Code of Acquisitions is a platform that exposes good and bad practices of art institutions, galleries, and studios based on published policies as well as cases of misconduct and abuse, where artists are not paid, not told the truth after sales, or did not get back their works.
Often a legal action is not possible to solve the conflict because of the precarious conditions of artists, and particularly because lack of establishing an individual juristic act overseas.
The Code of Acquisitions platform allows anyone to submit their cases anonymously or openly. Cases could range from gender and race discrimination to misconduct of payments. These submissions contribute to a database of conflicts, codes, and interactive visualizations that will increase awareness about the issues and hold organizations accountable through their reputation.
Submit a case of misconduct or abuse you've experienced with an
institution or a gallery or a studio.
 A common fact-checking method used by the members of International Fact-Checking Network.
Submissions: Submitted cases are collected through an open form into a database and prioritized based on the provided information. If there are no sufficient information, they are archived until additional sources are provided. A committee of fact-checkers including lawyers, artists, gallerists, curators, and other art workers evaluate the cases.
Assignment: Committee members periodically view the cases, and based on their knowledge of the institution and the type of issue they assign themselves to a case.
Research & Analysis: The assigned committee member conducts research within a fixed period. After they complete their research, they provide a minimum of two evidence (documents, media links, witnesses, or evidence of the issue being not a personal but a systemic one), and they mark the case as FAIL, SUCCEED, COMPLEX, or UNCERTAIN. If a committee member is not certain about the case, then they ask for a second look, and another fact-checker is assigned to work on it. 
Publishing: After the case is marked as FAIL or SUCCEED, then a secondary review is conducted by another committee member. If the reviewer says the research is valid, then the case is published on the database and the graph is updated on the website. If a case is marked as COMPLEX or UNCERTAIN, they are archived until more information is provided.
Impact & Updates: After the case is published, if the institution fixes the issue and reaches us about it, then the status of the issue is updated.
Commitment to fairness: We are committed to be fair and open. We conduct research on all sides of the issue. We follow the same process for every fact check and let the evidence dictate the conclusions.
Commitment to transparency of sources: We want our readers to be able to verify findings themselves. Therefore, we are committed to transparency of sources. We provide all sources in enough detail that readers can replicate their work, except in cases where a source’s personal security could be compromised. In such cases, we provide as much detail as possible.
Commitment to transparency of funding & organization: If we accept funding from other organizations, we ensure that funders have no influence over the conclusions the fact-checkers reach in their reports.
Commitment to transparency of methodology: We explain the methodology we use to select, research, write, edit, publish and correct the fact checks. We encourage readers to send claims to fact-check and are transparent on why and how we fact-check.
Commitment to open & honest corrections: We correct clearly and transparently to ensure that readers can see the corrected version.