Complete 2025 U.S. list taxonomy
Mineral evidence workspace
CMMS-BS · Method & boundariesWorkspace overview60 minerals · 128 profiles
Map the market. Trace the evidence.
Critical-mineral markets,
made comparable.
Navigate all 60 minerals on the 2025 U.S. list, then inspect sourced manufacturer and upstream evidence within a defined mineral, role and product niche.
MINERAL UNIVERSE60/ U.S. list
60 minerals with company evidence.
Source depth is shown for each record.
Product, operations and disclosure evidence
58 distinct reporting organizations
10 profiles meet disclosure gates
Evidence depth is explicit. All 60 minerals have company records. Product and operations observations support market discovery; full disclosure scoring remains focused on tantalum and tungsten. Supplier-risk ratings, industry-wide percentiles and independent validation are not established.
Research evidence, not supplier approval. Evidence depth and review status are shown for each record.
Transparent by design
Methodology and assessment boundaries
External research
Transition Minerals Tracker · 2026
Business and Human Rights Centre · Published 2026-06-24 · Source review 2026-10-03
329 reported allegations in 2025; 1,226 across 2010–2025. The report provides an external starting point for human-rights research.
What the 73% increase actually compares
Previously tracked mines: 156 allegations in 2024 → 270 in 2025. A further 59 came from 52 newly added mines. The 329 total uses an expanded sample. Source: report page 5.
Scope and how Highbrow uses this source
Nine mineral groups: Bauxite, Cobalt, Copper, Iron ore, Lithium, Manganese, Nickel, Rare earth elements, Zinc. The study focuses on large-scale mining; smelting/refining, tantalum and tungsten are outside its scope.
BHRC does not independently verify allegations or company responses. Coverage and public-reporting limits affect the counts. An allegation is not a finding of wrongdoing; absence from the Tracker does not establish a clean record.
Before attaching a case to a profile, Highbrow must match the mine, operator, parent or joint venture and relevant date; retain the original source and company response; and distinguish an allegation, legal filing, finding and remedy. A downstream relationship needs its own evidence.
This addition does not import individual allegations or change company scores. Dataset-level matching and case review remain to be completed. The Tracker is external research, not an endorsement or validation of Highbrow.
60 minerals have company evidence; research depth varies.
Product and operations screening covers all 60 minerals, with at least two organizations per mineral in the reference release. The original tantalum and tungsten disclosure assessments remain available. Product listings and specification tables do not receive sourcing-policy points. Quality, capacity, continuity, environmental performance, financial condition and legal screening need additional evidence, role-specific rules and specialist review. No score here represents overall supplier quality.
1. Establish the record
Preserve the organization, mineral, role, product niche, reporting period and scope. Record a public URL, page or section, review date and rationale for each assessment. Access must be permitted; do not bypass sign-in, licenses or source restrictions.
2. Compare relevant peers
Peer groups use mineral + role + niche + period + company/facility level. The initial electronics cohort is broad and not representative of an industry. A cohort median requires three matching, rateable profiles. No percentile or overall supplier ranking is generated.
3. Separate score from confidence
Supported disclosure = 2; partial = 1; an affirmatively documented gap = 0. Unknowns are excluded from the observed score and reduce coverage. Justified non-applicable criteria are excluded from both denominators. Missing evidence is not failure.
4. Apply publication gates
A band requires 80% coverage, four observed criteria and dated evidence no more than 730 days old. A ≥85; B ≥60; C <60. Insufficient or undated evidence is Unrated; old evidence is Historical. A sourced review hold overrides the band. These are proposed Highbrow thresholds, not OECD or RMI ratings.
Read the evidence depth
Product evidence means a mineral-specific offering is documented. Operations documented means a source describes an operation or processing activity; this may be historical and is not proof of current production. Disclosure assessment means at least four sourcing criteria have affirmative evidence, while publication bands still require the separate date and coverage gates. Independent review is shown only when a named reviewer is recorded. These labels describe our evidence, not supplier performance.
Technical comparisons must match chemical form, grade, assay basis, facility and intended use. For example, an oxide/TREO percentage is not the same as whole-product purity. Confirm applicable product standards, batch certificates, origin, current capacity and restrictions before procurement.
Active criteria
| Criterion | Reference | Research question |
|---|---|---|
| Sourcing policy | OECD Step 1 | Does a public policy address responsible mineral sourcing and relevant risks? |
| Accountable oversight | OECD Step 1 | Are responsible functions, supplier expectations and oversight processes described? |
| Upstream transparency | OECD Step 2 | Are origins or upstream facilities identified with a clear scope and acknowledged gaps? A possible upstream list alone is partial evidence. |
| Assessment evidence | OECD Step 4 / RMI | Is assessment scope, period and status described? Company assertions alone are partial; participation is not conformance or shipment certification. |
| Risk response | OECD Step 3 | Is a process for escalation, grievances and follow-up described? This does not verify that remediation succeeded. |
| Reporting & limitations | OECD Step 5 | Does a dated report explain scope, method, results and limitations? |
Six-domain risk overlay
The precursor framework’s weights are preserved inside CMMS-BS. Weighted risk = sum of rating ÷ 4 × domain weight, rounded once. Overall tiers are Lower (0–24), Moderate (25–44), Elevated (45–64), and High (65–100). All six domains need dated evidence and a named independent review. The proposed maximum age is 30 days for legal/trade screening and 365 days for other risk domains; otherwise the tier is withheld. Public labels never mean approve or reject a supplier. Environmental and labor evidence belongs within the responsible-sourcing domain; site-specific quality and safety evidence belongs within operations. A case-specific standard may require additional criteria.
| Domain | Current treatment | Evidence needed before scoring |
|---|---|---|
| Legal, sanctions & trade (20%) | Initial records unassessed; owner can add evidence | Exact entity, ownership, applicable restrictions and dated specialist screening. |
| Origin & traceability (20%) | Initial records unassessed; owner can add evidence | Material/site identity and a substantiated origin or chain-of-custody record. |
| Human rights & responsible sourcing (20%) | Initial records unassessed; owner can add evidence | Relevant risk findings, grievance and remediation evidence; policies alone are insufficient. |
| Operational & quality (15%) | Initial records unassessed; owner can add evidence | Product and facility-specific capability, quality, capacity and delivery evidence. |
| Continuity & concentration (15%) | Initial records unassessed; owner can add evidence | Dependencies, qualified alternatives, recovery and logistics evidence. |
| Financial & commercial (10%) | Initial records unassessed; owner can add evidence | Dated financial, insurance and commercial-risk evidence appropriate to the scope. |
Reference standards
- 2025 U.S. Critical Minerals List (opens in a new tab)
- OECD mineral due diligence guidance (opens in a new tab)
- RMI facility-list scope and statuses (opens in a new tab)
- IRMA mining scope (not applied here) (opens in a new tab)
RMI “active” is not “conformant.” Assessment results concern specified facilities, scope and periods; they do not certify shipments. Company reports are not independent validation.
Review and correction
Initial records have no independent specialist review. “Moderate” means sufficiently dated public evidence, not proven performance. “Reviewed” additionally requires a named second reviewer. Recheck changing sources before procurement.
Corrections should identify the profile, criterion, source and proposed change. Only the owner can edit and publish. Public visitors cannot edit, approve or upload data.