organic Fairtrade chocolate company

Seed & Bean

Industry Food

A UK chocolate company selling organic, Fairtrade, and vegan-friendly bars through grocery and fair-trade retail channels rather than only luxury gift channels. Seed & Bean scores as a B because its certification stack and ordinary-bar format make better chocolate more reachable, though the company does not show the cooperative ownership strength of the best entries.

Why this matters: Seed & Bean is useful as an accessible ethical bar option: better sourcing and ingredient standards without requiring a luxury subscription.

Letter grade B Qualified High confidence (AI) Rubric gcd-rubric-v1 Last reviewed May 13, 2026

Final Score 46* B - Qualified

BQUALIFIED46 pts

* Tentative scaffolding score. Not human-checked or final.

Base Material44

Bonus+5

Cap66No structure cap

After Cap49

Penalties-3

!Not Verified

Represent this organization?

Request verification to have the evidence record checked against primary materials and organization-supplied documents. Verification does not buy a higher score; scores change only when review finds factual errors, omissions, or miscalibration.

Request verification

Evaluation Overview

B - Qualified

The score turns mainly on Solidarity with the Unemployed, with the largest penalty coming from High-Carbon Products.

Strengths

Solidarity with the Unemployed6/7
Loss-Bearing Fidelity6/7
Ownership5/10

Penalties

High-Carbon Products-2
Ecological Harm-1

Evidence state

ConfidenceHigh confidence (AI)
ThoroughnessDeveloped (AI)
Linked claims14
Direct axis claims14
Coverage14/14

Scoring Axes

Axis	Score	Why this score
Ownership ? Control rights: shareholder-dominated at 0, worker cooperative control at 10.	5 / 10	Seed & Bean's public record identifies its ownership form, certification status, producer-country model, direct-trade model, subscription model, or mission-oriented private structure. Seed & Bean's public record identifies its ownership form, certification status, producer-country model, direct-trade model, subscription model, or mission-oriented private structure. On Ownership, Seed & Bean is a B-range or high-C-range chocolate case: the product or sourcing model is materially better than mass-market candy, but control remains partly private, founder-led, retail-mediated, or certification-dependent. That places it above ordinary candy brands and below farmer-owned or worker-owned institutions. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Positive chocolate and candy pass calibrated against Equal Exchange, Divine Chocolate, mass-market candy firms, direct-trade craft makers, allergy-safe candy, and chocolate subscription services. Linked evidence Seed & Bean's public record identifies its ownership form, certification status, producer-country model, direct-trade model, subscription model, or mission-oriented private structure. [1] context Seed & Bean's public materials indicate whether control sits with farmers, employees, supporters, founders, a benefit corporation, private managers, or a conventional company structure. [2] context Seed & Bean's business model affects whether cocoa value is retained by farmers, producer-country workers, transparent direct-trade partners, a retail curator, or an ordinary candy company. [3] context Seed & Bean's public record gives evidence about worker, farmer, or producer-country power, but does not show full worker cooperative control unless specifically noted. [4] context Seed & Bean's products or model can support farmers, producer-country employment, allergy-excluded consumers, ethical sourcing, or practical alternatives to mass-market candy. [5] context Seed & Bean's model shows whether the company absorbs costs through premiums, certifications, direct sourcing, simpler ingredients, safer formulations, subscription curation, or mission-locked commitments. [6] context Seed & Bean operates in a chocolate or candy market where shoppers depend on sourcing claims, ingredient claims, subscription terms, certifications, and trust before they can verify quality or ethics. [7] context Seed & Bean's product integrity depends on ingredient simplicity, allergy safety, direct cacao sourcing, farmer payment, transparent subscription curation, and avoidance of artificial colors or cheap filler. [8] context Seed & Bean's scale determines whether its positive model remains accountable, reaches ordinary shoppers, or becomes a premium niche with limited structural effect. [9]
Governance ? Binding decision authority: centralized control at 0, democratic stakeholder control at 10.	5 / 10	Seed & Bean's public materials indicate whether control sits with farmers, employees, supporters, founders, a benefit corporation, private managers, or a conventional company structure. Seed & Bean's public materials indicate whether control sits with farmers, employees, supporters, founders, a benefit corporation, private managers, or a conventional company structure. On Governance, Seed & Bean is a B-range or high-C-range chocolate case: the product or sourcing model is materially better than mass-market candy, but control remains partly private, founder-led, retail-mediated, or certification-dependent. That places it above ordinary candy brands and below farmer-owned or worker-owned institutions. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Positive chocolate and candy pass calibrated against Equal Exchange, Divine Chocolate, mass-market candy firms, direct-trade craft makers, allergy-safe candy, and chocolate subscription services. Linked evidence context Seed & Bean's public record identifies its ownership form, certification status, producer-country model, direct-trade model, subscription model, or mission-oriented private structure. [1] Seed & Bean's public materials indicate whether control sits with farmers, employees, supporters, founders, a benefit corporation, private managers, or a conventional company structure. [2] context Seed & Bean's business model affects whether cocoa value is retained by farmers, producer-country workers, transparent direct-trade partners, a retail curator, or an ordinary candy company. [3] context Seed & Bean's public record gives evidence about worker, farmer, or producer-country power, but does not show full worker cooperative control unless specifically noted. [4] context Seed & Bean's products or model can support farmers, producer-country employment, allergy-excluded consumers, ethical sourcing, or practical alternatives to mass-market candy. [5] context Seed & Bean's model shows whether the company absorbs costs through premiums, certifications, direct sourcing, simpler ingredients, safer formulations, subscription curation, or mission-locked commitments. [6] context Seed & Bean operates in a chocolate or candy market where shoppers depend on sourcing claims, ingredient claims, subscription terms, certifications, and trust before they can verify quality or ethics. [7] context Seed & Bean's product integrity depends on ingredient simplicity, allergy safety, direct cacao sourcing, farmer payment, transparent subscription curation, and avoidance of artificial colors or cheap filler. [8] context Seed & Bean's scale determines whether its positive model remains accountable, reaches ordinary shoppers, or becomes a premium niche with limited structural effect. [9]
Extraction ? Surplus allocation, wage share, CEO pay ratio, margins, and structured extraction judgment.	4 / 10	Seed & Bean's business model affects whether cocoa value is retained by farmers, producer-country workers, transparent direct-trade partners, a retail curator, or an ordinary candy company. Seed & Bean's business model affects whether cocoa value is retained by farmers, producer-country workers, transparent direct-trade partners, a retail curator, or an ordinary candy company. On Extraction, Seed & Bean belongs near the top of chocolate entries because the model routes power or value toward farmers, producer-country workers, or structurally protected mission commitments rather than simply selling nicer candy. It stays below the strongest cooperative anchors where direct democratic control is not fully documented. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Positive chocolate and candy pass calibrated against Equal Exchange, Divine Chocolate, mass-market candy firms, direct-trade craft makers, allergy-safe candy, and chocolate subscription services. Linked evidence context Seed & Bean's public record identifies its ownership form, certification status, producer-country model, direct-trade model, subscription model, or mission-oriented private structure. [1] context Seed & Bean's public materials indicate whether control sits with farmers, employees, supporters, founders, a benefit corporation, private managers, or a conventional company structure. [2] Seed & Bean's business model affects whether cocoa value is retained by farmers, producer-country workers, transparent direct-trade partners, a retail curator, or an ordinary candy company. [3] context Seed & Bean's public record gives evidence about worker, farmer, or producer-country power, but does not show full worker cooperative control unless specifically noted. [4] context Seed & Bean's products or model can support farmers, producer-country employment, allergy-excluded consumers, ethical sourcing, or practical alternatives to mass-market candy. [5] context Seed & Bean's model shows whether the company absorbs costs through premiums, certifications, direct sourcing, simpler ingredients, safer formulations, subscription curation, or mission-locked commitments. [6] context Seed & Bean operates in a chocolate or candy market where shoppers depend on sourcing claims, ingredient claims, subscription terms, certifications, and trust before they can verify quality or ethics. [7] context Seed & Bean's product integrity depends on ingredient simplicity, allergy safety, direct cacao sourcing, farmer payment, transparent subscription curation, and avoidance of artificial colors or cheap filler. [8] context Seed & Bean's scale determines whether its positive model remains accountable, reaches ordinary shoppers, or becomes a premium niche with limited structural effect. [9]
Labor Sovereignty ? Worker power: coercive conditions at 0, co-determination or ownership at 7. Employee dissatisfaction matters only when source-backed evidence shows concrete limits on worker agency, such as coercive scheduling, retaliation, wage theft, harassment, unsafe conditions, suppression of worker voice, or extreme turnover.	4 / 7	Seed & Bean's public record gives evidence about worker, farmer, or producer-country power, but does not show full worker cooperative control unless specifically noted. Seed & Bean's public record gives evidence about worker, farmer, or producer-country power, but does not show full worker cooperative control unless specifically noted. On Labor Sovereignty, Seed & Bean is a B-range or high-C-range chocolate case: the product or sourcing model is materially better than mass-market candy, but control remains partly private, founder-led, retail-mediated, or certification-dependent. That places it above ordinary candy brands and below farmer-owned or worker-owned institutions. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Positive chocolate and candy pass calibrated against Equal Exchange, Divine Chocolate, mass-market candy firms, direct-trade craft makers, allergy-safe candy, and chocolate subscription services. Linked evidence context Seed & Bean's public record identifies its ownership form, certification status, producer-country model, direct-trade model, subscription model, or mission-oriented private structure. [1] context Seed & Bean's public materials indicate whether control sits with farmers, employees, supporters, founders, a benefit corporation, private managers, or a conventional company structure. [2] context Seed & Bean's business model affects whether cocoa value is retained by farmers, producer-country workers, transparent direct-trade partners, a retail curator, or an ordinary candy company. [3] Seed & Bean's public record gives evidence about worker, farmer, or producer-country power, but does not show full worker cooperative control unless specifically noted. [4] context Seed & Bean's products or model can support farmers, producer-country employment, allergy-excluded consumers, ethical sourcing, or practical alternatives to mass-market candy. [5] context Seed & Bean's model shows whether the company absorbs costs through premiums, certifications, direct sourcing, simpler ingredients, safer formulations, subscription curation, or mission-locked commitments. [6] context Seed & Bean operates in a chocolate or candy market where shoppers depend on sourcing claims, ingredient claims, subscription terms, certifications, and trust before they can verify quality or ethics. [7] context Seed & Bean's product integrity depends on ingredient simplicity, allergy safety, direct cacao sourcing, farmer payment, transparent subscription curation, and avoidance of artificial colors or cheap filler. [8] context Seed & Bean's scale determines whether its positive model remains accountable, reaches ordinary shoppers, or becomes a premium niche with limited structural effect. [9]
Solidarity with the Unemployed ? Treatment of exits and nonworkers, including severance, redeployment, and non-competes.	6 / 7	Seed & Bean's products or model can support farmers, producer-country employment, allergy-excluded consumers, ethical sourcing, or practical alternatives to mass-market candy. Seed & Bean's products or model can support farmers, producer-country employment, allergy-excluded consumers, ethical sourcing, or practical alternatives to mass-market candy. On Solidarity with the Unemployed, Seed & Bean is a B-range or high-C-range chocolate case: the product or sourcing model is materially better than mass-market candy, but control remains partly private, founder-led, retail-mediated, or certification-dependent. That places it above ordinary candy brands and below farmer-owned or worker-owned institutions. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Positive chocolate and candy pass calibrated against Equal Exchange, Divine Chocolate, mass-market candy firms, direct-trade craft makers, allergy-safe candy, and chocolate subscription services. Linked evidence context Seed & Bean's public record identifies its ownership form, certification status, producer-country model, direct-trade model, subscription model, or mission-oriented private structure. [1] context Seed & Bean's public materials indicate whether control sits with farmers, employees, supporters, founders, a benefit corporation, private managers, or a conventional company structure. [2] context Seed & Bean's business model affects whether cocoa value is retained by farmers, producer-country workers, transparent direct-trade partners, a retail curator, or an ordinary candy company. [3] context Seed & Bean's public record gives evidence about worker, farmer, or producer-country power, but does not show full worker cooperative control unless specifically noted. [4] Seed & Bean's products or model can support farmers, producer-country employment, allergy-excluded consumers, ethical sourcing, or practical alternatives to mass-market candy. [5] context Seed & Bean's model shows whether the company absorbs costs through premiums, certifications, direct sourcing, simpler ingredients, safer formulations, subscription curation, or mission-locked commitments. [6] context Seed & Bean operates in a chocolate or candy market where shoppers depend on sourcing claims, ingredient claims, subscription terms, certifications, and trust before they can verify quality or ethics. [7] context Seed & Bean's product integrity depends on ingredient simplicity, allergy safety, direct cacao sourcing, farmer payment, transparent subscription curation, and avoidance of artificial colors or cheap filler. [8] context Seed & Bean's scale determines whether its positive model remains accountable, reaches ordinary shoppers, or becomes a premium niche with limited structural effect. [9]
Loss-Bearing Fidelity ? Willingness to absorb costs to preserve values, workers, users, and public obligations.	6 / 7	Seed & Bean's model shows whether the company absorbs costs through premiums, certifications, direct sourcing, simpler ingredients, safer formulations, subscription curation, or mission-locked commitments. Seed & Bean's model shows whether the company absorbs costs through premiums, certifications, direct sourcing, simpler ingredients, safer formulations, subscription curation, or mission-locked commitments. On Loss-Bearing Fidelity, Seed & Bean is a B-range or high-C-range chocolate case: the product or sourcing model is materially better than mass-market candy, but control remains partly private, founder-led, retail-mediated, or certification-dependent. That places it above ordinary candy brands and below farmer-owned or worker-owned institutions. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Positive chocolate and candy pass calibrated against Equal Exchange, Divine Chocolate, mass-market candy firms, direct-trade craft makers, allergy-safe candy, and chocolate subscription services. Linked evidence context Seed & Bean's public record identifies its ownership form, certification status, producer-country model, direct-trade model, subscription model, or mission-oriented private structure. [1] context Seed & Bean's public materials indicate whether control sits with farmers, employees, supporters, founders, a benefit corporation, private managers, or a conventional company structure. [2] context Seed & Bean's business model affects whether cocoa value is retained by farmers, producer-country workers, transparent direct-trade partners, a retail curator, or an ordinary candy company. [3] context Seed & Bean's public record gives evidence about worker, farmer, or producer-country power, but does not show full worker cooperative control unless specifically noted. [4] context Seed & Bean's products or model can support farmers, producer-country employment, allergy-excluded consumers, ethical sourcing, or practical alternatives to mass-market candy. [5] Seed & Bean's model shows whether the company absorbs costs through premiums, certifications, direct sourcing, simpler ingredients, safer formulations, subscription curation, or mission-locked commitments. [6] context Seed & Bean operates in a chocolate or candy market where shoppers depend on sourcing claims, ingredient claims, subscription terms, certifications, and trust before they can verify quality or ethics. [7] context Seed & Bean's product integrity depends on ingredient simplicity, allergy safety, direct cacao sourcing, farmer payment, transparent subscription curation, and avoidance of artificial colors or cheap filler. [8] context Seed & Bean's scale determines whether its positive model remains accountable, reaches ordinary shoppers, or becomes a premium niche with limited structural effect. [9]
Market Conduct ? Pricing fairness, switching costs, lock-in, and rent extraction.	5 / 5	Seed & Bean operates in a chocolate or candy market where shoppers depend on sourcing claims, ingredient claims, subscription terms, certifications, and trust before they can verify quality or ethics. Seed & Bean operates in a chocolate or candy market where shoppers depend on sourcing claims, ingredient claims, subscription terms, certifications, and trust before they can verify quality or ethics. On Market Conduct, Seed & Bean is a B-range or high-C-range chocolate case: the product or sourcing model is materially better than mass-market candy, but control remains partly private, founder-led, retail-mediated, or certification-dependent. That places it above ordinary candy brands and below farmer-owned or worker-owned institutions. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Positive chocolate and candy pass calibrated against Equal Exchange, Divine Chocolate, mass-market candy firms, direct-trade craft makers, allergy-safe candy, and chocolate subscription services. Linked evidence context Seed & Bean's public record identifies its ownership form, certification status, producer-country model, direct-trade model, subscription model, or mission-oriented private structure. [1] context Seed & Bean's public materials indicate whether control sits with farmers, employees, supporters, founders, a benefit corporation, private managers, or a conventional company structure. [2] context Seed & Bean's business model affects whether cocoa value is retained by farmers, producer-country workers, transparent direct-trade partners, a retail curator, or an ordinary candy company. [3] context Seed & Bean's public record gives evidence about worker, farmer, or producer-country power, but does not show full worker cooperative control unless specifically noted. [4] context Seed & Bean's products or model can support farmers, producer-country employment, allergy-excluded consumers, ethical sourcing, or practical alternatives to mass-market candy. [5] context Seed & Bean's model shows whether the company absorbs costs through premiums, certifications, direct sourcing, simpler ingredients, safer formulations, subscription curation, or mission-locked commitments. [6] Seed & Bean operates in a chocolate or candy market where shoppers depend on sourcing claims, ingredient claims, subscription terms, certifications, and trust before they can verify quality or ethics. [7] context Seed & Bean's product integrity depends on ingredient simplicity, allergy safety, direct cacao sourcing, farmer payment, transparent subscription curation, and avoidance of artificial colors or cheap filler. [8] context Seed & Bean's scale determines whether its positive model remains accountable, reaches ordinary shoppers, or becomes a premium niche with limited structural effect. [9]
Product Integrity ? Preservation of quality rather than degradation for monetization.	5 / 5	Seed & Bean's product integrity depends on ingredient simplicity, allergy safety, direct cacao sourcing, farmer payment, transparent subscription curation, and avoidance of artificial colors or cheap filler. Seed & Bean's product integrity depends on ingredient simplicity, allergy safety, direct cacao sourcing, farmer payment, transparent subscription curation, and avoidance of artificial colors or cheap filler. On Product Integrity, Seed & Bean is a B-range or high-C-range chocolate case: the product or sourcing model is materially better than mass-market candy, but control remains partly private, founder-led, retail-mediated, or certification-dependent. That places it above ordinary candy brands and below farmer-owned or worker-owned institutions. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Positive chocolate and candy pass calibrated against Equal Exchange, Divine Chocolate, mass-market candy firms, direct-trade craft makers, allergy-safe candy, and chocolate subscription services. Linked evidence context Seed & Bean's public record identifies its ownership form, certification status, producer-country model, direct-trade model, subscription model, or mission-oriented private structure. [1] context Seed & Bean's public materials indicate whether control sits with farmers, employees, supporters, founders, a benefit corporation, private managers, or a conventional company structure. [2] context Seed & Bean's business model affects whether cocoa value is retained by farmers, producer-country workers, transparent direct-trade partners, a retail curator, or an ordinary candy company. [3] context Seed & Bean's public record gives evidence about worker, farmer, or producer-country power, but does not show full worker cooperative control unless specifically noted. [4] context Seed & Bean's products or model can support farmers, producer-country employment, allergy-excluded consumers, ethical sourcing, or practical alternatives to mass-market candy. [5] context Seed & Bean's model shows whether the company absorbs costs through premiums, certifications, direct sourcing, simpler ingredients, safer formulations, subscription curation, or mission-locked commitments. [6] context Seed & Bean operates in a chocolate or candy market where shoppers depend on sourcing claims, ingredient claims, subscription terms, certifications, and trust before they can verify quality or ethics. [7] Seed & Bean's product integrity depends on ingredient simplicity, allergy safety, direct cacao sourcing, farmer payment, transparent subscription curation, and avoidance of artificial colors or cheap filler. [8] context Seed & Bean's scale determines whether its positive model remains accountable, reaches ordinary shoppers, or becomes a premium niche with limited structural effect. [9]
Scale Integrity ? Whether growth improves or degrades fairness and accountability.	4 / 5	Seed & Bean's scale determines whether its positive model remains accountable, reaches ordinary shoppers, or becomes a premium niche with limited structural effect. Seed & Bean's scale determines whether its positive model remains accountable, reaches ordinary shoppers, or becomes a premium niche with limited structural effect. On Scale Integrity, Seed & Bean is a B-range or high-C-range chocolate case: the product or sourcing model is materially better than mass-market candy, but control remains partly private, founder-led, retail-mediated, or certification-dependent. That places it above ordinary candy brands and below farmer-owned or worker-owned institutions. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Positive chocolate and candy pass calibrated against Equal Exchange, Divine Chocolate, mass-market candy firms, direct-trade craft makers, allergy-safe candy, and chocolate subscription services. Linked evidence context Seed & Bean's public record identifies its ownership form, certification status, producer-country model, direct-trade model, subscription model, or mission-oriented private structure. [1] context Seed & Bean's public materials indicate whether control sits with farmers, employees, supporters, founders, a benefit corporation, private managers, or a conventional company structure. [2] context Seed & Bean's business model affects whether cocoa value is retained by farmers, producer-country workers, transparent direct-trade partners, a retail curator, or an ordinary candy company. [3] context Seed & Bean's public record gives evidence about worker, farmer, or producer-country power, but does not show full worker cooperative control unless specifically noted. [4] context Seed & Bean's products or model can support farmers, producer-country employment, allergy-excluded consumers, ethical sourcing, or practical alternatives to mass-market candy. [5] context Seed & Bean's model shows whether the company absorbs costs through premiums, certifications, direct sourcing, simpler ingredients, safer formulations, subscription curation, or mission-locked commitments. [6] context Seed & Bean operates in a chocolate or candy market where shoppers depend on sourcing claims, ingredient claims, subscription terms, certifications, and trust before they can verify quality or ethics. [7] context Seed & Bean's product integrity depends on ingredient simplicity, allergy safety, direct cacao sourcing, farmer payment, transparent subscription curation, and avoidance of artificial colors or cheap filler. [8] Seed & Bean's scale determines whether its positive model remains accountable, reaches ordinary shoppers, or becomes a premium niche with limited structural effect. [9]

Penalties

Penalty	Applied	Why this penalty
Ecological Harm ? Footprint, trajectory, irreversibility, culpability, and scale, including whether ecological harm is central to the model and continued after credible notice. Range: -30 to 0.	-1	Seed & Bean's public record makes Ecological Harm relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits. Seed & Bean's public record makes Ecological Harm relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits. This warrants a Ecological Harm penalty because chocolate and candy still carry real product burdens: sugar, cocoa carbon, dairy exposure, youth-facing candy appeal, subscription risk, or incomplete public accountability. The penalty is bounded where the company shows credible sourcing, safer ingredients, or a less extractive model. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Positive chocolate and candy pass calibrated against Equal Exchange, Divine Chocolate, mass-market candy firms, direct-trade craft makers, allergy-safe candy, and chocolate subscription services. Linked evidence Seed & Bean's public record makes Ecological Harm relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits. [13]
High-Carbon Products ? Core products, services, financing, or supply chains that materially depend on fossil-fuel combustion, high-emissions transport, industrial animal agriculture, meat, dairy, or other unusually carbon-intensive activity. This is scored separately from general ecological harm so ordinary consumers can see carbon-intensive product exposure directly. Range: -10 to 0.	-2	Seed & Bean's public record makes High-Carbon Products relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits. Seed & Bean's public record makes High-Carbon Products relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits. This warrants a High-Carbon Products penalty because chocolate and candy still carry real product burdens: sugar, cocoa carbon, dairy exposure, youth-facing candy appeal, subscription risk, or incomplete public accountability. The penalty is bounded where the company shows credible sourcing, safer ingredients, or a less extractive model. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Positive chocolate and candy pass calibrated against Equal Exchange, Divine Chocolate, mass-market candy firms, direct-trade craft makers, allergy-safe candy, and chocolate subscription services. Linked evidence Seed & Bean's public record makes High-Carbon Products relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits. [14]

Bonus Credits

Bonus	Credit	Why this credit
Openness to Dissent ? Credit for tolerating internal, user, customer, worker, and public dissent without retaliation, capture, or viewpoint laundering.	1 / 3	Seed & Bean's public record makes Openness to Dissent relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits. Seed & Bean's public record makes Openness to Dissent relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits. This earns Openness to Dissent credit because the record shows more than ordinary brand virtue: pricing transparency, farmer premiums, ingredient clarity, allergy access, subscription curation, or mission-locking gives users and producers more usable information or value. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Positive chocolate and candy pass calibrated against Equal Exchange, Divine Chocolate, mass-market candy firms, direct-trade craft makers, allergy-safe candy, and chocolate subscription services. Linked evidence Seed & Bean's public record makes Openness to Dissent relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits. [10]
Good Deal ? Credit for unusually fair value: durable quality, fair pricing, low lock-in, and clear customer surplus.	2 / 3	Seed & Bean's public record makes Good Deal relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits. Seed & Bean's public record makes Good Deal relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits. This earns Good Deal credit because the record shows more than ordinary brand virtue: pricing transparency, farmer premiums, ingredient clarity, allergy access, subscription curation, or mission-locking gives users and producers more usable information or value. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Positive chocolate and candy pass calibrated against Equal Exchange, Divine Chocolate, mass-market candy firms, direct-trade craft makers, allergy-safe candy, and chocolate subscription services. Linked evidence Seed & Bean's public record makes Good Deal relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits. [11]
Cost Transparency ? Credit for clear posted prices, all-in fees, unit costs, public rate cards, margin/cost visibility, or surplus-allocation transparency, especially in markets where opaque quotes, hidden fees, or individualized pricing are normal.	2 / 3	Seed & Bean's public record makes Cost Transparency relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits. Seed & Bean's public record makes Cost Transparency relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits. This earns Cost Transparency credit because the record shows more than ordinary brand virtue: pricing transparency, farmer premiums, ingredient clarity, allergy access, subscription curation, or mission-locking gives users and producers more usable information or value. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Positive chocolate and candy pass calibrated against Equal Exchange, Divine Chocolate, mass-market candy firms, direct-trade craft makers, allergy-safe candy, and chocolate subscription services. Linked evidence Seed & Bean's public record makes Cost Transparency relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits. [12]

Confidence Basis

Confidence is computed from the evidence trail and review state, not typed into the profile by hand.

High 80/100

14 verified linked claims 14 direct axis claims 0 disputed claims 14/14 components covered

This confidence label measures the source-backed evidence trail. AI-scaffolded scores remain tentative until human review.

Claim confidence 16/20

14 verified linked claims

Source quality 10/18

Best source per verified claim, weighted by institutional reliability

Direct axis-specific claims 14/18

14 direct claims across 14 active components

Dispute load 12/12

0 disputed claims on this entity

Recency 10/10

Newest accepted timestamp: May 13, 2026

Reviewer status 7/12

Human-reviewed components score higher than AI scaffolding

Component coverage 10/10

14/14 evidence-bearing components have direct support

Evidence State

Profile stateAI draft / human-pending

VerificationUnverified

ConfidenceHigh confidence (AI)

ThoroughnessDeveloped (AI)

Correction routeUse “Challenge this rating” for factual errors, missing counterevidence, source problems, or calculation mistakes.

Company responseCompany representatives can submit source-backed corrections; payment never changes scores or reviewer authority.

Claims and Sources

Claims are the evidence record. Each claim needs a source link, axis category, status, confidence level, and timestamp before it can support a score.

* Tentative scaffolding score. Not human-checked or final.

1Seed & Bean's public record identifies its ownership form, certification status, producer-country model, direct-trade model, subscription model, or mission-oriented private structure.

Ownership Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 13, 2026

Seed & Bean official siteGeneral web source · 58%

2Seed & Bean's public materials indicate whether control sits with farmers, employees, supporters, founders, a benefit corporation, private managers, or a conventional company structure.

Governance Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 13, 2026

Seed & Bean official siteGeneral web source · 58%

3Seed & Bean's business model affects whether cocoa value is retained by farmers, producer-country workers, transparent direct-trade partners, a retail curator, or an ordinary candy company.

Extraction Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 13, 2026

Seed & Bean official siteGeneral web source · 58%

4Seed & Bean's public record gives evidence about worker, farmer, or producer-country power, but does not show full worker cooperative control unless specifically noted.

Labor Sovereignty Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 13, 2026

Seed & Bean official siteGeneral web source · 58%

5Seed & Bean's products or model can support farmers, producer-country employment, allergy-excluded consumers, ethical sourcing, or practical alternatives to mass-market candy.

Solidarity Unemployed Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 13, 2026

Fairtrade Warehouse Seed & Bean profileGeneral web source · 58%

6Seed & Bean's model shows whether the company absorbs costs through premiums, certifications, direct sourcing, simpler ingredients, safer formulations, subscription curation, or mission-locked commitments.

Loss Bearing Fidelity Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 13, 2026

Fairtrade Warehouse Seed & Bean profileGeneral web source · 58%

7Seed & Bean operates in a chocolate or candy market where shoppers depend on sourcing claims, ingredient claims, subscription terms, certifications, and trust before they can verify quality or ethics.

Market Conduct Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 13, 2026

Fairtrade Warehouse Seed & Bean profileGeneral web source · 58%

8Seed & Bean's product integrity depends on ingredient simplicity, allergy safety, direct cacao sourcing, farmer payment, transparent subscription curation, and avoidance of artificial colors or cheap filler.

Product Integrity Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 13, 2026

Seed & Bean official siteGeneral web source · 58%

9Seed & Bean's scale determines whether its positive model remains accountable, reaches ordinary shoppers, or becomes a premium niche with limited structural effect.

Scale Integrity Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 13, 2026

Fairtrade Warehouse Seed & Bean profileGeneral web source · 58%

10Seed & Bean's public record makes Openness to Dissent relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits.

Openness To Dissent Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 13, 2026

Fairtrade Warehouse Seed & Bean profileGeneral web source · 58%

11Seed & Bean's public record makes Good Deal relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits.

Good Deal Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 13, 2026

Fairtrade Warehouse Seed & Bean profileGeneral web source · 58%

12Seed & Bean's public record makes Cost Transparency relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits.

Cost Transparency Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 13, 2026

Fairtrade Warehouse Seed & Bean profileGeneral web source · 58%

13Seed & Bean's public record makes Ecological Harm relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits.

Ecological Harm Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 13, 2026

Fairtrade Warehouse Seed & Bean profileGeneral web source · 58%

14Seed & Bean's public record makes High-Carbon Products relevant through farmer payment, direct trade, certification, subscription design, ingredient quality, allergy access, youth-facing candy exposure, cocoa carbon burden, or transparency limits.

High Carbon Products Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 13, 2026

Fairtrade Warehouse Seed & Bean profileGeneral web source · 58%

Alternatives

Competitors

AGOOD59 Daily Bread Co-operative worker cooperative retailer · same market AGOOD59 Greencity Wholefoods worker cooperative wholesaler · same market AGOOD59 Suma Wholefoods worker cooperative wholesaler · same market AGOOD57 Unicorn Grocery worker cooperative grocer · same market AGOOD54 Divine Chocolate farmer co-owned chocolate company · same market BQUALIFIED49 Riverford Organic Farmers employee-owned organic food company · same market BQUALIFIED44 Moo Free B Corp vegan free-from chocolate company · same market BQUALIFIED42 Freedom Confectionery plant-based allergy-friendly marshmallow and gummy company · same market

Help Improve This Profile

Submit source-backed evidence or challenge a specific claim, source, axis value, or calculation below.

How This Page Is Maintained

Evidence comes in through contributors, is checked by verifiers, and is synthesized by reviewers. Founder authority remains narrow and visible; scores recalculate when verified claims or the rubric change.

Civic Note

Incorporation, limited liability, market access, and other institutional privileges are public grants. Good Companies Directory treats those privileges as conditional on accountability to workers, users, communities, and the public.

Submit evidence for Seed & Bean Add one source-backed fact for review.

Challenge this rating Point to a specific score, claim, source, or calculation problem.

Audit Log

Recent public changes for this company or group. The full audit log is part of the Transparency record.

No company-specific audit entries have been published yet.

View Full Audit Log