Buildings That
Met the Standard
Every building here was independently assessed against all 95 requirements, met the critical gates, and consented to be listed. Nothing on this page is self-declared, and nothing was added without a completed audit.
Checking the registry's hash chain in your browser.
How a building gets listed
Site survey, superintendent interview, and independent verification of all 95 requirements against evidence — including the municipal and provincial content the operator has no mechanism to check themselves.
Statutory and life-safety items are hard gates. A building scoring 97% with one critical item unmet is not listed. There is no partial credit and no discretion.
Listing is opt-in. No building appears here because someone decided it should. Consent can be withdrawn at any time and the record is retired — retired, not deleted, because deleting it would break the chain.
The record is hashed and linked to the record before it. Its basis is published below: score, per-pillar breakdown, items in scope, items excluded and why, and the assessment date.
Computed by this page from the expiry date. Nobody has to remember. A record past its date renders as Lapsed automatically, because municipal content decays and a permanent badge would be a lie within two years.
Showing the work
A registry of unexplained badges is a logo wall. Three mechanisms make this one checkable by anyone, including the operators listed on it.
| Mechanism | What it does |
|---|---|
| Published basis | Every record shows the score, the conformance level, the per-pillar breakdown, how many of the 95 items were in scope, how many were excluded as not applicable and on what basis, and the assessment date. Enough to see how the number was reached without publishing a confidential report. |
| Hash chain | Each record is hashed and linked to the one before it. Any later alteration to a past record breaks the chain, and this page reports it — in your browser, from the raw data, not from our word for it. An operator can confirm their own record is exactly as issued. |
| Automatic expiry | Status is computed here from the expiry date rather than set by hand. A lapsed record says so whether or not anyone intervenes. |
The chain makes the registry tamper-evident. It does not make an audit honest.
Every record here rests on an assessment conducted by CIONAOD Inc., and no amount of cryptography changes that. What the chain guarantees is narrower and still worth having: that a record has not been quietly revised since it was issued, and that nothing has been deleted from the history.
If you believe a listing is wrong — particularly if you live in one of these buildings and your experience does not match the score — tell us. A registry that cannot be challenged by the people it describes is not worth reading.
What this page is not
- Not a ranking. Buildings are listed alphabetically by operator, never ordered by score. A building at Level 2 and 81% is conformant, the same as one at 94%.
- Not a list of everyone assessed. Only those who met a level and consented. An operator who was audited and chose not to be listed does not appear, and no inference should be drawn.
- Not a comment on anyone absent. The overwhelming majority of buildings in this region have never been assessed. Absence means nothing except absence.
- Not a substitute for the free standard. Any building can reach Level 1 without engaging anyone. Score yours here, ungated, and nobody sees the result.