognised as a verified member of the European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN), organisations or parent organisations must:

Best Practices

In addition to the required standards listed above, the Code identifies the following as a best practice that is encouraged but not required to join the EFCSN.

I. ELIGIBILITY TO APPLY In order to apply to the EFCSN, your fact-checking operation must first meet the criteria outlined in Chapter 5.2 of the Code.

1. When and why was your fact-checking operation started?

2. How many people work or volunteer in the operation and what are their roles?

3. Please list any activities besides fact-checking that your operation engages in.

4. What are the goals of your fact-checking operation over the coming year?

5. Please explain the geographical scope of your fact-checking operation and how you fit the Code’s requirement to “have a substantial and demonstrable focus on one or more of the countries of the Council of Europe, Kosovo, Belarus or Russia”.

5.b Please provide all the relevant information to demonstrate the existence of “a meaningful connection with the country or countries where the mis- and disinformation your organization fact-check originates from”.

6. Please attach a list of an average of four original fact-checks per month from the past year if this is your first time applying to the EFCSN or from the past two years if you are renewing your application.

7. Please note which policies you have had to change, if any, over the past 6 months in order to comply with the Code.

2.A. Make available and easily accessible on their website an explanation of the process used to select, research and complete investigations, including a definition of any rating systems used.

2.B. Assess the merits of the evidence found using the same standards applied to evidence on equivalent claims, regardless of who made the claim.

2.C. Primarily focus on topics that are in the public interest, defined here as issues that concern the welfare of society or individuals, and be willing to explain, if requested by an assessor, how various investigations fit this definition.

2.D. Make available and easily accessible on their website a channel through which the public can submit possible claims for verification and encourage users to send claims to check, while making it clear what readers can legitimately expect will be fact-checked and what isn’t fact-checkable.

2.E. Identify and include in publications, when possible, access to all evidence or other required information for a reader to replicate the verification process.

2.F. Provide evidence for every pertinent factual statement made in an investigation, relying on primary sources where possible. Set out in its fact checks relevant evidence that appears to support the claim as well as relevant evidence that appears to undermine it.

2.H. Name all sources except when their safety is at risk. In such exceptions, anonymous sources may only be included if the information they provide is corroborated by named sources or material evidence.

2.I. When quoting experts, establish their credibility in the relevant topic.

2.J. Ensure each investigation undergoes at least one round of editing by someone other than the author before publication.

2.K. Present findings in precise, factual and non-emotive language, while taking care not to overstate conclusions.

2.K. Present findings in precise, factual and non-emotive language, while taking care not to overstate conclusions.

3.1.A. Be editorially free and politically independent.

3.1.B. Not endorse or advise the public to vote for any political parties or candidates for public office.

3.1.C. Not conclude any agreement or partnership with a political party or any other public relations and similar activities that could compromise the operation’s reputation for independence and impartiality

3.1.D. Not focus investigations unduly on one particular political party or side of the political spectrum.

3.1.E. Not employ anyone who holds a salaried and/or prominent position in a political party, government, state or public company under the direct control of a political party or government.

3.1.F. Explicitly address in publications any reasonable conflict of interest or political bias, including from experts or organisations cited.

3.1.H. Have internal policies that bar employees from accepting in a professional context any gifts, favours, or services with advantageous conditions that go beyond common social and courtesy items, and have procedures in place to take action if they do.

3.1.I. Make available and easily accessible on their website these and any other non-partisanship policies (See template in Annex 3)

3.1.J. Only advocate for issues that are relevant to the mission of fact-checking and are compatible with a reputation for independence and impartiality. Organisations that engage in advocacy must set out public guidelines on how they adhere to these standards.

3.2.A. Obscure the image and/or identity of subjects of an investigation when there is a reasonable concern for their safety.

3.2.B. Take measures to avoid exposing the source or identity of user-generated disinformation content to undue public scrutiny.

3.2.C. Be restrictive, respectful and considerate when mentioning or identifying minors and make efforts to protect their privacy.

3.2.D. Anonymise any personal information that could allow the harassment of people (i.e. at least partially concealing telephone numbers, IDs or passports, bank account numbers, email addresses…).

3.2.E. When appropriate and possible, a right-of-reply should be offered to any named person or organisation who is the source of the inaccurate claim and/or is the subject of significant criticism or allegations.

3.2.F. Put in place measures that aim to address the risk of trauma or harassment experienced by staff as a result of the operation’s activities, including but not limited to providing training to prevent and identify symptoms.

3.3.A. Correct every known mistake promptly with a correction note in the same publication in which the error was made; if the error is only typographical, grammatical or stylistic, a correction note is not needed.

3.3.B. When the original publication in which the mistake was made is not editable, disseminate the correction in the same format and channel as the original so that as far as possible users of the original see the correction and the corrected version.

3.3.E. Make available and easily accessible on their websites a corrections policy and a record of the corrections published over the previous year in the first application for EFCSN membership and of the previous two years upon renewal.

3.3.F. Include in their corrections policy, available and easily accessible on their websites, a detailed account of how they assess requests for corrections.

3.3.G. Offer audiences direct channels to request a correction, within the corrections policy on their website.

3.3.I. Undergo an internal and documented annual review of published corrections to determine whether methodological and procedural changes should be made to avoid repeating the same mistakes in the future.

3.3.H. Inform audiences of the possibility of submitting a complaint to the EFCSN under the terms of article 6 with a link to the complaint form.

4.1.A. Make available and easily accessible on their website a statement that sets out the applicant’s organisational structure and makes clear how and by whom editorial control is exercised.

4.1.B. Make available and easily accessible on their website regularly updated information related to the ownership and legal status of the operation and/or parent organisation. People or entities holding over 5% of the shares must be disclosed (see template in Annex 4).

4.1.C. Make available and easily accessible on their website regularly updated information related to the governance of the operation and/or the parent organisation (see template in Annex 5).

4.1.D. Provide proof of the ownership, legal status and governance of the organisation to the external assessors

4.1.E. Make available and easily accessible on their website regularly updated information about the identity of the editors or decision makers behind the operation, including any relevant previous roles.

4.1.F. Make available and easily accessible on their website regularly updated information about the positions held by all staff involved in the fact-checking operation’s editorial output, including any relevant previous roles.

4.1.G. Make available and easily accessible on their website a statement setting out the operation’s mission, values and internal guidelines in place to protect its independence.

4.1.H. Make available and easily accessible on their website the organisation’s bylaws, understood as the rules or statutes that govern the members of an organisation.

4.2.A. Disclose all income sources contributing 1% or 5.000 euros (whichever the higher), from the most recent annual accounts when joining and the last two annual accounts when renewing membership, to external assessors and the Governance Body

4.2.D. Make available and easily accessible on their website an updated declaration of all unpaid significant commitments made to other organisations (see Annex 9).

4.2.F. Make available and easily accessible on their website goods and services they receive from external sources, including paid subscriptions or free access to tools, software and/or advertising, that make a material difference to their finances (5% of net income).

4.2.H. Make available and easily accessible on or from their website the full annual accounts of their organisation for each year since joining the EFCSN.