African agricultural technology · crop and livestock
The proof is a by-product of running the scheme, not a project you run afterwards.
Every movement a scheme already makes — an advance issued, an intake weighed and graded, a delivery netted against credit, a settlement paid — is captured once, with its provenance attached. The receipt, the lot trace and the compliance pack are assembled from those records. Not reconstructed for an auditor at the end of a season.
It is not imagery. It is not another dashboard. It does not certify anything.
Who this is for
You carry the risk in a chain you do not farm.
You might be an aggregator or processor running an outgrower scheme. An exporter answerable to a buyer’s audit. A lender or a fund underwriting the growers inside someone else’s scheme. A programme accountable to a funder for outcomes across thousands of producers it does not employ.
The variable is who you answer to. The pain is the same one: you are accountable for something you cannot prove from the records you already have, so proving it becomes a second job, run to somebody else’s deadline.
Not the individual smallholder buying software for themselves. They are who the record is for, not who pays for it. The grower never pays — that is enforced in our commerce model, not promised in a paragraph.
The same sentence, four rooms
Different accountability. One missing record.
| You answer to | What you cannot assemble from the records you already keep |
|---|---|
| Your own balance sheet, and your buyer | What was advanced, what came back, what is still owed |
| A certifier and a retail buyer’s private standard | Which block a lot came from, and what was applied to it |
| A funder | That the money reached the producers, and that the practice changed |
| A credit committee | Which borrower is going wrong, and on what evidence |
A monitoring visit and a photograph answer none of them.
Products
Two products on one platform, as peers
Neither hosts the other. Both make their own case, to their own buyers, on their own sites — this page is about the company and the platform underneath.
FuroField — crop
The record that carries a grower from input advance to payment, and the evidence pack that falls out of it.
The crop product →FuroTrack — livestock
The livestock product on the same platform, with its own database, credentials and mail identity. A peer, not a guest.
The livestock product →The practice
What we will not do
A system of record that also certifies its own output is worth nothing to the party relying on it. These are constraints on the company, published so a counterparty can hold us to them rather than take our word.
- We do not certify or audit
- Certificates come from accredited bodies; market access is granted by importing authorities. We produce evidence and show where it is thin.
- We do not lend, underwrite or hold funds
- The obligation ledger is ours to record. The money is somebody else’s to move.
- We take no margin from vendors
- No commission, rebate or referral fee from any technology or input supplier. Advice with an undisclosed interest in the answer is not advice.
- The grower never pays
- Scheme software is bought by the party running the scheme. A cost passed to the producer is a cost deducted from the producer.
- A declared number stays declared
- Figures carry how they were established, permanently. Nothing is promoted to “verified” by age, or by being inconvenient to qualify.
- We publish our open gaps before you sign
- In writing — deployed single sign-on and session handling, workspace-wide export and erasure, and where each module’s rules are enforced. Ask and you get the current list, not a summary of it.
How this starts
One season, one sponsor, one number agreed before we start.
We will not scope a contract off a demonstration. A pilot without a baseline cannot be judged afterwards, which makes it a cost with no verdict attached — and the party who pays for that is you.