Disclaimer: 2019 GRESB Infrastructure Assessments
The information in this document has been provided in good faith and is provided on an “as is” basis. While we do not anticipate major changes, we reserve the right to make modifications prior to the official 2019 results launch on September 4. We will publicly announce any such modifications.
This document outlines the scoring methodology of the 2019 Infrastructure Fund Assessment. It is shared for information purposes, to provide transparency on the Assessment, Methodology and Scoring processes.
How to read this document
The GRESB Infrastructure Fund Scoring Document provides a breakdown of each indicator score included in the 2019 GRESB Infrastructure Fund Assessment. We recommend reading this document in conjunction with the Reference Guide, which includes the reporting requirements of indicators.
Indicators in the GRESB Infrastructure Fund Scoring Document are presented in a consistent manner to reflect the 2019 GRESB Infrastructure Fund Reference Guide. Please note the following:
- Numbers are documented in red on the left side of each scored indicator. They provide a breakdown of scoring for the indicator, including an explanation underneath.
- Provided on the far left are values representing the total number of points apportioned to the indicator, contributing to the overall indicator score. This is applied to all options contained within their respective bracket (when applicable).
- Represented within the square brackets "[" are the numbers demonstrating the fraction of points allocated for the indicator.
- The Symbol "x" (outside or inside brackets) indicates as a multiplier depending on the value associated. "x" can refer to a validation decision. What this multiplier applies to, can be found within the narrative located underneath each indicator.
- Blue brackets represents a Diminishing Increase in Scoring approach being applied. This scoring methodology is described further below.
Example of indicator level scoring:
Example: Fund 3 indicator
Has the entity made a formal commitment to ESG standards or principles?
Formal general ESG commitments (multiple answers possible)
UN Environment Programme Finance Initiative
Please explain why: ____________
Formal issue-specific commitments (multiple answers possible)
International Labour Organization (ILO) Standards
Global Investor Coalition on Climate Change (including AIGCC, Ceres, IGCC, IIGCC)
Climate Action in Financial Institutions Initiative
Science Based Targets Initiative
Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures
Upload or URL____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
Provide additional context for the answer provided (not validated, for reporting purposes only)
This indicator is split into three sections represented by two fractions and an "x" in the far-left column. The first section addresses 'general ESG commitments', the second covers 'issue-specific commitments', the final section covers evidence. The far-left column tells us that the score of the indicator is calculated as follows; (where the section and evidence scores are all numbers between 0 and 1):
Indicator score = (General ESG commitments score * 6/10) + (Issue-specific ESG commitments score * 4/10) * evidence score * 8 points
- The first section is worth 3/5 (60%) of the indicator score. This section contains 4 checkboxes, including 1 other. The fractions next to each option (1/2) show the proportion of the section score achieved.
- The second section is worth 2/5 (40%) of the indicator score. This section contains 7 checkboxes, including 1 other. The fractions next to each option (1/3) show the proportion of the section score achieved.
- Lastly, the evidence answer which is a multiplier on the total score from the other sections.
Evidence: The evidence is manually validated and assigned a multiplier, according to the table below. The evidence must support the validation requirements.
If any requirements are not met, the evidence may be partially accepted or not accepted depending on the level of alignment with the requirements.
|Not accepted/not provided
If the respondent achieved maximum scores for both of the first and second sections, with partially accepted evidence (resulting in a multiplier of 0.5), the score is:
((1 * 6/10) + (1 * 4/10)) * 0.5 * 8 points = points
The sum of the scores for all indicators adds up to a maximum of 100 points, therefore the overall GRESB Fund Score is an absolute measure of ESG management and performance expressed as a percentage.
The GRESB Fund Score is based on a combination of the Fund Assessment Score and the Weighted Average Asset (WAA) Score.
Fund Score: All participants receive a Fund Score. The Fund Assessment contains 13 different ESG indicators which are weighted as follows:
(% Overall Score)
|Fund 1 - Sustainable Investment Strategy ||8.0%
|Fund 2 - ESG Policies ||8.0%
|Fund 3 - ESG Commitments ||8.0%
|Fund 4 - Implementation Responsibility ||5.0%
|Fund 5 - Senior Decision Maker ||5.0%
|Fund 6 - ESG-related performance targets (NEW) ||5.0%
|Fund 7 - Gender & Diversity (NEW) ||0.0%
|Fund 8 - Assessment of ESG Risks & Opportunities ||13.3%
|Fund 9 - Monitoring of ESG Risks & Opportunities ||13.3%
|Fund 10 - Analysis of Asset Performance ||13.3%
|Fund 11 - ESG Disclosure ||8.0%
|Fund 12 - Third-party Review ||5.0%
|Fund 13 - ESG-related Misconduct, Penalties, Incidents ||8.0%
Weighted Average Asset (WAA) Score:
In order to receive a GRESB Fund Score in the Fund Assessment, then at least 25% weight of underlying assets (based on AUM), need to participate in the 2019 GRESB Asset Assessment. Once this threshold is met (and the assets have confirmed links and submitted assessments), then the entity receives a Weighted Average Asset (WAA) Score. The WAA Score is a weighted average of the asset scores of all assets listed by the fund in the Summary of Entity Assets table in indicator A1 (the 'table'). Non-reporting assets, or assets without a 'Confirmed’ connection status, will receive an asset score of 0 for the purposes of calculating the WAA Score. The weights reported in the table should be equity based; so that the weight of an asset reported in the table, represents the equity invested in the asset divided by the total equity invested in all assets in the fund.
GRESB Fund Score:
The overall GRESB Fund Score is then calculated based on a 30% weighting from the Fund Score and 70% weighting from the WAA Score. This is calculated based on the following formula:
GRESB Fund Score = (0.3 X Fund Score) + (0.7 X WAA Score)
Additional information on fund scoring:
- At least 25% of assets (based on AUM) should report in the GRESB Asset Assessment to calculate a WAA and to receive an overall GRESB Fund Score.
- If 25% of assets (based on AUM) or less participate in the GRESB Asset Assessment, the fund will only receive a Fund Score.
- Funds are entitled to exclude specific assets from contributing to the WAA if there is a valid reason (e.g. greenfield assets, operational for less than six months, or ownership for less than six months).
There are three models used for indicator scoring:
- One Section indicator - consisting of only Section 1 (Elements)
- Two Section indicator - consisting of both Section 1 (Elements) & 2 (Evidence)
- Not scored
Note that selection of the 'Yes/No'responses in relation to the indicator question, will no longer be scored in 2019
Section One (Elements)
Every scored indicator begins with this section which can receive a score between 0 and 1, determined by selections made in checkboxes and radio buttons, and answers provided in open text boxes. Based upon these inputs, scores are calculated using an aggregated points or a diminishing increase in scoring methodology.
Aggregated points: For indicators where one or more answers can be selected, points are awarded cumulatively for each individual selected answer and then aggregated to calculate a final score for the indicator. In some cases, each checkbox answer may be equally weighted and in others, each checkbox answer may be assigned a higher or lower amount of points each, to reflect best practice responses. For many indicators, the final score is capped at a maximum, which means that it is not necessary to select all checkbox answers in order to receive full points.
Diminishing increase in scoring: Under this methodology, the number of additional points achieved for each additional option selected decreases as the number of provided data points increases. This means that the number of points achieved for the first data point will be higher than the number of additional points achieved for the second, which again will be higher than for the third, and so on.
If an indicator is a One Section indicator, the score calculated in this section will also be its final score.
Section 2 (Evidence)
Some indicators include an evidence section to verify information provided in section 1 (Elements). In these cases, the score for the evidence section acts as a multiplier to the Section 1 score. Evidence can be optional or mandatory, and is scored as follows:
- Optional evidence receives a score of 0.3, 0.65 or 1. 0.3 points are given for providing no evidence or where the evidence is not-accepted, 0.65 points are given where the evidence is partially accepted and 1 point is given where the evidence is fully accepted.
- Mandatory evidence receives a score of 0, 0.5 or 1. 0 points are given for providing no evidence or where the evidence is not-accepted, 0.5 points are given where the evidence is partially accepted and 1 point is given where the evidence is fully accepted. The indicator will receive no points unless the hyperlink and/or uploaded document is considered valid (i.e. partially and/or fully accepted).
The total indicator score is then calculated as:
Indicator score = (Section 1 score) X (Section 2 score)