Download PDF

2018

Developer

Reference Guide

Contents

Disclaimer: 2018 GRESB Developer Assessment Reference Guide

The 2018 GRESB Developer Assessment Reference Guide (“Reference Guide”) accompanies the 2018 GRESB Developer Assessment and is published both as a standalone document and in the GRESB Portal alongside each Assessment indicator. The Reference Guide reflects the opinions of GRESB and not of our members. The information in the Reference Guide has been provided in good faith and is provided on an “as is” basis. We take reasonable care to check the accuracy and completeness of the Reference Guide prior to its publication. While we do not anticipate major changes, we reserve the right to make modifications to the Reference Guide. We will publicly announce any such modifications.

The Reference Guide is not provided as the basis for any professional advice or for transactional use. GRESB and its advisors, consultants and sub-contractors shall not be responsible or liable for any advice given to third parties, any investment decisions or trading or any other actions taken by you or by third parties based on information contained in the Reference Guide.

Except where stated otherwise, GRESB is the exclusive owner of all intellectual property rights in all the information contained in the Reference Guide.

About GRESB

GRESB is the global environmental, social and governance (ESG) benchmark for real assets. Working in collaboration with the industry, GRESB defines the standard for sustainability performance in real assets, providing standardized and validated ESG data to more than 75 institutional investors, representing over USD 18 trillion in institutional capital. In 2018 a record of 903 property companies and funds participated in the GRESB Real Estate Assessment, the Infrastructure Assessment covered 75 funds and 280 assets, and 25 portfolios completed the Debt Assessment.

For more information, visit gresb.com. Follow @GRESB on Twitter.

Overview of GRESB Assessments

GRESB Real Estate Assessment

The GRESB Real Estate Assessment is the global standard for ESG benchmarking and reporting for listed property companies, private property funds, developers and investors that invest directly in real estate. The Assessment evaluates performance against seven sustainability aspects, including information on performance indicators, such as energy, GHG emissions, water and waste. The methodology is consistent across different regions, investment vehicles and property types and aligns with international reporting frameworks, such as GRI and PRI.

The GRESB Real Estate Assessment provides investors with actionable information and tools to monitor and manage the ESG risks and opportunities of their investments, and to prepare for increasingly rigorous ESG obligations. Assessment participants receive comparative business intelligence on where they stand against their peers, a roadmap with the actions they can take to improve their ESG performance and a communication platform to engage with investors.

GRESB Developer Assessment

Besides the GRESB Real Estate Assessment for property companies and fund managers that focus on the management of standing investments, GRESB provides a stand-alone GRESB Developer Assessment for organizations that focus on real estate development activities. The Developer Assessment evaluates the ESG performance of these organizations, focusing on policies, strategies, and measurable actions related to new construction and major renovation projects.

The following organizations should fill out the GRESB Developer Assessment:

The GRESB Developer Assessment contains a subset of indicators from the GRESB Real Estate Assessment, plus the 14 indicators in the New Construction & Major Renovations (NC&MR) Aspect.

GRESB Public Disclosure

GRESB Public Disclosure evaluates the level of ESG disclosure by listed property companies and REITs. The evaluation is based on a set of indicators aligned with the GRESB Real Estate Assessment, allowing for a comparison of ESG disclosure performance between GRESB participants and non-participants. It also provides investors with a resource hub to access ESG disclosure documents across their full investment portfolio.

GRESB Public Disclosure data is initially collected by the GRESB team for selected companies, including both 2018 GRESB Real Estate Assessment participants and non-participants.All constituents have the opportunity to review and update this data before it becomes accessible to GRESB Investor Members. GRESB Public Disclosure consists of four Aspects: Governance of Sustainability, Implementation, Operational Performance and Stakeholder Engagement. Together, these Aspects contribute towards a Public Disclosure Level, expressed through an A to E sliding scale.

(Real Estate and Infrastructure) Supplement: Resilience

The GRESB Resilience Module is an optional supplement to the GRESB Real Estate and Infrastructure Assessments. It has been developed in response to organizations that are developing a capacity to assess, manage and adapt in the face of social and environmental shocks and stressors. The Module is motivated by two key factors:

(Real Estate) Supplement: Health & Well-being

The GRESB Health & Well-being Module is an optional supplement to the GRESB Real Estate Assessments. The Module provides participating companies and funds with practical tools for assessing and benchmarking the actions they are taking to promote health and well-being.

The purpose of the Module is to understand how the entity is promoting the health & well-being among its stakeholders, such as employees, tenants and community members. Indicators in the Module are not intended to address individuals, and information identifying individuals is not requested for any Health & Well-being Module indicator.

(Real Estate) Supplement: NAREIT Leader in the Light

The National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (NAREIT) is a GRESB Industry Partner and we work in close collaboration. NAREIT encourages its corporate members to complete the annual GRESB Real Estate Assessments, which, for the past six years, has been the basis for their annual Leader in the Light Award competition.

The Leader in the Light Awards are presented to REITs in eight property sectors: Diversified, Global (for non-U.S. companies), Health Care, Industrial, Lodging/Resorts, Office, Residential and Retail. If there are both large and smallcap entries that meet the awards criteria in a given property sector, awards are presented to both the leading large and small cap companies.

To participate in the Leader in the Light Award program, NAREIT members must complete both the GRESB Real Estate Assessment and the Leader in the Light Supplement. Once all sections of the GRESB Real Estate Assessment are completed, including the Leader in the Light Supplement, participants are able to submit their entire submission which will automatically be included in the Leader in the Light Award competition.

GRESB Infrastructure Assessment

The GRESB Infrastructure Assessment is an ESG engagement and benchmarking tool for institutional investors, fund managers and asset operators working in the infrastructure space.

The GRESB Infrastructure Assessment consists of two complementary components, a Fund Assessment and an Asset Assessment. Both components address critical aspects of ESG performance through a standardized, globally applicable, reporting and benchmarking framework. The GRESB Infrastructure Assessment focuses on operating investments, infrastructure assets, companies and funds, and covers the full breadth of infrastructure sectors, including:

The GRESB Infrastructure Assessment provides investors with actionable information and tools to monitor and manage the ESG risks and opportunities of their investments, and to prepare for increasingly rigorous ESG obligations. GRESB Infrastructure Assessment participants receive comparative business intelligence on where they stand against their peers, a roadmap with the actions they can take to improve their ESG performance and a communication platform to engage with investors.

GRESB Developer Assessment Introduction

The role of the GRESB benchmark

GRESB’s global benchmark uses a consistent methodology to compare performance across different regions, investment vehicles and property types. This consistency, combined with our broad market coverage, means our members and participants can apply a single, globally recognized ESG framework to all their real estate investments.

The GRESB Developer Assessment is structured around 5 Aspects and contains approximately 35 indicators. The indicators follow a plan-do-check-act logic and are designed to encompass the wide variety of property companies and funds included in the benchmark.

While GRESB provides an overall GRESB Score for each participant, it recognizes that this is only a single element within a range of results reported in the benchmark. The key to analyzing GRESB data is in peer group comparisons that take into account country, regional, sectoral and investment type variations.

GRESB is committed to facilitating the inclusion of its ESG metrics in investment decision-making processes and encouraging an active dialogue between investors, fund managers and companies on ESG issues. GRESB updates its Investor Engagement Guide on an annual basis to assist GRESB Investor Members in their engagement with managers.

Timeline and Process

The GRESB Developer Assessment opens in the Assessment Portal on April 1, 2018. The submission deadline is July 1, 2018, providing participants with a three-month window to complete the Assessment. This is a fixed deadline, and GRESB will not accept submissions received after this date.

The GRESB validation process starts on June 15 and continues until July 31, 2018. We may need to contact you during this time to clarify any issues with your response.

Results are published in September and are distributed as follows:

For an overview of key dates and activities for the 2018 Assessment cycle, please see the Assessment timeline here.

Response Check

A Response Check is a high-level check of the Assessment response prior to final submission. It helps to reduce errors that may adversely impact the Assessment results and ensures the submission is as complete as possible.

The Response Check is available for request from April 1 to June 8, 2018 subject to available resources. We strongly encourage participants to place their request as early as possible.

Fund Manager and Company Members are able to request a complimentary Response Check for one entity as one of their membership benefits.

Guidance & Support

The Assessment Portal is accompanied by indicator-specific guidance, available under the “Guidance” tab that explains:

The guidance of each indicator in the Portal is also provided in this Reference Guide, accompanied by general introductory information to the Assessments.

The GRESB Assessment Portal has the following tools and functionality to help ensure an efficient and accurate submission:

GRESB works with a select group of Partners who can help participants with their Assessment submission. To learn more about the services offered by GRESB Partners, please refer to our Partner Directory.

Participants are able to contact the GRESB Helpdesk at any time for support and guidance.

GRESB Assessment Training Program

GRESB Real Estate Assessment Training is designed to educate participants, potential participants and other GRESB stakeholders (managers, consultants, data partners) on ESG management and reporting through the GRESB Real Estate Assessment.

The training is divided into two sessions – Introductory and Advanced – to reflect the level of experience with GRESB:

Both programs are delivered via face-to-face group sessions, in select locations across all regions with GRESB participation, including Europe, North America and Asia Pacific. See dates and locations for GRESB Assessment Training.

Starting in October 2018, GRESB will run Data Insights Training sessions focussing on the interpretation of the Assessment results and the reporting and benchmarking tools available in the online Portfolio Analysis.

About the 2018 GRESB Developer Reference Guide

This Guide accompanies the 2018 GRESB Developer Assessment (referred to as “the Assessment”). Guidance is included for all Assessment indicators that comprise GRESB Developerr's five sustainability aspects. This Guide provides:

This Guide should provide all the basic information needed to complete the 2018 Assessment. If you need additional help, please contact our helpdesk team at info@gresb.com.

Who can see my data?

Data is submitted to GRESB through a secure online platform and can only be seen by current GRESB Staff or authorized personnel from GRESB’s parent company, i.e., GBCI, Inc. (“GBCI”). GRESB benchmark scores are not made public. Data collected through the GRESB Developer Assessment is only disclosed to the participants themselves and:

No other third parties will see the data.

Documentation provided as evidence can be made available to GRESB Real Estate Investor Members on a document by document basis. Each uploaded document has a checkbox (the default being set to ‘not available’) which, when selected by the participant, makes this evidence available to all investors with access to that entity. It is not possible to choose a sub-set of investors which you would like to share the documents with.

GRESB has developed a number of tools to assist participants with the collection and aggregation of asset-level data that is required to complete certain aspects of the Assessment. Property companies and funds are encouraged to use the asset-level tools to streamline data flows, and to increase data quality. The asset-level data provided to GRESB is strictly confidential and will only be used for aggregation to portfolio level. No asset-level information will be disclosed to participants’ investors.

As a default, GRESB does not disclose a participant’s data to other participants. For listed entities, the entity name is disclosed in the Benchmark Report, as well as the entity names of listed peer group constituents. For non-listed entities, only the fund manager’s name is disclosed, as well as the fund manager’s name of private peer group constituents. GRESB provides an opt-in option that will disclose the entity’s name (listed entity) or fund manager’s name (non-listed entity), as well as the scores for the two dimensions (Management & Policy and Implementation & Measurement), to participants in the peer group that also opted to disclose their name and dimension scores.

Grace Period

GRESB offers participants reporting for the first time the option to not disclose their first year Assessment results to their investors. This "Grace Period" allows companies and funds a year to familiarize themselves with the GRESB reporting and assessment process without externally disclosing their results to GRESB Investor Members.

While Grace Period participant names are disclosed to GRESB Investor Members, Investor Members are not able to request access to Grace Period participant results.

First-time participants wishing to opt for the Grace Period can select the option from the settings section in the Assessment Portal.

GRESB Assessment and Reference Guide Structure

Allocation to E, S, G

GRESB has allocated each indicator to one of the three sustainability dimensions (E- environmental; S- social; G- governance):

Assessment indicator structure

Every indicator in the 2018 Assessment can be answered with ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ and in some cases with ‘Not applicable’. If ‘Yes’ is selected, the participant has the option to further classify the response by selecting one or more sub-options.Participants should select all sub-options that accurately describe the entity and for which the entity can provide evidence. If ‘No’ or ‘Not applicable’ is selected, the participant may not select any additional sub-options. “A Not Applicable” answer is interpreted and scored in the same way as a “No” and will yield 0 points. GRESB has marked each indicator to reflect whether it has been amended or is new, by providing the 2017 indicator naming on the right side of each indicator.

Evidence

Selected indicators in the Assessment require the provision of supporting evidence. Evidence is information that can be used to validate the overall answer to the indicator and support any additionally selected criteria. GRESB does not have a prescriptive standard for evidence, rather the expectation is that a validator with reasonable domain expertise can review the evidence and find support for the overall indicator response and selected answer options. This means that the uploaded evidence should clearly reference the answer options selected by the participant. The evidence should not require extensive interpretation or inference, and participants are strongly encouraged to provide the clearest and most concise evidence that supports their claim.

It is the responsibility of the reporting entity to provide clear and concise information that can be easily found and understood by the validator. The validator will reject claimed answers or selected answer options not supported by clear evidence.

Hyperlink

If a hyperlink (or deep link) is provided, ensure that the relevant page can be accessed within two steps. Ideally, the landing page should contain all the information needed to validate the answer. In order to qualify as valid supporting evidence, the evidence provided must demonstrate the existence of the relevant topic relating to each of the criteria selected. The participant has the obligation to ensure that the hyperlink is functioning. Broken links are the responsibility of the participant and will be interpreted as the absence of evidence.

Hyperlinks can only be provided if indicated. In all other instances, the actual document should be uploaded, or the document name and publication date should be provided. Hyperlinks in uploaded documents will not be checked.

Language

Your Assessment response must be submitted in English.

Documents uploaded as supporting evidence do not need to be entirely translated. However, a thorough summary of the content, sufficient to convey that each requirement has been met, should be provided in English.

Open text boxes

Over the years, the number of scored open text boxes was reduced in an effort to shift focus from management to implementation. GRESB distinguishes between open text boxes:

Each type of text box is clearly indicated in the Assessment Guidance.

“Other” answers

Some indicators offer the opportunity to provide an alternative answer option (‘Other’). Such other answers must stand outside of the options listed in the question. It is possible to add multiple other answers, however scores will not be aggregated. All answers are validated as part of the data validation process.

Indicator-specific guidance

The indicator-specific guidance contains:

Reporting period

Responses must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3 in the Entity and Reporting Characteristics. A response to an indicator must be true at the close of the reporting period; however, the response does not need to have been true for the entire reporting period. GRESB does not favour the use of calendar year over fiscal year or viceversa, as long as the chosen reporting period is used consistently throughout the Assessment.

Reporting level

Assessment indicators are asked at two levels. Each indicator specifies at which level you should respond. As part of the validation process, GRESB may seek confirmation that a question has been answered at the correct reporting level.

Where a participating entity is not part of a larger organization, all Assessment responses should be answered at the entity level.

Where a participating entity is part of a larger investment management organization or group of companies (the ‘Organization’), GRESB directs some indicators to be answered either:

  1. At ‘Organization Level' (applicable to Entity Level);
  2. At ‘Entity Level’.

Organization Level (applicable to Entity Level): These indicators require you to respond at entity level but, if the entity is part of a larger organization (such as an investment management organization or group of companies), your response may relate to organization level activities. However, in these circumstances, the organization level activities must apply to the entity.

Entity Level: These indicators ask for the highest level of detail in your response. Your response should relate specifically to the named entity for which you are submitting an Assessment response.

Service providers (Organization name)

This information is used in the data validation process. State the full name of the organization(s). As part of our annual validation of service providers, we may ask you to provide additional information via the GRESB Portal.

Reporting Scope and Boundaries

Development projects

Development projects may refer to new construction or major renovation projects. These projects should be reported in RC-NC1 and RC-NC2. New construction includes all activities to obtain or change building or land-use permissions and financing. It includes construction work for the project with the intention of enhancing the property’s value. Development of new buildings and additions to existing buildings that affect usable space are treated as new construction. New construction projects refer to buildings that were under construction at any time during the reporting period. Major renovations include alterations that affect more than 50 percent of the total building floor area or cause relocation of more than 50 percent of regular building occupants. Major renovation projects refer to buildings that were under construction at any time during the reporting period.

Operational projects

Participants in the Developer Assessment are considered to have development of new construction and major renovation projects as their core business. However, as a by-product of their development activities, Developer Assessment participants might have operational projects. Because the management of standing investments is not considered to be the key focus of their business, participants are not required to report on their operational projects. If participants both focus on management of standing investments and development of new construction and major renovation projects, they should complete the GRESB Real Estate Assessment, including the New Construction & Major Renovations Aspect.

Joint ventures

Where an asset or assets are part of a joint venture, joint operation or are in joint ownership, participants are required to report on these assets, even if the joint arrangement means that the participant does not have direct operational control over the asset(s). Joint venture partners with a stake of 25 percent or higher are considered to have significant influence over operational initiatives and can therefore drive implementation of sustainability initiatives and performance improvements, even in the case the operational control resides with another partner. If the equity share in a joint venture, joint operation or joint ownership is more than, or equal to, 25 percent, participants can choose to either (a) report on their share or (b) report on the full asset. This must be done consistently throughout the portfolio and is regardless of operational or management control. This may result in an asset being included in two separate submissions. However, this does not impact GRESB’s analysis or the benchmark results. If the equity share in a joint venture, joint operation or joint ownership is less than 25 percent, participants can exclude the asset(s) from the reporting boundaries. In either case, participants must explain their approach in the open text box in RC-NC1.2 and RC-NC2.2. If an asset is part of multiple portfolios managed by the same fund manager, the asset should be treated as a joint venture in each portfolio. The rules outlined above apply.

Scoring Methodology

The GRESB Developer Assessment is structured into five sustainability aspects. The weighted combination of scores for each aspect generates the overall GRESB Score. This Reference Guide provides detailed insight into the points available for each indicator, and the weighting of Assessment aspects. The information in this section provides additional context. Points per indicator are decided by GRESB in advance of the Assessment opening for responses. Indicator scoring goes through a three-stage review process based on GRESB’s rules, principles and guidelines.

Points per indicator

For indicators where you can select one or more answers, GRESB awards points cumulatively for each individual selected answer and then aggregates to calculate a final score for the indicator. For many indicators, this final score is capped at a maximum, which means that it is not necessary to select all answers in order to receive full points. This scoring mechanisms allows for reflecting the diversity among property companies and funds and the variety of their sustainability-oriented activities. Open text boxes (where participants answer through a descriptive text), and indicators for which participants select ‘other’ answers, are manually validated. Points are awarded based on the validity of the response.

Scoring model

The scoring model is based on an automated system, which uses a technology platform designed for GRESB by a third party that specializes in data analysis software development. The scoring is completed without manual intervention after data validation has been completed.

The sum of the scores for each question adds up to a maximum of 78 points, and the overall GRESB Score is then expressed as a percentage – from 0 to 100. The maximum score for each aspect is a weighted element of the overall GRESB Score. GRESB takes into account the unique characteristics of different property types, not only in benchmarking absolute scores, but also in the scoring of a selection of questions. A selection of indicators is scored based on each portfolio’s main property types – this holds specifically for the Performance Indicators and Building Certifications aspects.

The overall GRESB Score is divided into two dimensions: Management & Policy (MP) and Implementation & Measurement (IM).

Sustainability Aspect Weight (% Overall Score)
Management 14.1%
Policy & Disclosure 16.7%
Risks & EMS 10.3%
Stakeholder Engagement 11.5%
New Construction & Major Renovations 47.4%
Health & Well-being Module (voluntary Module) Scored individually
Resilience Module (voluntary Module) Scored individually

Management & Policy is defined as “the means by which a company or fund deals with or controls its portfolio and its stakeholders and/or a course or principle of action adopted by the company or fund.” The maximum score for Management & Policy is 50 points – this is 64.1 percent of the overall GRESB Score and is expressed as a percentage.

Implementation & Measurement is defined as “the process of executing a decision or plan or of putting a decision or plan into effect and/or the action of measuring something related to the portfolio.” The maximum score for Implementation & Measurement is 28 points – this is 35.9 percent of the overall GRESB Score and is expressed as a percentage.

Participants reporting on new construction and major renovation projects complete the additional New Construction & Major Renovations (NC&MR) aspect, which receives a separate aspect score that is not included in the overall GRESB Score. Companies and funds that focus on development activities rather than the management of standing investments must complete the separate GRESB Developer Assessment and will receive a separate Developer Score.

Other information

In response to industry feedback, GRESB has compiled a Scoring Document outlining in detail the scoring methodology applied to each indicator in the 2017 Real Estate Assessment. The document served as baseline for development for the 2018 procedure, but differences in the scoring rationale of certain indicators may occur. The 2017 Scoring Document is available to participants via the Assessment Portal and was shared for information purposes and in an effort to increase transparency around the Assessment, Methodology and Scoring processes.

GRESB Rating

The GRESB Rating is an overall measure of how well ESG issues are integrated into the management and practices of companies and funds. The rating is based on the GRESB Score and its quintile position relative to the GRESB universe. It is calculated relative to the global performance of all reporting entities - property type and geography are not taken into account. The GRESB Rating thus provides investors with differentiation in overall ESG performance of the global property sector. If certain regions systematically perform better, they will on average have higher-rated companies and funds. The calculation of the GRESB Rating is based on the GRESB Score and its quintile position relative to the GRESB universe, with annual calibration of the model. If the entity is placed in the top quintile, it will have a GRESB 5-star rating; if it ranks in the bottom quintile, it will have a GRESB 1-star rating, etc.

Entities with a score higher than 50 for both the Implementation & Measurement (IM) and Management & Policy (MP) dimensions receive the Green Star designation, highlighted through a distinctive markup in the Scorecard and Benchmark Reports.

Peer group allocation

Each participant is assigned to a peer group, based on the entity’s legal structure (listed/non-listed), property type and geographical location. To ensure participant anonymity, GRESB will only create a peer group if there is a minimum of five peers in the group.

Peer group assignments do not affect a company/fund’s score, but determine how GRESB puts an Assessment participant’s results into context. The peer group composition is determined by a simple set of quantitative rules and provides consistent treatment for all participants.

A pre-set threshold determines an entity’s geographic location and property type:

Peer group disclosure

For listed companies, the entity name of the peer group constituents is disclosed in the Benchmark Report. For private entities, only the fund manager’s name of the peer group constituents is disclosed. GRESB provides an opt-in option that discloses the entity’s name (listed/public) or fund manager’s name (non-listed/private), as well as the scores for the two dimensions (Management & Policy and Implementation & Measurement). However, this is only disclosed to participants in the peer group that also opted to disclose their name and dimension scores.

2018 GRESB Data Validation Process

Data validation is an important part of GRESB’s annual benchmarking process. The purpose of data validation is to encourage best practices in data collection and reporting. It is a vital element of GRESB’s continued efforts to provide investment grade data to its stakeholders. Following receipt of participant’s Assessment submissions, prior to analyzing the data, GRESB validates the participant’s input data. This process continues from June 15 until July 31, 2018.

GRESB operates a three-tier validation process (All Participant Check, Validation Plus, Validation Interview). Over the past years, the topics covered by the validation process and the scope of work for Validation Plus and Validation Interviews have increased significantly. In 2018, the validation process is completely outsourced to its parent company GBCI, completing a transition process started in 2017.

What data does GRESB Validate?

GRESB validation is a check on (a) the factual accuracy and (b) the logic (e.g. clear, sound reasoning) of GRESB Assessment submissions including:

GRESB checks:

  1. The existence and content of answers to open text boxes;
  2. The additional information provided to Assessment Indicators, e.g. third-party organization names, assurance, audit, certification and verification standards and ‘other’ answers;
  3. Uploaded documents, and/or on provided document name and date of publication;
  4. Automated outlier and consistency checks of performance indicators data in the Real Estate Assessment (energy and water consumption, GHG emissions and waste).

Document uploads are validated based on the validity of the document relative to the requirements stated in the guidance for the indicator, including the actual reference to selected answer options (see “Evidence”). Uploaded evidence that was accepted in previous Assessment submissions might not be accepted in following submissions. Enhanced validation checks and/or a change in the level of validation may result in different validation outcomes. In order to be accepted, the provided evidence should meet the requirements as stipulated in this Reference Guide.

All Participant Checks

Validation Plus

Starting 2018, the random selection of 25% participants for a more detailed check of all supporting evidence will be replaced by a selection of 100% participants being checked on the same subset of indicators. The indicator selection is performed by GRESB and is subject to change on an annual basis. This will allow GRESB to apply a consistent level of scrutiny on all participating entities.

The GRESB/GBCI validation team reviews the uploaded documents, they are not disclosed by GRESB to any third parties, unless the option to make the evidence available to investors was selected. You may redact the documents, provided that enough information to validate your Assessment responses is available. All supporting evidence for indicators selected for Validation Plus must be submitted alongside the Real Estate Assessments. Documents, clarifications and information provided after submission will not be taken into consideration.

Validation Interviews

Validation Interviews participants are automatically selected using a system that analyzes criteria based on the previous year’s Assessment data. Participants selected will be notified by email after the Assessment submission. In 2018, GRESB anticipates that approximately five percent of participants will be selected for a Validation Interview.

Quantitative Data Quality Control

Based on statistical modelling, GRESB identifies outliers in all reported quantitative data in the Performance Indicators Aspect in the Real Estate Assessment. This analysis is performed to ensure that all participating entities included in the benchmarking and scoring process are compared based on a fair, quality-controlled dataset.

Identification of outliers

GRESB identifies reported consumption values as outliers, if the corresponding consumption intensity (consumption/area) and/or its change over time is abnormal relative to all reported data for the particular property type. Through an in-house developed statistical program, GRESB groups and benchmarks values within their property type, which allows for the identification of consumption values that fall outside normally observed ranges. Beyond reviewing the intensity of consumption, the Like-for-Like development of consumption over a two-year period is also used to identify abnormal data points.

Once the overall portfolio consumption and/or its consumption change over time are identified as abnormal, all underlying data points are reviewed by a member of the validation team. All GRESB participants undergo the same data review and all decisions are automatically protocolled by the system so that they can always be reviewed.

Elimination of outliers

GRESB acknowledges that some identified abnormal data points are not the result of incorrect data, but rather the result of unusual business development. To account for this explanation, outliers are not removed if a reasonable explanation by the respondent exists. Once participants enter unusual data points, the GRESB Portal requires a written explanation for those reported values. GRESB reviews all explanations for outliers and considers those before making a final decision on removing the outlier from the dataset. If a data point is identified as outlier and no reasonable explanation is provided, the data point is removed from the participant’s Assessment response, both for scoring and reporting purposes. The outcomes of the outlier validation process are presented in the Benchmark Report and are not communicated to participants during the validation process.

2018 GRESB Developer Assessment Changes

GRESB works closely with it’s members and broader industry stakeholders to ensure the Assessment addresses material issues in the sustainability performance of real estate investments. Following an extensive industry engagement through the GRESB Advisory bodies, the 2018 GRESB Developer Assessment only introduces minor changes, which are also aligned with GRESB Real Estate Assessment.

High-level comments

Assessment development process focused on creating alignment between the different GRESB business lines and recognizing topics that are directly aligned with investment rationale

Alignment in terminology, interpretation of indicators, document structure and process standardization is important, especially for managers with investments in multiple asset classes. One of the direct outcomes relates to the renaming of the Developer Assessment indicators to associate with each Aspect (e.g. DQ1 of the Management Aspect becomes MA1, DQ8 of the Policy & Disclosure Aspect becomes PD1). In the long term, this provides more flexibility in adding or removing indicators without affecting the entire Assessment structure.

The desire for better alignment between GRESB Assessments also led to the amendment of indicators in the Management, Policy & Disclosure, Stakeholder Engagement sections which address the management and policy dimensions of a reporting entity.

The 2017 indicator naming is listed on the right side of each 2018 indicator. In a case when a 2018 indicator is not the same as the one in 2017 but follows the same principle, there are parentheses added to the 2017 indicator naming.

Reduced number of scored open text boxes and new portal functionalities for a faster reporting process

The 2018 Assessment developments are designed with the purpose of scoring performance in a way that encourages improvement in ESG performance (measured, tested performance). Allowing participants the option to provide context to their answers is important and will continue to happen via non-scored open text boxes used for reporting purposes in the Benchmark Report.

Updated selection methodology for Validation Plus scope

The validation process continues to be structured in three layers: All Participant Check (APC), Validation Plus (VP) and Validation Interviews (VI). Starting 2018, the random selection of 25% participants for a more detailed check of all supporting evidence will be replaced by a selection of 100% participants being checked on the same subset of indicators. This will allow GRESB to apply a consistent level of scrutiny on all participating entities. Detailed information on the validation process will be included in the Reference Guide.

Increased transparency on scoring and Assessment methodology

In response to multiple requests for additional information on scoring and methodology, GRESB publishes the 2017 Real Estate Scoring document on the Assessment Portal. This document is shared with participants in good faith and can be used by participants as an additional source of information on the Assessment. Please note that the 2018 scoring methodology can differ partially or completely for certain indicators.

Health & Well-being Module enters its final year

The GRESB Health & Well-being module is entering its third and final year alongside the Real Estate Assessment. After two years of successful voluntary participation in the module coupled with encouraging results, human health is among the top trends expected to shape the real estate industry in the near future. The final year of the GRESB Health & Well-being Module will build on information accumulated over the past years to further develop material indicators for potential integration in the 2019 Real Estate Assessment. In February, 2018, GRESB and the Green Health Partnership have convened an Industry Working Group (IWG) to review and comment on the proposed changes on the 2018 Module indicators.

New! Resilience Module

Resilience has emerged as an important topic for real estate and infrastructure investors and the companies, funds and assets they invest in. With the frequency and cost of natural disasters increasing around the world, the topic will remain on the agenda for years to come.

In order to provide our Investor Members with more transparency about the resilience of real estate and infrastructure companies, funds and assets, GRESB is introducing a new Resilience Module for the 2018 Assessment cycle. The new Resilience Module will be available as an optional supplement for 2018 GRESB Assessments, including Real Estate and Infrastructure, and is informed by the Industry Working Groups hosted in January, 2018.

The table below has more information on the changes:

Entity and reporting characteristics

RC2

Add "Millions" in the question text to emphasise the number input should be in millions and implement answer check (i.e.,warning, signal, flag)

Rationale for change: A frequent mistake made in 2017, which required individual follow-up with many participants during the summer.

Impact of change: Additional portal check.

RC-NC1.2, RC-NC2.2

Additional question on portfolio characteristics to ensure complete reporting

Rationale for change: Ensure participants report on their entire real estate portfolio and do not report on a selected subset.

Impact of change: A simple Yes/No question, followed by additional context to provide assurance for participants that portfolios are fairly benchmarked.

RC-NC3

Replace "United States" in the dropdown list of countries by the full list of US states

Rationale for change: The climate on the West Coast is very different from the one on the East Coast. Knowing the location of the assets by state would allow GRESB to break down the peer groups into more specific parts, similar to the sub-regions in Europe (e.g. Benelux).

Impact of change: Expand the dropdown. Participants need to calculate their regional allocation of assets in more detail.

Management

MA1(DQ1)

Open text box no longer scored, but used for reporting purposes

Rationale for change: In 2017, 95% responses received Full points or Partial Points. Most participants are able to explain their sustainability objectives, following the standard validation requirements for the answer. This change is in line with our effort to shift more weight from the management to the quality and implementation of sustainability objectives.

Impact of change: Reduced reporting burden. The total points assigned to this indicator remains 2p.

New option added: Health & Well-being

Rationale for change: Health & Well-being is a cross-cutting issue borrowing elements from the entire spectrum of environmental, social and governance indicators. Human health is among the top trends expected to shape the real estate industry in the near future and an increasing number of real estate companies define their strategy around it. We do not expect all GRESB participants to define their development strategy around health & well-being, but we would like to identify the ones who do.

Impact of change: This section is not used for scoring, but is relevant for the validation of the supporting evidence.

MA2(DQ2)

“Investment partners (co-investors/JV partners)” is added to the options list. The “Other” answer option has been removed

Rationale for change: Investment partners/JV partners is a frequently provided “Other” option. All the other answers provided by participants were duplicated of the already listed elements or a duplicate of the sustainability taskforce addressed in MA4.

Impact of change: It is not possible to pre-fill the indicator in 2018. No impact on score.

MA4 (DQ4&DQ5)

The open text in Q5 is integrated into Q4 and is used for reporting purposes only

Rationale for change: In 2017, 96% participants answered “Yes” in DQ5, confirming they have a formal process to inform the most senior decision-maker on the sustainability performance. 98% of these answers received “Full points”, demonstrating that when applicable, internal communication on sustainability is done in a structured way. This indicators presents little opportunity for differentiation from a scoring perspective, but is an important piece for defining the context of the submission.

Impact of change: The open textbox is incorporated into MA4 but will not be scored.

MA5 (DQ6)

Restructured indicator coupled with the request for supporting evidence

Rationale for change: Specific provisions for rewards, penalties, or support reflect the entity’s strategic priorities and provide the foundation for accountability of senior management and responsibility for employees. In 2017, 90% of participants confirmed that their organizations include sustainability factors in the annual performance targets of the employees. The updated indicator unpacks that claim to determine how incentives are created for the achievement of ESG targets and who benefits from them.

Impact of change: A more structural approach to ESG targets. No changes on scoring.

Policy and Disclosure

Adjusted the order of indicators within section

Rationale for change: The order was counterintuitive; starting with the indicators on disclosure and followed by the ones on policy. Restructured the section into fewer indicators that follow a simple flow: policies on E, S, G, and disclosure methods.

Impact of change: Better flow of indicators.

PD1 (DQ8)

Option “Building safety” is removed

Rationale for change: In the context of this indicator, the answer is often interpreted in the same way as “Environmental attributes of building materials”. The provision of policy clauses on asset-level structural characteristics that can harm tenant safety is captured in the option “asset-level safety (for tenants)” in PD3.

Impact of change: Indicator is still pre-filled, no impact on scoring.

PD2

Elements of DQ9, DQ10, DQ11 are combined into an indicator addressing policies on social issues

Rationale for change: Overlapping elements across indicators.

Impact of change: Better Assessment structure through individual indicators on each of the E/S/G pillars. PD2 receives 2p.

PD3 (DQ9)

Update issues for policy/policies on governance (this change is related to the previous one)

Rationale for change: The list of items classified as E/S/G issues was not consistent with the definitions of other reporting guidelines.

Impact of change: List of governance issues has been updated to reflect the most material governance issues for an efficient operation of the entity. The maximum points available for this indicator is increased from 1p to 2p.

PD4

Indicator on board diversity

Rationale for change: Research shows that companies with higher board diversity are more likely to have strong financial performance and fewer instances of bribery, corruption, conflicts of interest and fraud. The aim of this newly created indicator is to zoom into the diversity topic and improve alignment with the GRI, EPRA (GRI102-24 / 103 / 405-1 / 405-2) and PRI standards (IFD20, SG10, LEI10).

Impact of change: The indicator is not scored and only used for reporting purposes in 2018.

DQ10

Remove the indicator

Rationale for change: DQ10 is overlapping with the updated PD2.

Impact of change: Easier reporting.

DQ11

Remove the indicator

Rationale for change: Q11 is overlapping with the updated PD2.

Impact of change: Easier reporting.

PD6

Indicator on company’s commitment to ESG leadership standards or group

Rationale for change: The public commitment to sustainability through affiliation to internationally recognised initiatives contributes to the organization’s credibility and strengthens investor confidence.

Impact of change: The indicator is not scored and only used for reporting purposes in 2018.

PD7

Consolidate two reporting indicators (PD14 and PD16) on ESG misconduct, penalties, incidents or accidents

Rationale for change: Easier reporting and a better flow of indicators.

Impact of change: This indicator is not scored and only used for reporting purposes. However, this information may be used as criteria for the recognition of 2018 Sector Leaders.

Risk and EMS

ME1

DQ17.1 and DQ17.2 merged into one indicator RE4

Rationale for change: Consolidation of the Assessment and validation process.

Impact of change: Easier reporting, no impact on scoring.

Stakeholder engagement

DQ18

Remove the indicator

Rationale for change: The baseline information for this indicator changed.

Impact of change: In 2017, 97% participants indicated they monitored the implementation of their employee policies.

SE1 (DQ19)

Restructured answer options

Rationale for change: Requirement for better analytics capabilities.

Impact of change: Better analytics, no impact on scores or data collection process.

SE2.1 (DQ20.1)

Expand scope of indicator to include survey quantitative metrics

Rationale for change: Surveys are the most frequently used methods for receiving feedback from employees. They can be an effective means of engagement and if designed properly, an important source of information to be used for increasing the satisfaction levels of the tested groups. In view of this, the outcomes of the surveys need to be translated into unambiguous and easily interpretable customer satisfaction score that can be compared over time or between different sectors.

Impact of change: The new section is not scored and only used for reporting purposes in 2018.

SE 4.2 (NEW)

Indicator on supply chain engagement

Rationale for change: The intent of this question is to identify if the reporting entity effectively engages with its suppliers in order to deliver sustainable goals communicated in the previous question. The indicator addressed the Check component in the Plan - Do - Check - Act structure defined by ISO.

Impact of change: Indicator not scored in 2018, used for reporting purposes only.

DQ22

Removed the indicator from Developer Assessment

Rationale for change: Stainability-specific requirements in standard lease is not always applicable to development projects; hence, this indicator is remoevd from the Developer Assessment.

Impact of change: None.

New construction and major renovation

NC1

Open text box no longer scored, but used for reporting purposes

Rationale for change: (Alignment with MA1/DQ1) In 2017, 96% responses received Full points or Partial points. Most participants are able to explain their sustainability strategy, following the standard validation requirements for the answer. This change is in line with our effort to shift more weight from the management to the quality and implementation of sustainability strategy.

Impact of change: Reduced reporting burden. The total points assigned to this indicator remains 1p.

New option added: Green building certification

Rationale for change: The added option was a frequently reported Other answer in 2017.

Impact of change: No impact on score.

NC5.1

Update on wording so that the indicator is clear and answer options are mutually exclusive

Rationale for change: Wording was updated to improve terminology, and to ensure the answer options are mutually exclusive.

Impact of change: No more double scoring for participants that require certification at a specific level. No impact on score.

NC5.2

Participants can also report on projects that are registered to obtain a green building certification

Rationale for change: Green building certifications are often only awarded after NCMR projects are completed, and pre-certifications are not available for all building certificates. This change enable participants to report on projects that have registered at an official directory of green building certification scheme but not yet obtained the final certificate.

Impact of change: Adapted approach to the use of green building certifications in new construction and/or major renovation projects during the reporting period. No impact on score.

NC7.1

The percentage of projects with renewable energy is used for scoring

Rationale for change: This enable participant to get recognition on their effort in promoting renewable energy in new construction and/or major renovation projects. And it provides a better differentiation between sustainability best practices.

Impact of change: The percentages of all reported renewable projects are added up and capped at 100%, and the total percentage is taken into account in the scoring. It is calculated linearly.

NC7.2

Evidence is removed

Rationale for change: The mandatory open text box provides sufficient information for validation. Removing the mandatory upload can reduce the reporting burden.

Impact of change: No impact on scoring.

NC8, NC11

Participants no longer need to provide evidence for “common water efficiency measures” and “common occupant health and well-being measures”

Rationale for change: Both indicators cover a lot of information, which makes it difficult to provide evidence for each checkbox. To shift the validation focus to the subcategory of "Requirement for planning and design" will concentrate the validation effort and reduce the reporting burden from the participants.

Impact of change: Reduced reporting burden. No impact on scoring.

NC12.1

Shifted the focus of this indicator from health and safety to safety. New options added

Rationale for change: Emphasize the difference between safety and health.

Impact of change: It is not possible to pre-fill the indicator in 2018. No impact on scoring.

NC14

Open text box no longer scored, but used for reporting purposes

Rationale for change: To shift the validation focus on the uploaded document, to emphasize the quality and implementation of community impact monitoring.

Impact of change: Reduced reporting burden. No impact on scoring.

Entity & Reporting Characteristics

Information provided in the Entity and Reporting Characteristics section determines the reporting scope and boundaries for the submission of the GRESB Assessment response. This section identifies the entity's characteristics o and uses the information for benchmark-based scoring. The profile of the reporting entity is also used for peer group selection, which is based on property type and geographic allocation, as well as the nature of ownership and management structure. The section consists of two parts:

Entity Characteristics

Intent

Identify the participating entity. The entity name provided remains confidential and will only be used for validation and to identify the entity in the GRESB Investor Member interface.

Terminology

Entity name: Fund or company name of the investable entity for which the Assessment is submitted. In case of listed companies, the entity name is the legal name of the organization, also used for identification on international stock exchanges. In case of non-listed entities, the entity name identifies the investable portfolio for which the Assessment is submitted.

Entity manager (organization) name: Legal name of the organization that manages the entity (typically applicable for non-listed entities only).

Requirements

Complete all applicable fields.

Intent

Describe the ownership status and characteristics of the participating entity.

Terminology

Closed end fund: An investment vehicle with a fixed amount of capital. Limited liquidity, with the redemption of units provided for at the end of the life of the vehicle.

Core: An entity that includes a preponderance of core attributes; the entity as a whole will have low leasing exposure and low leverage. A low percentage of non-core assets is acceptable. As a result, such portfolios should achieve relatively high-income returns and exhibit relatively low volatility. Low-risk entities that invest in stabilized, income producing property, which is typically held for 5 to 10 years and have limited acquisition/disposal activity after the fund has been invested. Assets in core funds are characterized by stable income returns with less capital growth.

A Core Plus fund invests in similar style assets but adopts a more aggressive management style. Core Plus entities are considered Core for the purposes of the GRESB Assessment.

Finite structure: Refers to funds that have a specific termination date, otherwise known as the funds expiration or liquidation date.

First closing: A date specified by the manager on which the vehicle is launched, the initial capital subscription is completed and the commitment period commences.

Fund or vehicle: Terms used to describe a structure where at least three investors’ capital is pooled together and managed as a single entity with a common investment aim. For the purposes of these definitions, these terms can be used interchangeably.

Government entity: A real estate portfolio managed by a government agency (e.g. U.S. General Services Administration, GSA). Government portfolios are formed of publicly owned, publicly managed and publicly leased properties.

Infinite structure: Refers to funds with no specified or intended termination dates.

ISIN: International Securities Identification Number. ISINs are assigned to securities to facilitate unambiguous clearing and settlement procedures. They are composed of a 12-digit alphanumeric code and act to unify different ticker symbols, which can vary by exchange and currency for the same security. In the United States, ISINs are extended versions of 9-character CUSIP codes.

Listed entity: A company that is publicly listed and traded on a recognized stock exchange, such as Nasdaq or NYSE. Also known as "public entities”.

Non-listed entity: A company or fund that is not a listed or traded on any stock exchange. Also known as private entities or private portfolios.

Open end fund: An investment vehicle with a variable and unlimited amount of capital. Investors may purchase or redeem units or shares from the vehicle as outlined in contractual agreements.

Opportunistic: An entity of preponderantly non-core investments that is expected to derive most of its return from appreciation/ depreciation and/ or which is expected to and may exhibit significant volatility in returns. This volatility may be due to a variety of characteristics, such as exposure to development, significant leasing risk, high leverage, or a combination of moderate risk factors. High-risk entities that invest in greater yielding assets; for example, developments without pre-leasing, properties involving significant repositioning or that are distressed, and large portfolio acquisitions, purchased to be re-packaged and sold in smaller lot sizes. Opportunity funds generally maintain higher leverage limits and have shorter holding periods for assets.

REIT: A Real Estate Investment Trust is an investment vehicle for real estate that is comparable to a mutual fund. Listed REITs are traded on a stock exchange.

Value Added: An entity that generally includes a mix of core investments and non-core investments that will have less stable income streams. The entity as a whole is likely to have moderate lease exposure and moderate leverage. As a result, such entities should achieve a significant portion of the return from appreciation/ depreciation and are expected to exhibit moderate volatility.

Moderately higher-risk entities that typically engage in “forms of active management, such as tenant lease-up, repositioning or redevelopment, to generate returns through adding value to the investment properties”.

Year of commencement: The year in which the reporting entity began investing in the market. If a listed entity is delisted (i.e., taken private) but remains under the same management, the date of original commencement can be used for “date of first closing” for the new non-listed entity. If the entity is taken private by a new management company, the first day of closing should be the date of privatization. This information is not used for scoring and used for context only; portfolio vintage may affect the ability to implement ESG policies and strategies.

Requirements

Select one of the options, select all applicable sub-options and complete the year of first closing/commencement. Entities reporting to GRESB are expected to represent investable vehicles, and these entities are expected to include all direct real estate assets held by the vehicle (i.e., the whole portfolio).

If two or more listed companies merge into one entity during the reporting period, report on the structure, policies and procedures of the newly formed entity as of the end of the reporting period.

Note: GRESB Real Estate Investor Members that invest in listed real estate securities have access to the results of all listed entities that participate in the GRESB Real Estate and/or Developer Assessment.

Reference

INREV Global Definitions Database, 2018

Intent

Set the entity’s annual reporting period.

Terminology

Calendar year: January 1 – December 31.

Fiscal year: The period used to calculate annual financial statements. Depending on the jurisdiction the fiscal year can start on April 1, July 1, October 1, etc.

Reporting period: Responses provided in the Assessment must refer to the reporting period identified in this indicator and should correspond to the most recently closed calendar year / fiscal year, as applicable. A response to an indicator must be true at the close of the reporting period; however, the response does not need to have been true for the entire reporting period. GRESB does not favour the use of calendar year over fiscal year or viceversa, as long as the chosen reporting period is used consistently throughout the Assessment.

Requirements

Select one of the options.

Intent

Establish whether there is a relationship with GRESB Partners (industry associations). Each entity on this list is a GRESB partner, receiving annual reports that show aggregate GRESB results for their membership. It is important for NAREIT members to select “NAREIT” for enrollment in the Leader in the Light Award Program (see Introduction for more information).

Terminology

See definitions in Appendix - Terminology Acronyms.

Requirements

Select one or more of the options. You can answer this indicator either at entity level or organization level.

Reporting Characteristics

Intent

Set the currency for which the entity’s real estate portfolio of assets is denominated.

Requirements

State the currency used by the entity for Assessment indicators that require a monetary value as a response.

Other: State the other currency form.

Intent

Gross asset value (“GAV”) is a metric used in GRESB data analysis to identify the size of the portfolio.

Terminology

GAV: Gross Asset Value.

Requirements

Complete the GAV field in millions (e.g., a GAV of $75,000,000 must be reported as 75). Do not include a currency, as this has been reported in indicator RC1 above, but make sure the currency applied for GAV reporting is consistent with indicator RC1.

The value provided should be the GAV of the investable entity at the end of the reporting period, and should include New Construction and Major Renovation projects (if any).

As an alternative to GAV, you may report using Market Capitalization (for listed entities) or Net Asset Value (NAV), both at the end of the reporting period.

Intent

Metrics are needed to ensure comparability for benchmarking and reporting purposes. Set the reporting units used by the entity.

Requirements

Select one of the options, and use it consistently when reporting the floor area of the portfolio.

Intent

The entity’s primary business activity(ies) during the reporting period is used to determine which GRESB Aspect(s) should be completed.

Terminology

Developer Assessment: In addition to the GRESB Real Estate Assessment, GRESB offers a stand-alone GRESB Developer Assessment, for companies and fund managers that focus on development activities rather than the management of standing investments. The GRESB Developer Assessment evaluates the ESG performance of companies and funds, focusing on policies, strategies and measures related to new construction and major renovation projects.

Major Renovations: Alterations that affect more than 50 percent of the total building floor area or cause relocation of more than 50 percent of regular building occupants. Major renovation projects refer to buildings that were under construction at any time during the reporting period.

New Construction: Includes all activities to obtain or change building or land use permissions and financing. Includes construction work for the project with the intention of enhancing the property’s value. Development of new buildings and additions to existing buildings that affect usable space can be treated as new constructions and reported in RC-NC1. New construction projects refer to buildings that were under construction at any time during the reporting period.

Standing Investments: Real estate properties where construction work has been completed and which are owned for the purpose of leasing and producing rental income. The level of occupancy is not relevant for this definition. Also known as operating buildings.

Requirements

If you select:

  • Management of standing investments only – only complete Aspects 1-7 of the GRESB Real Estate Assessment. You will receive an overall GRESB Real Estate score.
  • Management of standing investments and development of new construction and major renovation projects – complete all indicators in Aspects 1-7 of the GRESB Assessment, as well as the New Construction and Major Renovations Aspect. You will receive two scores: a GRESB Real Estate Score and a separate New Construction and Major Renovations Score.
  • Development of new construction and major renovation projects – complete the GRESB Developer Assessment. You will receive a GRESB Developer Score.

Who should complete the GRESB Developer Assessment?

  • Organizations that develop properties, or acquire property development projects, with aim to sell the ownership stake upon the project’s completion. Projects may be developed to a tenant‘s specification (build to suit), commissioned by an investment manager, or developed at risk.
  • Organizations that acquire properties exclusively for redevelopment and resale.
  • Organizations that manage standing investments as a by-product of their development activities, and for whom the development activities are considered to be the core business.

Development portfolio composition

Intent

Describe the entity’s new construction portfolio. This information determines the structure of important elements of the Assessment.

Terminology

Data Centers: Property used for the purpose of data storage, processing and/or distribution. Examples may include, but are not limited to: telecommunications centers and data storage centers.

Hotel: Includes hotels, motels, youth hostels, lodging, and resorts.

Healthcare: Buildings used for the purpose of primary healthcare. Examples may include, but are not limited to: hospitals, clinics, physical therapy centers and mental health centers.

Industrial, Distribution warehouses: Industrial buildings used for the purpose of storing, processing and distribution of goods to wholesalers, retailers and/or consumers.

Industrial, Manufacturing: Industrial buildings used for the purpose of manufacturing. Otherwise known as a factory or manufacturing plant.

Industrial, Business parks: An industrial business park is an area zoned for the purpose of industrial development, where (light-weight) industrial buildings are grouped together with offices. Examples may include, but are not limited to: industrial estate, trading estate and enterprise zone.

Land: Land is an un-occupied property type which does not meet the operational profile of other property types. It can be either open land or land containing dormant buildings not in operational use. If the portfolio includes Land as property type, report on it in RC-NC1 and in the New Construction & Major Renovations Aspect.

Lodging, Leisure & Recreation: Indoor center used for the purpose of leisure and recreation. Examples may include, but are not limited to: exercise facilities, indoor sports courts, fitness studios, movie theaters, swimming centers and saunas/steam rooms.

Medical office: Examples may include, but are not limited to: offices specifically used for the purpose of medical administration, secondary research or other purposes, exclusive of the property types specified for Healthcare.

New Construction: Includes all activities to obtain or change building or land use permissions and financing. Includes construction work for the project with the intention of enhancing the property’s value. Development of new buildings and additions to existing buildings that affect usable space can be treated as new constructions and reported in RC-NC1. New construction projects refer to buildings that were under construction at any time during the reporting period.

Office: Includes free-standing offices, office terraces, unattributed office buildings and office parks.

Operational control: The ability to introduce and implement operating and/or environmental policies and measures.

Other: State the other property type. Possible other answers may include, but are not limited to: kindergarten, community halls. Only use this option if your investments do not fit into any of the options given.

Parking (indoors): Enclosed, indoor vehicle parking facilities, usually consisting of numerous levels for which vehicles are intended to be parked. Otherwise known as multi-story car park, parking building, parking garage, stacked car parking and indoor parking.

Retail, High street: Retail buildings located on the high street in a particular area, usually terraced buildings located in the city centre or other high-traffic pedestrian zones.

Retail, Shopping centers: Enclosed centers for retail purposes. Examples may include, but are not limited to: regional malls and shopping malls.

Retail, Warehouse: Refers to buildings in an un-enclosed retail space, otherwise known as a strip center or strip mall, whereby buildings are usually stand-alone and situated side-by-side with their entrance facing a main street or carpark.

Residential, Multi-family: Refers to multiple residential dwelling spaces contained within one building, otherwise known as a multi-dwelling unit. This includes low-, mid- and high-rise apartment blocks.

Residential, Family homes: Includes both single-family homes and multi-dwelling units not including apartment blocks. A single-family home is a separate, free-standing residential building. A multi-dwelling family home includes those such as two-flats, duplex, semi-detached, and townhouses. Synonyms include: Single-family home, single-detached dwelling, detached house, single-family residence, separate house, free-standing house, townhouse, duplex, condo, semidetached, villa.

Residential, Student housing: Residential buildings used for the purpose of housing students, otherwise known as student apartments, student houses, student residence, student quarters, and student accommodation.

Self-storage: Indoor building or warehouse used for the purpose of self-storage for individuals and/or organizations, otherwise known as self-service storage.

Senior homes: Residential buildings used for the purpose of housing seniors, otherwise known as senior assisted living homes, retirement homes/apartments, retirement villages, old-age homes.

GRESB aims to benchmark participants against other similar property types. If that is not possible, we will group property types defined in “Other” based on their property type characteristics.

Requirements

You must include the whole floor area for all new construction projects, regardless of restrictions on management control resulting from (a) the landlord and tenant relationship or (b) the ownership structure of the entity.

Floor area type: Select the type of floor area used across the portfolio. The floor area type selected will not influence the analysis, as long as it remains consistent throughout the entire Assessment. It is recommended to report on floor areas using the International Property Measurement Standard (IPMS). IPMS aims to establish a globally consistent methodology for property measurement.

GAV: Provide the GAV either according to market value/fair value or based on construction costs.

Note: GAV should be reported in millions.

Intent

Provide additional context on the entity’s reporting boundaries.

Requirements

The floor area reported in RC-NC1.1 must reflect the total size of the investable entity’s new construction projects. It is required to specify and clarify any inconsistencies with the reporting boundary requirements of GRESB in this open text box.

Open text box: The content of this open text box is not used for scoring, but will be included in the Benchmark Report. Participate may use this open text box to communicate on additional information about the reporting boundary

Intent

Describe the entity’s portfolio of major renovation projects. This information determines the structure of important elements of the Assessment.

Terminology

Data Centers: Property used for the purpose of data storage, processing and/or distribution. Examples may include, but are not limited to: telecommunications centers and data storage centers.

Hotel: Includes hotels, motels, youth hostels, lodging, and resorts.

Healthcare: Buildings used for the purpose of primary healthcare. Examples may include, but are not limited to: hospitals, clinics, physical therapy centers and mental health centers.

Industrial, Distribution warehouses: Industrial buildings used for the purpose of storing, processing and distribution of goods to wholesalers, retailers and/or consumers.

Industrial, Manufacturing: Industrial buildings used for the purpose of manufacturing. Otherwise known as a factory or manufacturing plant.

Industrial, Business parks: An industrial business park is an area zoned for the purpose of industrial development, where (light-weight) industrial buildings are grouped together with offices. Examples may include, but are not limited to: industrial estate, trading estate and enterprise zone.

Land: Land is an un-occupied property type which does not meet the operational profile of other property types. It can be either open land or land containing dormant buildings not in operational use. If the portfolio includes Land as property type, report on it in RC-NC1 and in the New Construction & Major Renovations Aspect.

Lodging, Leisure & Recreation: Indoor center used for the purpose of leisure and recreation. Examples may include, but are not limited to: exercise facilities, indoor sports courts, fitness studios, movie theaters, swimming centers and saunas/steam rooms.

Major Renovations: Alterations that affect more than 50 percent of the total building floor area or cause relocation of more than 50 percent of regular building occupants. Major renovation projects refer to buildings that were under construction at any time during the reporting period.

Medical office: Examples may include, but are not limited to: offices specifically used for the purpose of medical administration, secondary research or other purposes, exclusive of the property types specified for Healthcare.

Office: Includes free-standing offices, office terraces, unattributed office buildings and office parks.

Operational control: The ability to introduce and implement operating and/or environmental policies and measures.

Other: State the other property type. Possible other answers may include, but are not limited to: kindergarten, community halls. Only use this option if your investments do not fit into any of the options given.

Parking (indoors): Enclosed, indoor vehicle parking facilities, usually consisting of numerous levels for which vehicles are intended to be parked. Otherwise known as multi-story car park, parking building, parking garage, stacked car parking and indoor parking.

Retail, High street: Retail buildings located on the high street in a particular area, usually terraced buildings located in the city centre or other high-traffic pedestrian zones.

Retail, Shopping centers: Enclosed centers for retail purposes. Examples may include, but are not limited to: regional malls and shopping malls.

Retail, Warehouse: Refers to buildings in an un-enclosed retail space, otherwise known as a strip center or strip mall, whereby buildings are usually stand-alone and situated side-by-side with their entrance facing a main street or carpark.

Residential, Multi-family: Refers to multiple residential dwelling spaces contained within one building, otherwise known as a multi-dwelling unit. This includes low-, mid- and high-rise apartment blocks.

Residential, Family homes: Includes both single-family homes and multi-dwelling units not including apartment blocks. A single-family home is a separate, free-standing residential building. A multi-dwelling family home includes those such as two-flats, duplex, semi-detached, and townhouses. Synonyms include: Single-family home, single-detached dwelling, detached house, single-family residence, separate house, free-standing house, townhouse, duplex, condo, semidetached, villa.

Residential, Student housing: Residential buildings used for the purpose of housing students, otherwise known as student apartments, student houses, student residence, student quarters, and student accommodation.

Self-storage: Indoor building or warehouse used for the purpose of self-storage for individuals and/or organizations, otherwise known as self-service storage.

Senior homes: Residential buildings used for the purpose of housing seniors, otherwise known as senior assisted living homes, retirement homes/apartments, retirement villages, old-age homes.

GRESB aims to benchmark participants against other similar property types. If that is not possible, we will group property types defined in “Other” based on their property type characteristics.

Requirements

You must include the whole floor area for all major renovation projects, regardless of restrictions on management control resulting from (a) the landlord and tenant relationship or (b) the ownership structure of the entity.

Floor area type: Select the type of floor area used across the portfolio. The floor area type selected will not influence the analysis, as long as it remains consistent throughout the entire Assessment. It is recommended to report on floor areas using the International Property Measurement Standard (IPMS). IPMS aims to establish a globally consistent methodology for property measurement.

GAV: Provide the GAV either according to market value/fair value or based on construction costs.

Note: GAV should be reported in millions.

Intent

Provide additional context on the entity’s reporting boundaries.

Requirements

The floor area reported in RC-NC2.1 must reflect the total size of the investable entity’s major renovation projects. It is required to specify and clarify any inconsistencies with the reporting boundary requirements of GRESB in this open text box.

Open text box: The content of this open text box is not used for scoring, but will be included in the Benchmark Report. Participate may use this open text box to communicate on additional information about the reporting boundary

Intent

Describe the location of the entity’s new construction and/or major renovation projects by country. GRESB scoring uses the information to create country and regional peer groups.

Requirements

Select the countries in which the entity’s investments are located, using the fraction of total GAV or net operating income (NOI). Use the drop down menu.

In the case of portfolios from the United States, a state by state breakdown is required.

Management

Intent and Overview

This Aspect focuses on how the organization integrates ESG into its overall business strategy. The purpose of this section is to (1) identify who in the participant organization is responsible for managing ESG issues and has decision-making authority; (2) communicate to investors how the entity structures management of ESG issues and (3) determine how ESG is embedded into the organization.

Sustainability Objectives

2017 Indicator

2 points , MP, G

Indicator aligned with PRI Reporting Frameworkd 2018, Direct Property, PR 01: Responsible Property Investment (RPI) policy

Intent

Clear Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) objectives help participants identify material issues and integrate them into overall day-to-day management practices. Integrating ESG practices into the overall business strategy fosters alignment between management of sustainability issues and the overall strategy of the organization. It also demonstrates commitment to monitoring ESG objectives and to meeting targets.

Terminology

Environmental objectives: Overall environmental goal, arising from the environmental policy, that an organization sets itself to achieve. The objectives should be quantifiable and correlated with the organization’s ambitions. In turn, they determine targets, which are detailed performance requirements necessary to achieve the environmental objectives.

ESG objectives: Strategic priorities and key topics for the management and/or improvement of ESG issues.

Fully integrated: Complete alignment between the management of sustainability issues and the overall strategy of the organization. A fully integrated strategy incorporates sustainability to manage risk and create competitive advantages beyond utility cost savings.

General sustainability objectives: Cross-cutting objectives to improve overall ESG performance, such as relative position on sustainability indices or rankings.

Governance objectives: Objectives to improve entity governance. These can relate to governance structures and composition of the organization and how this relates to economic, environmental and social dimensions, or the entity’s approach to corporate governance issues such as transparency, board composition, or bribery and corruption.

Not integrated: Sustainability objectives were set disjointly from the overall strategy of the organization.

Overall business strategy: The organization's long-term strategy for meeting its objectives.

Partially integrated: Refers to any level of alignment less than 'fully integrated'.

Social objectives: Objectives to improve absolute or relative on social issues, such as stakeholder engagement or health and well-being.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Evidence: Document upload or hyperlink. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. If a hyperlink is provided, ensure that it is not outdated and the relevant page can be accessed within two steps.

The provided evidence should meet the following criteria:

  1. The objective(s) should be specific, and the evidence supports each of the selected objectives.
  2. Objectives should relate to the entity level. If this is not clear in the provided evidence, ensure to explain how the organizational level objectives relate to the entity in the text field provided for the location of the relevant information.
  3. Evidence should clearly indicate the public availability of the objectives (If applicable).

Open text box: The content of this open text box is not used for scoring, but will be included in the Benchmark Report. Participate may use this open text box to communicate on

  1. The scope of the objectives. The text should identify key sustainability priorities and issues relevant to the entity. If applicable, explain how these objectives relate to specific elements of the entity’s overall business strategy. Sustainability and/or ESG objectives can relate to quantifiable goals or to strategic developments;
  2. Time bounds around the objectives. The text should include a description indicating whether the objectives are short-term (one to two years), medium-term (three to five years) or long-term (more than five years);
  3. Explanation around the extent of integration of ESG objectives with business strategy and next steps to foster further alignment.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded based on each of the selected components, the objectives' level of integration into the overall business as well as their public availability.

The open text box is not scored and is for reporting purposes only.

The reported answer options are validated based on the provided evidence, and points are contingent upon validity of the supporting evidence.

References

EPRA Best Practices Recommendations on Sustainability Reporting, 3rd version, September 2017: 5.7, Analysis

SASB (March 2016)-Real Estate Owners, Developers & Investment Trusts: IF0402-05

3 points , MP, G

Indicator aligned with PRI Reporting Frameworkd 2018, Strategy & Governance module, SG 07 and SG 08

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to identify resources allocated to sustainability management. Having personnel dedicated to sustainability issues increases the likelihood that the entity’s sustainability objectives will be properly managed and targets will be met.

Terminology

Dedicated employee(s) for whom sustainability is the core responsibility: The employee(s)’ main responsibility is defining, implementing and monitoring the sustainability objectives at organization and/or entity level.

Employee(s) for whom sustainability is among their responsibilities: The implementation and monitoring of sustainability is part of the employee’s role, but is not necessarily their main responsibility.

ESG objectives: Strategic priorities and key topics for the management and/or improvement of ESG issues.

Investment partners (co-investor/JV partners): A General Partner that co-owns and operates (part of) the entity’s assets and is responsible for implementing ESG objectives at a property level.

Persons responsible: A person or group of people who work on the implementation and completion of the task, project or strategy.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

If you select External Consultants, also state the name of the organization.

Details of employee: Participants must provide an e-mail address together with the name and job title of the relevant employee. This information will remain confidential and will only be used for data validation purposes.

Name of the organization: Provide the full name of the organization. You may be asked for additional information about the organization(s). It is possible to report on multiple organizations.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded to each selected responsible party and are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score. It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator.

Reporting more than one external consultants will not impact scoring; reported answer options in these fields are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

The LinkedIn profiles of the persons responsible for implementing the sustainability objectives are optional fields and do not impact scoring.

References

GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (2016): 102-20

Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures June 2017: Governance A&B

Sustainability Decision Making

2017 Indicator

2 points , MP, G

Indicator aligned with PRI Reporting Frameworkd 2018, Strategy & Governance module, SG 07 and SG 08

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to explore the existence of an internal taskforce focused on sustainability components. The existence of a taskforce focused on sustainability issues demonstrates a structured approach towards integrating sustainability practices across the organization.

Terminology

Asset manager: A person or group of people responsible for developing and overseeing financial and strategic developments of real estate investments at asset level.

Board of Directors: A body of elected or appointed members who jointly oversee the activities of a company or organization as detailed in the corporate charter. Boards normally comprise both executive and non-executive directors.

Fund/portfolio manager: A person or a group who manages a portfolio of real estate investments, and the deployment of investor capital, by creating and implementing asset level strategies, across the entire portfolio.

Property manager: An individual or organization in charge of overseeing day-to-day property operations.

Senior Management Team: A team of individuals who have the day-to-day responsibility of managing the entity/organization. Senior management are sometimes referred to, within corporations, as executive management, executive leadership team, top management, upper management, higher management, or simply seniors.

Sustainability taskforce/committee: A group of individuals who meet, at least four times per year, to discuss and monitor the implementation of the organization’s sustainability objectives.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

If you select External Consultants, also state the name of the organization.

Name of the organization: Provide the full name of the organization. You may be asked for additional information about the organization(s). It is possible to report on multiple organizations.

Other: State the other type of member included in the taskforce. Other answers can include individuals (e.g. ESG Manager, IR Manager, HR representative) or groups of individuals (e.g. Product innovation team). It is possible to report on multiple other answers.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded to each selected checkbox option and are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this question.

References

GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (2016): 103-32

RobecoSAM Corporate Sustainability Assessment 2017: 3.1.5, Responsibilities & Committees

Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures June 2017: Governance A&B

1 point , MP, G

Intent

The presence of senior management dedicated to sustainability increases the likelihood that sustainability objectives will be met. A structured process to keep the most senior decision-maker informed on the entity’s sustainability performance increases accountability and encourages continuous improvement of sustainability performance.

Terminology

Board of Directors: A body of elected or appointed members who jointly oversee the activities of a company or organization as detailed in the corporate charter. Boards normally comprise both executive and non-executive directors.

Fund/portfolio manager: A person or a group who manages a portfolio of real estate investments, and the deployment of investor capital, by creating and implementing asset level strategies, across the entire portfolio.

Investment Committee: A group of individuals who oversee the entity’s investment strategy, evaluates investment proposals and maintains the investment policies, subject to the Board’s approval.

Senior decision-maker accountable for sustainability: A senior individual with sign off (approval) authority for approving strategic sustainability objectives and steps undertaken to achieve these objectives. The accountable person can delegate the work to other responsible people who will work on the implementation and completion of the task, project or strategy.

Person accountable: A person with sign off (approval) authority over the deliverable task, project or strategy. The accountable person can delegate the work to other responsible people who will work on the implementation and completion of the task, project or strategy.

Senior Management Team: A team of individuals who have the day-to-day responsibility of managing the entity/organization. Senior management are sometimes referred to, within corporations, as executive management, executive leadership team, top management, upper management, higher management, or simply seniors.

Sustainability strategy: Strategy which (1) sets out the participant’s procedures and (2) sets the direction and guidance for an organization’s implementation of sustainability measures.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select one sub-option and optionally, complete the open text box.

Senior decision-maker: The organization’s most senior decision-maker on sustainability is expected to be actively involved in the process of defining the sustainability objectives and should approve associated strategic decisions regarding sustainability. This person can be the same as the individual identified in MA2.

Other: State the other senior decision-maker on sustainability issues.The answer should only refer to the department or governance structure of which the senior decision maker is part of. Include just one other answer.

Details of employee: Participants must provide an e-mail address together with the name and job title of the relevant employee. This information will remain confidential and will only be used for data validation purposes.

Open text box: The content of this open text box is not used for scoring, but will be included in the Benchmark Report. Participate may use this open text box to communicate on

  1. Means of communication. Examples can include, but are not limited to: written memos, formal reports, presentations or meeting minutes;
  2. Frequency of reporting. Examples can include, but are not limited to: monthly, quarterly or annually;
  3. Contents of reporting. Examples can include, but are not limited to: (i) an overview of asset performance (quantitative), (ii) realized sustainability performance against objectives, (iii) updates regarding long-term strategic objectives, (iv) updates/notifications regarding regulatory changes or (v) updates regarding proposed actions to improve the performance of the assets.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded based on the selected decision-maker. It is not possible to select more than one answer option.

The open text box is not scored and is for reporting purposes only.

References

CDP, CC1.1

GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (2016): 103-32

RobecoSAM Corporate Sustainability Assessment 2017: 3.1.5, Responsibilities & Committees

Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures June 2017: Governance A&B

3 points , MP, G

Indicator aligned with PRI Reporting Frameworkd 2018, Strategy & Governance module, SG 08

Intent

This indicator intends to identify whether, and how, ESG issues are addressed in employee performance targets. It also identifies how the sustainability-related objectives outlined in MA1 are reflected within the organizational structure. Including sustainability factors in annual performance targets for employees can increase the organization’s capacity to improve sustainability performance.

Terminology

Annual performance targets: Targets set in annual performance reviews, which are assessments of employee performance.

Board of Directors: A body of elected or appointed members who jointly oversee the activities of a company or organization as detailed in the corporate charter. Boards normally comprise both executive and non-executive directors.

ESG Factors: Criteria associated with the entity’s ESG objectives identified in MA1.

Financial consequences: Predetermined monetary benefits incorporated into the employee compensation structures. The financial consequences are contingent upon the achievement of the annual performance targets.

Non-financial consequences: Non-financial benefits (or detriments), such as verbal or written recognition, non-financial rewards or opportunities. The non-financial consequences are contingent upon the achievement of the annual performance targets.

Senior Management Team: A team of individuals who have the day-to-day responsibility of managing the entity/organization. Senior management are sometimes referred to, within corporations, as executive management, executive leadership team, top management, upper management, higher management, or simply seniors.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

This indicator considers only employee performance reviews. Accordingly, if the entity employs a contractor, any review of their performance should not be included in the answer to this indicator.

Other: State the other employee type. Other answers should relate to groups of employees, such as asset managers, property managers, or acquisition teams.

Evidence: Document upload or document name and date. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. In the absence of an upload, providing the document name AND date of publication is mandatory, and you may be asked to disclose the document to GRESB as part of the validation process.

The provided evidence should cover the following elements:

  1. Existence of employee targets that cover ESG related issues related to the objectives identified in MA1.
  2. If applicable, mechanisms in place that ensure these targets are met (i.e., consequences - positive or negative).

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded to each selected group of employees, and whether or not targets have consequences. Points are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field will be validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

The reported answer options are validated based on the provided evidence, and points are contingent upon validity of the supporting evidence.

References

RobecoSAM Corporate Sustainability Assessment 2017: 3.1.7, Executive Compensation-Success Metrics and Vesting

Policy & Disclosure

Intent and Overview

The purpose of this section is to (1) describe the organization’s ESG policies and (2) understand how the organization communicates its ESG performance.

Institutional investors and other shareholders are primary drivers for greater sustainability reporting and disclosure among investable entities. Real estate companies and managers share how ESG policies and management practices are implemented, and how these practices impact the business through formal disclosure mechanisms. This Aspect focuses on the policies established to formally manage and communicate ESG issues to investors.

ESG Policies

2017 Indicator

3 points , MP, G

Indicator aligned with PRI Reporting Frameworkd 2018, Direct Property, PR 01: Responsible Property Investment (RPI) policy

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to describe the existence and scope of policies that address environmental issues. Policies on environmental issues assist organizations with incorporating sustainability criteria into their business practices.

Terminology

Biodiversity and habitat: Issues related to wildlife, endangered species, ecosystem services, habitat management, and relevant topics. Biodiversity refers to the variety of all plant and animal species. Habitat refers to the natural environment in which these plant and animal species live and function.

Building safety: Environmental issues with the potential to create or exacerbate risks to human safety, such as structural failure.

Climate change adaptation: Preparation for long-term change in climatic conditions or climate related events. Example of climate change adaptation measures can include, but are not limited to: building flood defenses, xeriscaping and using tree species resistant to storms and fires, adapting building codes to extreme weather events.

Energy consumption/management: Fuel consumption or management of energy from renewable and non-renewable sources.

Environmental attributes of building materials: Life-cycle environmental characteristics of the building materials, such as embodied carbon or water

GHG emissions: GHGs refers to the seven gases listed in the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard: carbon dioxide (CO2); methane (CH4); nitrous oxide (N2O); hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs); perfluorocarbons (PFCs); nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6).

Policy: Defines an organizational commitment, direction or intention as formally adopted by the organization.

Resilience: Preparedness of the built environment towards existing and future climate changes (i.e., the ability to absorb disturbances such as increased precipitation or flooding while maintaining its structure). This can be achieved by management policies, informational technologies, educating tenant, community, suppliers and physical measures at the asset level.

Waste management: Issues associated with hazardous and non-hazardous waste generation, reuse, recycling, composting, recovery, incineration, landfill and on-site storage.

Water consumption/management: Planning, developing, distributing and managing the optimum use of water resources.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Evidence: Document upload or document name and date. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. In the absence of an upload, providing the document name AND date of publication is mandatory, and you may be asked to disclose the document to GRESB as part of the validation process.

Other: State the other environmental issue.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded to each selected checkbox option and are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this question.

The reported answer options are validated based on the provided evidence, and points are contingent upon validity of the supporting evidence.

References

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 1994 Global Reporting Initiative

EPRA Best Practices Recommendations on Sustainability Reporting, 3rd version, September 2017: 7.9, Narrative on performance

GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (2016): GRI, 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307; GRI, 416

2 points , MP, G

Indicator aligned with PRI Reporting Frameworkd 2018, Direct Property, PR 01: Responsible Property Investment (RPI) policy

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to describe the existence and scope of policies that address social issues. Policies on social issues assist organizations with incorporating sustainability criteria into their business practices.

Terminology

Asset level safety (for tenants): Protecting tenants and building visitors from structural characteristics that can cause danger, risk, or injury.

Child labor: Work that children should not be doing because they are too young, or, if they have reached the minimum age, because it is dangerous or otherwise unsuitable for them.

Diversity: Similarities and differences among employees in terms of age, cultural background, physical abilities and disabilities, race, religion, sex, and sexual orientation.

Equal opportunity: The right to be treated without discrimination, including, but not limited to, on the grounds of one‘s sex, race, or age.

Forced or compulsory labor: All work or service which is expected from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily.

Labor-management relationships: Set of principles and procedures governing the relationship between management and the labor force.

Occupational safety (for employees):Occupational safety focuses on the primary prevention of hazards within workplace. This includes the reduction of risk factors at the workplace leading to cancers, accidents, musculoskeletal diseases, respiratory diseases, hearing loss, circulatory diseases, stress related disorders and communicable diseases and others.

Performance and career development: Training, mentoring, reviews, and other processes intended to understand employee performance and guide career development.

Policy: Defines an organizational commitment, direction or intention as formally adopted by the organization.

Stakeholder engagement: Engagement with individuals/entities that have an interest in the entity.

Worker rights: Fundamental principles and rights at work, covering issues such as freedom of association, right to collective bargaining, the elimination of forced or compulsory labor, the abolition of child labor and the elimination of discrimination with respect to employment and occupation.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Evidence: Document upload or document name and date. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. In the absence of an upload, providing the document name AND date of publication is mandatory, and you may be asked to disclose the document to GRESB as part of the validation process.

Other: State the other social issue.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded to each selected checkbox option and are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this question.

The reported answer options are validated based on the provided evidence, and points are contingent upon validity of the supporting evidence.

References

EPRA Best Practices Recommendations on Sustainability Reporting, 3rd version, September 2017: 7.9, Narrative on performance

GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (2016): GRI, 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307; GRI, 416

ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work

2 points , MP, G

Indicator aligned with PRI Reporting Frameworkd 2018, Direct Property, PR 01: Responsible Property Investment (RPI) policy

Intent

This indicator examines the scope and existence of a governance policy. Policies on governance assist organizations with incorporating the management of governance issues into their business practices. This indicator asks whether a participant has a policy in place. RO1 and RO2 (Risks and Opportunities) ask the participant to explain how that policy is implemented.

Terminology

Bribery: The offering, giving, receiving or soliciting an item of value to influence the actions of an official or other person in charge of a public or legal fiduciary duty.

Corruption: Abuse of entrusted power for private gain.

Cyber security: Protection from an assault by a third party via a computer against another computer or computer system, which is intended to compromise the integrity, availability or confidentiality of that computer or computer system.

Executive compensation: The financial payments and non-monetary benefits provided to high-level management in exchange for their work on behalf of an organization.

Fiduciary duty: A legal obligation of one party to act in the best interest of another. The obligated party is typically a fiduciary, that is, someone entrusted with the care of money or property. Also called fiduciary obligation.

Fraud: Wrongful deception intended to result in financial or personal gain.

Governance issues: Governance structure and composition of the organization. This includes how the highest governance body is established and structured in support of the organization’s purpose, and how this purpose relates to economic, environmental and social dimensions.

Policy: Defines an organizational commitment, direction or intention as formally adopted by the organization.

Remuneration: Basic salary plus additional amounts such as those based on years of service, bonuses including cash and equity such as stocks and shares, benefit payments, overtime, time owed, and any additional allowances (such as transportation, living and childcare allowances).

Whistle-blower mechanism: A process that offers protection for individuals that want to reveal illegal, unethical or dangerous practices. An efficient whistle-blower mechanism prescribes clear procedures and channels to facilitate the reporting of wrongdoing and corruption, defines the protected disclosures, outlines the remedies and sanctions for retaliation.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Evidence: Document upload is mandatory for this indicator. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question.

Acceptable evidence may include a formal policy that is in place such as an company Policy document, official documents, or other resources describing the entity's governance policies. Reference can be provided, such as bullets or passages within a policy, to descibe each selected issue.

Other: State the other governance issue.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded to each selected checkbox option and are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this question.

The reported answer options are validated based on the provided evidence, and points are contingent upon validity of the supporting evidence.

References

EPRA Best Practices Recommendations on Sustainability Reporting, 3rd version, September 2017: 2017: 7.9, Narrative on performance

GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (2016): 102-35; 102-37; GRI 205

RobecoSAM Corporate Sustainability Assessment 2017: 3.1.7

Not scored , MP, G

Intent

This indicator is intended to describe metrics collected by the organization to understand diversity at governance level. Diversity on boards has become a clear priority for investors and is considered to be positively impacting investing decisions.

Terminology

Age group distribution: Percentage of a population, at each age.

Board tenure: Refers to the period or term of an organization board of directors.

Socioeconomic background: Combined measure of sociological and economic background of a person.

Gender ratio: Proportion of one gender to another in a given population.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Open text box: The content of this open text box is not used for scoring, but will be included in the Benchmark Report. Participate may use this open text box to communicate on monitoring processes and calculation methods.

Scoring

This indicator is not scored and is used for reporting purposes only.

References

EPRA Best Practices Recommendations on Sustainability Reporting, 3rd version, September 2017: 5.1, Diversity-Employee gender diversity

GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (2016): 102-22

RobecoSAM Corporate Sustainability Assessment 2017: 3.1.3, Diversity Policy

Sustainability Disclosure

2017 Indicator

4 points , MP, G

Indicator aligned with PRI Reporting Frameworkd 2018, Direct Property, PR 10

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to assess the level(s) of sustainability disclosure undertaken by the entity. Disclosure of sustainability performance demonstrates an entity’s transparency in explaining how sustainability policies and management practices are implemented by the entity, and how these practices impact the business.

Terminology

Alignment: To agree and match with a recognized sustainability standard (either voluntary or mandatory).

Annual report: A yearly record of an organization’s financial performance that is distributed to investors under applicable financial reporting regulations.

Dedicated section on corporate website: A section of the organization’s website that explicitly addresses ESG performance.

Disclosure: The act of making information or data readily accessible and available to all interested individuals and institutions. Disclosure must be external and cannot be an internal and/or ad hoc communication within the participant organization.

Entity reporting to investors: A report prepared by the participant for the purpose of informing investors on the (sustainability) performance of the entity. A summary outlining an entity’s overall approach to sustainability that does not contain any analysis of performance (as defined below) is insufficient.

ESG actions: Specific activities performed to improve management of environmental, social and governance issues within the organization.

ESG performance: Reporting of material indicators that reflect implementation of environmental, social, or governance (ESG) management.

Integrated Report: A report that is aligned with the requirements of the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) Integrated Reporting Framework (December 2013).

Reporting Level:

  1. Entity: related specifically to the named entity, where entity is defined as the investable portfolio for which you are submitting an Assessment response.
  2. Investment Manager: related to the investment management organization or company of which the participating entity forms a part.
  3. Group: related to the group of companies of which the participating entity forms a part.

Standalone sustainability report: A report dedicated to the organization’s (and if applicable, entity’s) sustainability performance.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

In all cases:

  1. Select the applicable reporting level. If the organization reports at multiple levels, you should select the most detailed reporting level;
  2. If applicable, select alignment from the dropdown lists to confirm that your method of reporting is aligned with an external standard or guideline. The list is based on leading international best practice guides for sustainability reporting. If reporting is aligned with more than one standard, select the standard with which there is most alignment;
  3. Provide document upload or URL.

Evidence: Document upload or hyperlink. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. If a hyperlink is provided, ensure that it is not outdated and the relevant page can be accessed within two steps.

  • Integrated report: The document upload or URL provided must contain evidence of alignment with the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) Integrated Reporting Framework (December 2013).
  • Reporting to investor: A summary outlining an entity’s overall approach to sustainability that does not contain any analysis of performance is insufficient. Entity reporting to investors should include an year-on-year comparison of sustainability performances supported by explanatory comments. Performance achievements should be linked to measures formerly implemented by the entity.

Other: State the other method of reporting. Include just one other answer.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3. Except Stand-alone sustainability reports and integrated reports, that which Stand-alone sustainability reports can also refer to the year prior to the reporting year, and integrated reports can also refer to two years prior to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity and/or organization level.

Scoring

Points are awarded to each disclosure method based on (1) reporting level, (2) alignment and (3) public availability.

Reporting levels receive the following points: Group, 0.25 point; Investment Manager, 0.5 point; and Entity, 1 point.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring, and it is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator.

The reported answer options are validated based on the provided evidence, and points are contingent upon validity of the supporting evidence.

References

ANREV (endorsed INREV Sustainability Reporting Recommendations), 2012

APREA Sustainability Handbook, 2012

EPRA Best Practice Recommendations in Sustainability Reporting, September 2017

GRI Sustainability Reporting Guidelines, 2016: 202-1; 205-3; 308-2

IIRC Integrated Reporting Framework, 2013

INREV Sustainability Reporting Recommendations, 2012

2 points , MP, G

Intent

The purpose of this indicator is to assess the entity’s use of third-party checks, review and assurance to ensure the reliability, integrity and accuracy of ESG disclosure.

ESG-related information is essential to the evaluation of investments’ performance. Third-party checks on sustainability disclosure help investors confirm the information disclosed.

Terminology

Assured/Verified: The process of checking data, as well as its collection methods and management systems, through a systematic, independent and documented process against predefined criteria or standards. Assurance/Verification services should be in line with a standard and can only be provided by accredited professionals.

Checked: A third-party review that does not comply with the definition of Assurance/Verification.

Verified: The process of checking data, as well as its collection methods and management systems, through a systematic, independent and documented process against predefined criteria or standards. Verification can be performed by a wide range of accredited professionals.

Requirements

Respond for all methods of reporting selected in PD5.1. For each disclosure:

  1. State whether the methods of reporting are checked, verified or assured (select one option; the most detailed level of scrutiny to which the reporting was subject);
  2. Select the assurance/verification standard (as applicable) from the dropdown menu (See Accepted assurance schemes in the Appendices);
  3. State the name of the reviewing/verification/assurance organization.

Other: State the other method of reporting. Include just one other answer, which must match the answer provided in PD5.1

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3. Except Stand-alone sustainability reports and integrated reports, that which Stand-alone sustainability reports can also refer to the year prior to the reporting year, and integrated reports can also refer to two years prior to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity and/or organization level.

Scoring

Points are awarded based on the average level of review across disclosure methods.

PD5.2 is linked to PF5.1. The selections of disclosure methods in both questions must match, otherwise the answer in PD5.2 will not be considered valid. Evidence provided in PD5.1 will be used to validate this indicator; therefore, the evidence in PD5.1 should also include confirmation of the existence and type of third-party check.

The reported answer options are validated based on the provided evidence, and points are contingent upon validity of the supporting evidence.

References

GRESB’s accepted assurance and verification are aligned with the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP).accepted verification standards.

EPRA Best Practices Recommendations on Sustainability Reporting, 3rd version, September 2017: 5.4, Third party assurance

RobecoSAM Corporate Sustainability Assessment 2017: 4.1.2, Assurance

Not scored , MP, G

Intent

This indicator intends to identify public commitments made by the organization. A public commitment to sustainability through externally recognized initiatives contributes to the organization’s credibility and strengthens investor confidence.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Evidence: Hyperlink is mandatory for this indicator. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. Ensure that the hyperlink is not outdated and the relevant page can be accessed within two steps.

To qualify as valid supporting evidence, the URL must demonstrate the existence of publicly available commitment to ESG leadership relating to each of the issue selected.

Other: State the other public commitment. It is possible to report multiple other answers.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity and/or organization level.

Scoring

This indicator is not scored and is used for reporting purposes only.

Not scored , MP, G

Intent

This indicator intends to identify whether the reporting entity has a defined process in place to communicate any ESG-related misconducts to its stakeholders if the entity has incurred any environment, social or governance fines and/or penalties at its investment properties or elsewhere.

Terminology

ESG fines and/or penalties: Sanctions resulting from an illegal act or non-compliant behavior, which directly harms the environment and/or stakeholders of the organization.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Other: State the other stakeholders group. It is possible to add multiple other answers.

Open text box: The content of this open text box is not used for scoring, but will be included in the Benchmark Report. Participate may use this open text box to communicate on the process the reporting entity intends to follow in order to communicate any ESG-related misconducts to its stakeholders.

Scoring

This indicator is not scored and is used for reporting purposes only.

*The information in PD7.1 and PD7.2 may be used as criteria for the recognition of 2018 Sector Leaders.

Reference

GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards, 2016: 102-17, Mechanisms for advice and concerns about ethics

CDP Reporting Guidelines, Compliance

RobecoSAM Corporate Sustainability Assessment, 2017: 3.3.6, Report on breaches

Not scored , MP, G

Intent

This indicator intends to ensure the communication of any environmental fines and/or penalties to the reporting entity’s investor. Recurring misconducts and penalties can increase the risk profile of the portfolio as they impose financial, management and regulatory burdens on the entity.

Terminology

ESG fines and/or penalties: Sanctions resulting from an illegal act or non-compliant behavior, which directly harms the environment and/or stakeholders of the organization.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Open text box: The content of this open text box is not used for scoring, but will be included in the Benchmark Report. Participate may use this open text box to communicate on how the entity has resolved or intends to resolve the above issue(s).

Scoring

This indicator is not scored and is used for reporting purposes only.

*The information in PD7.1 and PD7.2 may be used as criteria for the recognition of 2018 Sector Leaders.

References

GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards, 2016: 205-3; 419-1

EPRA Best Practices Recommendations on Sustainability Reporting, 3rd version, September 2017: 2017: 5.8, H&S

Risks & EMS

This Aspect investigates the steps undertaken by organizations to stay abreast of sustainability risks related to bribery and corruption, climate change, environmental legislation, market risks and other material sustainability risks. This Aspect also describes the processes the entity uses to support ESG implementation via the use of an Environmental Management System (EMS).

Governance

2017 Indicator

1 point , IM, G

(refers to PD3 Policy & Disclosure Aspect)

Intent

This indicator examines specific actions taken to limit exposure to governance-related risks. It is linked to PD3 in Policy & Disclosure, and refers to the implementation of the policy that addresses risks from exposure to governance issues (as defined in PD3).

Terminology

Governance risks for employees: Examples can include, but are not limited to: bribery and corruption risks, insider trading, sharing of confidential information.

Investment due diligence process: A systematic process to collect and interpret information about a prospective investment.

Regular follow-ups: Training offered at least once a year to employees, starting from their second year of employment.

Employee training on governance risks: Employee training ensures that employees understand and adhere to the laws, regulations and internal corporate policies that apply to their daily roles is essential to ensuring that compliance regulations are met in the workplace.

Whistle-blower mechanism: A process that offers protection for individuals that want to reveal illegal, unethical or dangerous practices. An efficient whistle-blower mechanism prescribes clear procedures and channels to facilitate the reporting of wrongdoing and corruption, defines the protected disclosures, outlines the remedies and sanctions for retaliation.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Evidence: Document upload or document name and date. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. In the absence of an upload, providing the document name AND date of publication is mandatory, and you may be asked to disclose the document to GRESB as part of the validation process.

The provided evidence should cover the following elements:

  1. The existence of selected systems and procedures;
  2. Proof of implementation into the organization’s operations.

Examples of supporting evidence may include an excerpt from the organization’s policy manual, example of formal update sent by the organization’s general counsel, due diligence checklists, employee training slides, or a signed letter of verification from a third party.

A sign-off from employee on the Code of Conduct is not considered valid evidence for formal employee training.

Other: State the other system or procedure in place. It is possible to report multiple other answers.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at organization level.

Scoring

Points are awarded to each selected checkbox option and are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this question.

The reported answer options are validated based on the provided evidence, and points are contingent upon validity of the supporting evidence.

References

OECD Cleangovbiz, “Whistleblower protection: encouraging reporting”, 2012

2 points , IM, G

Intent

This indicator is intended to describe the variables included the entity’s governance and/or social risk assessments. Risk assessments refer to the identification and quantification of processes, systems and/or scenarios that could potentially cause harm to the entity and its underlying investors. It is important that organizations monitor their exposure to governance-related risks, as these can negatively impact reputation and expose the entity to civil and criminal penalties.

RO2 asks whether certain governance and/or social issues are assessed in a risk assessment by the entity, which is different from social and governance policies (PD2 and PD3).

Terminology

Bribery: The offering, giving, receiving or soliciting an item of value to influence the actions of an official or other person in charge of a public or legal fiduciary duty.

Corruption: Abuse of entrusted power for private gain.

Child labor: Work that children should not be doing because they are too young, or, if they have reached the minimum age, because it is dangerous or otherwise unsuitable for them.

Diversity: Similarities and differences among employees in terms of age, cultural background, physical abilities and disabilities, race, religion, sex, and sexual orientation.

Equal opportunity: The right to be treated without discrimination, including, but not limited to, on the grounds of one‘s sex, race, or age.

Executive compensation: The financial payments and non-monetary benefits provided to high-level management in exchange for their work on behalf of an organization.

Forced or compulsory labor: All work or service which is expected from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily.

Labor-management relationships: Set of principles and procedures governing the relationship between management and the labor force.

Risk assessment: Careful examination of the factors that could potentially adversely impact the value or longevity of a real estate asset. The results of the assessment assist in identifying measures that have to be implemented in order to prevent and mitigate the risks.

Shareholder rights: Assessing the potential risk of breaking or working against the entity’s contractual shareholder rights. Shareholder rights are defined in the company’s charter and bylaws.

Worker rights: Fundamental principles and rights at work, covering issues such as freedom of association, right to collective bargaining, the elimination of forced or compulsory labor, the abolition of child labor and the elimination of discrimination with respect to employment and occupation.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Evidence: Document upload or document name and date. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. In the absence of an upload, providing the document name AND date of publication is mandatory, and you may be asked to disclose the document to GRESB as part of the validation process.

The provided evidence should cover the following elements:

  1. Risk exposure - Evidence of the methodology used to identify risks. A good example would be a risk register, or matrix ranking the materiality of each risk.
  2. Evidence should explain the governance risk assessments as well as the response to mitigate the outcomes of the assessments. Examples of responses to mitigate outcomes can include the development of policies
  3. Applicability level - The parties included in the risk assessment. Examples can include, but are not limited to: individual parts of the business or business units, employees, business partners, suppliers, contractors and sub-contractors and other third parties.

Examples of supporting evidence may include an excerpt from the organization’s policy manual, example of formal update sent by the organization’s general counsel, or a signed letter of verification from a third party.

Other: State the other governance issue.

It is possible to report multiple other answers.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded to each selected checkbox option and are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this question.

The reported answer options are validated based on the provided evidence, and points are contingent upon validity of the supporting evidence.

References

RobecoSAM Corporate Sustainability Assessment 2017: 5.2.3, Human rights-assessment

Environmental & Social

2017 Indicator

2 points , IM, E

Indicator aligned with PRI Reporting Frameworkd 2018, Direct Property, PR 04

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to identify if the entity performs asset-level environmental and/or social assessments as a standard part of the due diligence process for new acquisitions.

Risk assessments help to reduce exposure to long-term sustainability risks. Integration of sustainability risk assessments into the acquisition process demonstrate a commitment to ESG management, a focus on mitigating risks that might impact returns, and a forward-looking approach to the development of the portfolio.

Terminology

Building safety and materials: Assessment to identify potential hazards resulting, for example, from vulnerabilities caused by the construction materials used, major structural flaws or the presence of asbestos.

Climate change adaptation: Preparation for long-term change in climatic conditions or climate related events. Example of climate change adaptation measures can include, but are not limited to: building flood defenses, xeriscaping and using tree species resistant to storms and fires, adapting building codes to extreme weather events.

Contamination: Land and groundwater pollution which may require action to reduce risk to people or the environment. As an example, contamination can be assessed through a Phase I or II Environmental Site Assessment.

Due diligence process: The process through which a potential acquirer evaluates a target asset for an acquisition, contributing to well-informed investment decision-making.

Energy efficiency: Refers to products or systems using less energy to provide the same consumer benefit.

Energy supply: Availability of conventional power (generated by the combustion of fuels: coal, natural gas, oil) or renewable energy (e.g. sun, wind, water, organic plant and waste material).

Environmental risks: Impact on living and non-living natural systems, including land, air, water and ecosystems. This includes, but is not limited to biodiversity, transport and product and servicerelated impacts, as well as environmental compliance and expenditures.

GHG emissions: GHGs refers to the seven gases listed in the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard: carbon dioxide (CO2); methane (CH4); nitrous oxide (N2O); hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs); perfluorocarbons (PFCs); nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6).

Health and well-being: “Health is a complete state of physical, mental and social well-being, not merely the absence of disease or infirmity”(WHO). Health & well-being is impacted by genetics and individual behavior as well as environmental conditions. Particularly relevant to GRESB stakeholders are the social determinants of health, which are the “conditions in which people are born, grow, work, live and age, and the wider set of forces and systems shaping the conditions of daily life.” These are the conditions that enable or discourage healthy living. This could include issues such as physical activity, healthy eating, equitable workplaces, maternity and paternity leave, access to healthcare, reduction in toxic exposures, etc.

A risk assessment on health and well-being might address only one or both of these topics, and could include assessments of risks associated with employees, customers, surrounding communities or all of the above.

Indoor environmental quality: Refers to the conditions inside the building. It includes air quality, access to daylight and views, pleasant acoustic conditions and occupant control over lighting and thermal comfort. It may also include the functional aspects of space such as whether the layout provides easy access to tools and people when needed, and whether there is sufficient space for occupants.

Natural hazards: Naturally occurring hazards, including but not limited to flooding, drought, hail storms, earthquakes and fire (including wildfire).

Regulatory risks: Examples include, but are not limited to: mandatory energy/carbon disclosure schemes, changes in taxes e.g. carbon tax, extreme volatility in energy prices due to regulation, zoning.

Resilience: Preparedness of the built environment towards existing and future climate changes (i.e., the ability to absorb disturbances such as increased precipitation or flooding while maintaining its structure). This can be achieved by management policies, informational technologies, educating tenant, community, suppliers and physical measures at the asset level.

Risk assessment: Careful examination of the factors that could potentially adversely impact the value or longevity of a real estate asset. The results of the assessment assist in identifying measures that have to be implemented in order to prevent and mitigate the risks.

Socio-economic risks: Impact on social well-being, livelihoods and prosperity of local communities and individuals. Examples include: economic/political instability, vulnerability to pandemics and epidemics, crime and vandalism, and the displacement of people.

Transportation risks: Risks associated with transportation around the location of a building in relation to pedestrian, bicycle and mass-transit networks, in context of the existing infrastructure and amenities in the surrounding area.

Water efficiency: Refers to the conservative use of water resources through water-saving technologies to reduce consumption.

Water supply: Provision of surface water, groundwater, rainwater collected directly or stored by the organization, waste water from another organization, municipal water supplies or other water utilities, usually via a system of pumps and pipes.

Waste management: Issues associated with hazardous and non-hazardous waste generation, reuse, recycling, composting, recovery, incineration, landfill and on-site storage.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Evidence: Document upload is mandatory for this indicator. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question.

The provided evidence should cover the following elements:

  1. Specific environmental and/or social risk assessment issues addressed in the entity’s due diligence process;
  2. Proof of standard implementation into the entity’s acquisitions process.

Examples of valid evidence may include: (1) a standard risk assessment template document that was completed by the entity during the acquisitions process, (2) proof of a risk assessment being performed during the reporting period or (3) standard requirements for performing environmental and/or social risk assessments within the entity’s acquisition process protocol.

Other: State the other risk factor assessed.

It is possible to report multiple other answers.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded to each selected checkbox option and are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this question.

The reported answer options are validated based on the provided evidence, and points are contingent upon validity of the supporting evidence.

References

World Economic Forum, Global Risks, 2014 Environment Agency, Groundwater protection: Principles and practice, 2013

World Health Organization

SASB-Real Estate Owners, Developers & Investment Trusts (March 2016): IF0402-05; IF0402-09; IF0402-14

RobecoSAM Corporate Sustainability Assessment 2017: 3.2.2 Risk Correlation

Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures June 2017: Strategy A&B; Risk Management A&B

Environmental Management Systems

2017 Indicator

3 points , MP, G

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to assess the entity’s use of a systematic process to manage environmental impacts, risks and opportunities.

An Environmental Management System (EMS) is an internal framework that structures all procedures, projects and tactics into a cohesive program which aligns the sustainability efforts at entity or organization level. An EMS can assist organizations in managing and improving their environmental performance, complying with environmental laws and regulations, identifying financial savings through more efficient operating practices, and improving the standing of the business with staff, client companies, partner organizations and other stakeholders.

Use of an aligned or certified EMS framework provides assurance to both the business and external stakeholders that environmental impacts are measured and acted upon using a recognized and proven methodology. Periodic reviews of the EMS ensure its continuing suitability and effectiveness for the organization.

Terminology

Alignment: To agree and match with a recognized sustainability standard (either voluntary or mandatory).

Certified: Third-party recognition of meeting the requirements of a recognized standard.

Environmental Management System (EMS): A framework for managing an organization’s environmental impact based on its sustainability and related objectives. An EMS provides a practical framework for the assessment of environmental impacts, establishment of impact reduction targets, and the development of plans to achieve targeted reductions. An EMS enables an organization to take a structured approach to planning and implementing environmental protection measures.

An effective EMS is analogous to a financial management system that monitors expenditure and income to support analysis of financial performance. An EMS can cover a wide range of environmental topics, including, but not limited to: energy, GHG emissions, water, waste, transportation, climate change, resilience, risks, and materials. It can also refer to a wide variety of internal procedures, targets, persons responsible for implementing these procedures and working towards achieving the organization’s objectives. In summary, an EMS is used to formalize the strategic approach of the organization towards sustainability. It outlines the structure used to monitor and manage environmental topics.

An important distinction needs to be made between an EMS and an EnMS. Unlike an EMS, an EnMS (Energy Management System) only covers energy, energy efficiency and conservation, energy management and performance. The most commonly used standard for implementing an EnMS is ISO 50001. An EnMS does not qualify as a valid answer for the purposes of this indicator.

ISO 14001 Alignment: ISO 14001 defines a complete EMS to include four stages:

  1. Plan
    • Define the scope of the organization’s environmental policy (the most important areas of impact and relationship with primary stakeholders)
    • Define and maintain environmental objectives and targets (short-term and long-term)
    • Define the materiality matrix, based on priority sustainability issues
    • Identify relevant legal requirements and environmental legislation
    • Define emergency procedures
  2. Do
    • Ensure the implementation of the action plan established in stage one and the maintenance of the systems in place
    • Assign responsibility for the overall development and maintenance of the system
    • Offer training and/or support to the people in charge to ensure conformity with the policy
  3. Check
    • Establish appropriate communication channels with the people in charge
    • Monitor and document progress
    • Ensure compliance with applicable legal requirements
    • Identify and correct non-conformity
  4. Act
    • Schedule periodic management reviews on results and next steps
    • Evaluate performance against targets
    • Determine corrective and preventative actions
    • Provide feedback and suggestions for improvement
    • Prepare and/or update procedures and supporting documentation

The process above provides an example of an EMS outline with the stages and elements included. The EMS, and therefore the supporting evidence, does not necessarily have to be structured according the ISO recommendations, nor does it have to include all suggested elements for each stage. While adherence to ISO 14001 is not required, the reported EMS must support the purpose identified in ISO 14001 and provide comparable functionality.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Complete the additional information requested, and provide supporting evidence.

Aligned: Report the recognized standard used for the alignment of the EMS.

Externally certified: Provide the name of the organization responsible for certifying the EMS using a recognized standard, as well as the name of the recognized standard applied.

GRESB requires certification to be undertaken by a third party and not by the participant. EMS certification may only be obtained for one (or more) of the main standards/schemes, for example ISO14001.

Note that aligning or certifying individual sections of the EMS does not comply with the requirements of this indicator and does not constitute a valid answer.

Evidence: Document upload is mandatory for this indicator. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question.

To qualify as valid, the evidence provided must include:

  1. A high level outline or diagram of the implemented EMS.
  2. The applicability of the EMS at the entity level.
  3. The stages, elements and or processes currently covered by the EMS.
  4. Evidence of implementation of the EMS into the entity or organization’s operations.

A fully accepted evidence must cover at least one elements from each of the four Plan - Do - Act - Check stages.

Energy Management Systems (EnMS): An EnMS only covers energy issues and is not considered an EMS, and as such not accepted as evidence for this indicator.

If the EMS is aligned with a standard, the evidence must include the name the standard used for alignment and define the degree of alignment with the standard. Elements of the EMS that align with the standard can be summarized, called out, highlighted, or shown in a diagram.

If the EMS is externally certified by and independent third party, the evidence should include signed proof of the certification according to the standard, which must be named within the evidence, as well as contact information of the independent third party involved and the date of the most recent certification.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity and/or organization level.

Scoring

Points are awarded based on (1) the existence of an EMS, (2) alignment or external certification with valid name of the organization that certified the EMS, if applicable. Points are contingent upon validity of the supporting evidence.

Full points will be awarded only if the evidence covers at least one element from each of the four stages outlined above, or is considered to comprehensively cover comparable stages, with proof of implementation.

References

LEED BD+C: Core and Shell, v4, Sustainable Sites; Water efficiency; Energy & Atmosphere; Material & resources; and Indoor Environmental Quality BREEAM In-Use International, Asset Performance; and Building Management

ISO 14001:2015 Environmental management systems – Requirements with guidance for use

ISO 14004:2015 Environmental management systems – general guidelines on principles, systems and support techniques

Stakeholder Engagement

This Aspect focuses on engagement with employees, tenants, direct third-party suppliers and the community. Improving the sustainability performance of a real estate portfolio requires dedicated resources, a commitment from senior management and tools for measurement/management of resource consumption. It also requires the cooperation of other stakeholders, including tenants, suppliers, a participant’s workforce and the local community. The Aspect identifies actions taken to engage with those stakeholders and to characterize the nature of the engagement.

Employees

Employees are key stakeholders in any business. Organizations can make use of sustainability reporting metrics to boost employee engagement, motivation, recruitment and retention of talent, work-life balance, teamwork and leadership development. Employee engagement may also contribute to the successful implementation of sustainability best practices across the organization. Furthermore, proper understanding of workplace-related ESG issues, and how these issues are reported, will help the organization with its branding as an employer.

Note: There are situations where the entity benefits from services performed by employees of an investment manager under an exclusive investment management agreement. The individuals are wholly responsible for investment and portfolio management (including sustainability) of the participating entity's property assets, and has wide discretionary powers for day to day management of these investments (which include supervisory management powers over third party property managers). When these situations occur, you can refer to the employees of the investment manager as the employees of the reporting entity.

Suppliers

These indicators have the purpose of comparing the entity’s management of ESG-related issues in its material and service supply chain. Negative supply chain-related ESG issues can pose a reputational risk, and can also put purchasing and contracting strategies at risk. Property companies and fund managers are in a strong position to influence the behavior of external property/asset managers and/or other external suppliers with regard to ESG issues.

Employees

2017 Indicator

2 points , IM, S

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to examine the types and content of training received by employees responsible for this entity. A more skilled and aware workforce enhances the organization’s human capital and may help to improve employee satisfaction. Both elements contribute to improved business performance.

Terminology

Community health and well-being: Training related to the promotion of stakeholder health and well-being in surrounding neighborhoods.

Community safety: Training related to the prevention of harm to stakeholder communities in surrounding neighborhoods.

Community social and economic impacts: Training related to the social and economic dimensions of stakeholder communities in surrounding neighborhoods.

Contamination: Land and groundwater pollution which may require action to reduce risk to people or the environment. As an example, contamination can be assessed through a Phase I or II Environmental Site Assessment.

Employee(s): Either the entity’s employees or the organization’s employees whose primary responsibilities include the operation or support of the entity.

Environmental issues: The impact on living and non-living natural systems, including land, air, water and ecosystems. This includes, but is not limited to, biodiversity, transport and product and service-related impacts, as well as environmental compliance and expenditures.

Energy efficiency: Refers to products or systems using less energy to provide the same consumer benefit.

GHG emissions: GHGs refers to the seven gases listed in the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard: carbon dioxide (CO2); methane (CH4); nitrous oxide (N2O); hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs); perfluorocarbons (PFCs); nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6).

Natural hazards: Naturally occurring hazards, including but not limited to flooding, drought, hail storms, earthquakes and fire (including wildfire).

Professional training: Training related to day-to-day operations, health and safety, specialization career development courses, or related/similar topics. Training can be delivered in person, online or in other formats.

Regulatory standards: Training on (mandatory) energy/carbon disclosure schemes or other environment-related regulatory standards, at either local or global level.

Regular training: Occurs at least once every two years.

Social issues: Concerns the impacts the organization has on the social systems within which it operates.

Sustainability-specific training: Training related to environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues.

Waste management: Issues associated with hazardous and non-hazardous waste generation, reuse, recycling, composting, recovery, incineration, landfill and on-site storage.

Water efficiency: Refers to the conservative use of water resources through water-saving technologies to reduce consumption.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Percentage of employees covered: The percentage of employees covered based on headcount for employees responsible for the entity (see example). If the number of employees responsible for the entity changed during the reporting period, calculate the percentage based on the average number.

Training topics: Select the applicable training topics included in the training series during the reporting year or the year prior to that.

Other: State the environmental or social training topic(s). It is possible to report multiple other answers.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at organization level.

Examples

Both percentages should be calculated based on the following formulas:

    Number of employees receiving training / Total number of employees x 100%

    Number of employees receiving sustainability specific training / Total number of employees x 100%

Scoring

Points are awarded based on (1) the type of trainings and (2) percentage of employees who received training. The training topics are not scored and are used for reporting purposes only.

References

EPRA Best Practices Recommendations on Sustainability Reporting, 3rd version, September 2017: 5.3, Employee Training and development

RobecoSAM Corporate Sustainability Assessment 2017: 3.3.2, Coverage

1.5 points , IM, S

Intent

This indicator is intended to show action taken to understand employee satisfaction. Employee satisfaction surveys help organizations understand critical issues within the business, engage with their staff and increase employee satisfaction, which may contribute to improving retention rates and overall productivity.

Using widely applied employee satisfaction surveys should be translated into easily interpretable metrics can help analyze and compare the outcomes, despite the many variations between firms.

Terminology

Employee(s): Either the entity’s employees or the organization’s employees whose primary responsibilities include the operation or support of the entity.

Employee satisfaction survey: Survey measuring overall and work-specific employee satisfaction at the individual and organizational levels. The survey should directly address employee concerns and include the opportunity to provide recommendations for improvement.

Net promoter score: The Net Promoter Score ® (NPS) is a customer loyalty metric developed by Bain & Company. It divides customers, tenants or employees into three segments: passives, detractors and promoters. The NPS is the percentage of promoters minus the percentage detractors.

Overall satisfaction score: An overarching metric in a satisfaction survey, with no prescribed scale, that measures how happy an employee or tenant is with the organization, lease, and/or services provided.

Quantitative metric: Any measure or parameter in employee satisfaction that can be represented numerically.

Survey response rate: The proportion of submitted surveys as a percentage of the total number of employees that received a request to complete a survey.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Percentage of employees covered: The percentage of employees covered based on headcount for employees responsible for the entity (see example). If the number of employees responsible for the entity changed during the reporting period, calculate the percentage based on the average number.

Survey response rate: Report the proportion of employees that received and completed the survey, compared to the total number of employees that have received the survey expressed as a percentage (see example).

Name of the organization: Provide the full name of the organization. You may be asked for additional information about the organization(s). It is possible to report on multiple organizations.

Evidence: Document upload or document name and date. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. In the absence of an upload, providing the document name AND date of publication is mandatory, and you may be asked to disclose the document to GRESB as part of the validation process.

The evidence should indicate that survey was conducted. It can be a sample survey or survey results reports with aggregated feedback.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at organization level.

Examples

Percentage of employees covered = Number of employees receiving the satisfaction survey / Total number of employees x 100%

Survey response rate = Number of individual surveys submitted / Number of employees receiving the satisfaction survey x 100%

Scoring

Points are awarded based on (1) selected answer options, and (2) percentage of employees covered. The survey response rate and the quantitative metrics sub-indicator are not scored.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator. Reporting multiple names of organizations will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

The reported answer options are validated based on the provided evidence, and points are contingent upon validity of the supporting evidence.

References

GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards, 2016: 102-43, Approach to stakeholder engagement

Bain & Company, Introducing: The Net Promoter System®

1 point , IM, S

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to evaluate a firm’s response to the outcomes of an employee satisfaction survey. Proactive responses demonstrate commitment to the employee engagement process and to developing, maintaining and enhancing employee satisfaction.

Terminology

Action Plan: A detailed plan outlining actions needed to enhance tenant satisfaction. An action plan has three major elements (1) Specific tasks: what will be done and by whom; (2) Time horizon: when will it be done; (3) Resource allocation: what specific funds are available for specific activities.

Employee(s): Either the entity’s employees or the organization’s employees whose primary responsibilities include the operation or support of the entity.

Focus groups: Working groups established to, in this context, focus on improving employee satisfaction.

Senior Management Team: A team of individuals who have the day-to-day responsibility of managing the entity/organization. Senior management are sometimes referred to, within corporations, as executive management, executive leadership team, top management, upper management, higher management, or simply seniors.

Separate teams/departments: Representatives from different departments and disciplines within the organization.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Other: State measures/activities that were part of the program. It is possible to report multiple other answers.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at organization level.

Scoring

Points are awarded to each selected checkbox option and are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this question.

1 point , IM, S

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to evaluate whether the organization has the capacity to understand the health & well-being needs of its employees, on aggregate. A formal mechanism of understanding employee needs allows the organization to more effectively take action to promote employee health & well-being.

Terminology

Employee(s): Either the entity’s employees or the organization’s employees whose primary responsibilities include the operation or support of the entity.

Employee surveys on health and well-being: Written documents containing questions covering health and well being indicators or physical inspections on health and well-being issues. Topics covered can include, but are not limited to: personal health and well being, medical assistance at the workplace and housekeeping.

Physical and/or mental health checks: Physical and/or mental assessments of employees by a medical professional. Examples can include, but are not limited to: eye checks, cholesterol and blood pressure monitoring.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Percentage of employees: The percentage of employees offered to do a check or participate in a survey, etc.

Other: State the type of health and well-being check. It is possible to report multiple other answers.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at organization level.

Scoring

Points are awarded based on (1) selected health and well-being options and (2) average percentage of employees.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

References

GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards, 2016: 403-2

RobecoSAM Corporate Sustainability Assessment, 2017: 3.5.2, Risk Culture

0.5 points , IM, S

Intent

This indicator is intended to describe metrics collected by the organization to understand health, safety and productivity of employees responsible for this entity. Monitoring and reporting on occupational health and safety is an indicator of good management and allows for a continuous understanding of organizational health and safety issues. Maintaining records of the number of incidents among employees over time helps to analyze incidents and to identify areas where improvements are necessary.

Terminology

Absentee rate: A measure of absenteeism expressed as a percentage of total days scheduled to be worked by the workforce during the reporting period.

Employee(s): Either the entity’s employees or the organization’s employees whose primary responsibilities include the operation or support of the entity.

Injury rate: A measure of the total number of instances of being injured, (including occupational diseases and occupational disabilities, and fatalities) arising from operations expressed as a percentage of total number of employees.

Lost day rate: A measure of the impact of occupational accidents and diseases as reflected in time off work by the affected workers. It is expressed by comparing the total workdays lost due to occupational injury to the total number of hours scheduled to be worked by the workforce during the reporting period.

Reporting on health and safety indicators: Records of employee health and safety.

Workstation checks: Assessment of employee workstations (immediate working environment including desks, IT and other office equipment) performed to monitor compliance with health and safety requirements. The checks can either be performed internally or by independent third parties.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Open text box: It is mandatory to use the open text box to explain the applied calculation method/formula and monitoring scope of each of the selected metrics. The calculations should cover events arising from on-site operations, building maintenance and employees commuting to and from their workplace. Response provided in this open text-box used for scoring.

Construction works related metrics: Injuries and fatalities (including third-party workers, visitors, members of the public) that occur during construction or major renovation projects should be reported in the New Construction & Major Renovations Aspect (NC 12.2).

Other metrics: State the other indicator monitored. It is possible to report multiple other answers. Other indicators can include the occupational disease rate (ODR), near miss rate, presenteeism rate, and fatalities, but should not include answers provided in the New Construction & Major Renovations section (NC 12.2).

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at organization level.

Scoring

Points are awarded based on the number of health-related indicators monitored and/or tracked, contingent upon the validity of the explanation of the applied calculation method/formula provided in the open text box.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator.

References

RobecoSAM Corporate Sustainability Assessment, 2017: 3.5.2, Risk Culture

GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards, 2016: 403-2

EPRA Best Practices Recommendations on Sustainability Reporting, 3rd version, September 2017: 5.6 H&S-Employee Health and Safety

Suppliers

2017 Indicator

3 points , MP, G

Indicator aligned with PRI Reporting Frameworkd 2018, Direct Property, PR 07

This Indicator is intended to describe the management practices and requirements the entity uses to manage supply chain risks. The procurement process is an effective way to integrate the organization’s sustainability-specific requirements into their supply chain. This indicator applies to existing and new contracts.

Terminology

Business Ethics: Basic moral and legal principles used to address issues such as corporate governance, insider trading, bribery, discrimination, corporate social responsibility and fiduciary responsibilities.

Environmental process standards: Minimum standards required during the procurement process in relation to environmental processes, such as requirements for disposal of waste generated by contractors.

Environmental product standards: Minimum standards required during the procurement process in relation to environmental products, such as requiring a certain percentage of products to be locally sourced or contain recycled content.

ESG-specific requirements for sub-contractors: Refers to any ESG-related requirements that the company or fund has included in its contracts with its sub-contractors, including specification and use of sustainable materials, systems, processes and operating practices.

External contractors: Organizations or persons working on-site or off-site on behalf of an organization with a relationship determined by a contract. A contractor may hire their own staff directly or hire sub-contractors or independent contractors.

External property/asset managers: Organizations or persons to which participants outsource some or all of their property and asset management functions.

External suppliers: Organizations or persons that provide a product or service used in the supply chain during the reporting period.

Human health-based product standards: Minimum standards for the health-related attributes of products, such as lists of prohibited chemicals.

Human rights: Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever their nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language or any other status.

Occupational safety (for employees):Occupational safety focuses on the primary prevention of hazards within workplace. This includes the reduction of risk factors at the workplace leading to cancers, accidents, musculoskeletal diseases, respiratory diseases, hearing loss, circulatory diseases, stress related disorders and communicable diseases and others.

Sustainable procurement: Encourage, facilitate or require the reduction of consumption of goods within the building or premises and/or the sourcing of sustainable or ethical goods. Clauses can relate to reduction of paper consumption, supply of biodegradable materials, use of recycled paper, building materials, etc.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Other: State the other party to whom the requirements apply and/or the other topic included in requirements. “Tenants” will not be considered a valid other answer. It is possible to report multiple other answers for both the above sub-options.

Evidence: Document upload is mandatory for this indicator. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question.

Evidence should support at least one element of the ESG procurement requirements applying to each stakeholder group selected. Evidence examples may include but are not limited to, Communication or redacted documentation/contract enforcing ESG procurement.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded to each selected party and are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field will be validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator.

Points are contingent upon validity of the supporting evidence.

References

GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards, 2016: 204-1; 308, Supplier environmental assessment; GRI 414, Supplier social Assessment

RobecoSAM Corporate Sustainability Assessment, 2017: 3.5.2 Risk Exposure

Not scored , MP, G

Indicator aligned with PRI Reporting Frameworkd 2018, Direct Property, PR 07

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to assess whether the reporting entity effectively engage with its supply chains in order to deliver sustainable goals communicated in indicator SE4.1. A sustainable organization should be conscious of decisions and activities undertaken by its supply chains. A fair and inclusive process based on engaging suppliers should be developed to demonstrate the entity’s willingness to commit to ESG outside its own boundaries.

Terminology

Sustainable procurement: Encourage, facilitate or require the reduction of consumption of goods within the building or premises and/or the sourcing of sustainable or ethical goods. Clauses can relate to reduction of paper consumption, supply of biodegradable materials, use of recycled paper, building materials, etc.

Requirements

Select yes, no or not applicable. If yes, describe the process.

Open text box: Explain the engagement process carried out by the reporting entity with regards to the delivery of sustainable procurement goals. In order to be as effective as possible the process described should cover or respect the following criteria:

  1. Materiality: Include an estimation of the proportion of the reporting entity’s revenue spent through its supply chains.
  2. Clear purpose of the engagement: The text must explain how the entity ensures the clarity of its engagement with suppliers.
  3. Supplier’s interest: The text should include a description around the entity’s identification of supplier’s interests.
  4. Importance of interest:: Describe how the importance of suppliers’ interests is be respected throughout the engagement process.
  5. Necessary information: Describe how the reporting entity ensures that its suppliers benefit from the necessary information to base their decisions on.
  6. Balanced communication: Provide explanation around the entity’s ability to keep a two-way dialogue throughout its engagement with suppliers.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

This indicator is not scored and is used for reporting purposes only.

References

ISO 20400, 2017: Sustainable Procurement

New Construction & Major Renovations

Intent and Overview

This Aspect addresses the entity’s efforts to address ESG-issues during the design, construction, and renovation of buildings. The built environment has a significant impact on ecological systems as well as the health, safety and welfare of communities. In addition, construction activities consume resources such as water and natural materials, while the construction process generates large quantities of waste. Integrating sustainability into construction activities can help mitigate this negative impact, and at the same time improve the environmental efficiency of buildings in the operational phase. By implementing sustainable best practices in construction activities, organizations can also positively impact local communities.

Before you start with this Aspect, note that:

This section should only be completed if the entity is involved in development of new construction (building design, site selection and/or construction) and/or major renovation projects, and had on-going projects or completed projects during the reporting period.

Major renovations: Alterations that affect more than 50 percent of the total building floor area or cause relocation of more than 50 percent of regular building occupants. Major Renovation projects refer to buildings that were under construction at any time during the reporting period.

New construction: Includes all activities to obtain or change building or land use permissions and financing. Includes construction work for the project with the intention of enhancing the property’s value. Development of new buildings and additions to existing buildings that affect usable space can be treated as new constructions and reported in RC-NC1. New Construction projects refer to buildings that were under construction at any time during the reporting period.

Reporting in this Aspect should be based on the new development and major renovations projects reported in RC-NC1 and RC-NC2.

Sustainability Requirements

2017 Indicator

1 point , MP, G

Intent

This indicator is intended to describe the entity’s sustainability strategy for new construction and major renovation projects. A well-defined sustainability strategy for new construction and major renovation projects helps organizations to identify material issues and focus areas during the different phases of these projects.

Terminology

Biodiversity and habitat: Issues related to wildlife, endangered species, ecosystem services, habitat management, and relevant topics. Biodiversity refers to the variety of all plant and animal species. Habitat refers to the natural environment in which these plant and animal species live and function.

Building safety: Environmental issues with the potential to create or exacerbate risks to human safety, such as structural failure.

Climate change adaptation: Preparation for long-term change in climatic conditions or climate related events. Example of climate change adaptation measures can include, but are not limited to: building flood defenses, xeriscaping and using tree species resistant to storms and fires, adapting building codes to extreme weather events.

Energy consumption/management: Fuel consumption or management of energy from renewable and non-renewable sources.

Environmental attributes of building materials: Life-cycle environmental characteristics of the building materials, such as embodied carbon or water

GHG emissions/management: GHG management refers to the management of GHG emissions. GHGs refers to the seven gases listed in the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard: carbon dioxide (CO2); methane (CH4); nitrous oxide (N2O); hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs); perfluorocarbons (PFCs); nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6).

Health and well-being: “Health is a complete state of physical, mental and social well-being, not merely the absence of disease or infirmity”(WHO). Health & well-being is impacted by genetics and individual behavior as well as environmental conditions. Particularly relevant to GRESB stakeholders are the social determinants of health, which are the “conditions in which people are born, grow, work, live and age, and the wider set of forces and systems shaping the conditions of daily life.” These are the conditions that enable or discourage healthy living. This could include issues such as physical activity, healthy eating, equitable workplaces, maternity and paternity leave, access to healthcare, reduction in toxic exposures, etc.

Location and transportation: Location of a building in relation to pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit networks, and existing infrastructure and amenities in the surrounding area.

Resilience: Preparedness of the built environment towards existing and future climate changes (i.e., the ability to absorb disturbances such as increased precipitation or flooding while maintaining its structure). This can be achieved by management policies, informational technologies, educating tenant, community, suppliers and physical measures at the asset level.

Supply chain: Sequence of activities or parties that provide products or services to the entity.

Sustainability strategy: Strategy which (1) sets out the participant’s procedures and (2) sets the direction and guidance for an organization’s implementation of sustainability measures.

Water consumption/management: Planning, developing, distributing and managing the optimum use of water resources.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Other: State the sustainability/ESG element included in the strategy. It is possible to add multiple other answers.

Open text box: The content of this open text box is not used for scoring, but will be included in the Benchmark Report. Participate may use this open text box to communicate on

  1. Specific description of the strategy, objectives and approach;
  2. The Strategy should apply to the entity level and should address all the elements selected from the list;
  3. Scope of implementation (e.g., all projects, some projects, select demonstrations).

Evidence: Document upload or hyperlink. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. If a hyperlink is provided, ensure that it is not outdated and the relevant page can be accessed within two steps.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded to each selected checkbox option and are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this question.

The reported answer options are validated based on the provided evidence, and points are contingent upon validity of the supporting evidence.

The public availability of the sustainability strategy is credited with 0.5 points.

References

LEED BD+C: New Construction v4, Sustainable Sites, Location and Transportation

3 points , MP, G

Intent

This indicator examines the entity’s approach to sustainable site selection. Sustainable site selection helps to conserve land and protect farmland and wildlife habitat. The site selection process should be based on structured, predefined methodologies that include limits on the development of inappropriate sites or projects with a negative impact on the immediate surroundings, and on the environment in general.

Terminology

Aquatic ecosystems: Ecosystems such as coastal and riparian areas, wetlands and deepwater habitats that provide critical ecosystem functions for aquatic organisms, other wildlife and people.

Farmland: Agricultural land, designated as such by a national, local, or intergovernmental authority (e.g., US Department of Agriculture, US Food and Agriculture Organization, Australian Department of Agriculture and Water Resources, French Ministry of Agriculture, Agrifood and Forestry).

Floodplain functions: A floodplain is an area of land adjacent to types of waterways and watercourses (e.g., a stream or a river) that experience flooding during periods of high discharge. It functions as water storage, protects habitat and benefits water quality.

Habitats for threatened and endangered species: Areas that contain habitat for plant and animal species identified as threatened or endangered by a national or intergovernmental authority (e.g., US Fish and Wildlife Service, Australian Department of Environment, EU Habitats Directive, European Red List of Threatened Species, and International Union for the Conservation of Nature).

Locate projects within existing developed areas: Locate projects in existing previously developed areas or areas of infill.

Multi-modal transit networks: Pedestrian, bicycle, and mass-transit networks.

Redevelop brownfield sites: Brownfield sites are areas of land or premises that have been previously used, but has subsequently become vacant, derelict or contaminated. Brownfield sites typically require preparatory regenerative work before any new development goes ahead, and can also be partly occupied.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

(1) site selection criteria in place (2) alignment with third-party guidelines and/or rating systems, (3) selection requirements.

Other: State the topic included in the site selection assessment.Criteria must be related to the site selection process for new construction projects. It is possible to add multiple other answers.

Third-party guidelines: Specify the applicable guidelines. Examples include, but are not limited to: Sustainable Design Guidelines, such as Port Authority of New York & New Jersey or individual companies. These are not rating systems and do not have provisions for certification. However, they can be used to inform project development and delivery.

Third-party rating system: Specify the applicable scheme(s)/sub-schemes(s). Examples include, but are not limited to: BREEAM International, New Construction; LEED v4, Building Design & Construction.

Evidence: Document upload or document name and date. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. In the absence of an upload, providing the document name AND date of publication is mandatory, and you may be asked to disclose the document to GRESB as part of the validation process.

If applicable, the evidence must provide information about alignment with third-party standards or rating systems.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded based on (1) selected answer options and validity of provided other answers, (2) validity of third party rating systems and/or guidelines or other alignment as well as (3) the validity of the evidence based on the requirements stated above.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator.

References

SITES v2 Rating System for Sustainable Land Design and Development

LEED BD+C: New Construction, v4, Sustainable Sites, and Location & Transportation

BREEAM International New Construction, 2013; and BREEAM Communities Manual, 2012

1.5 points , MP, G

Indicator aligned with PRI Reporting Frameworkd 2018, Direct Property, PR 09

Intent

Sustainable site development requirements help to minimize the negative direct and indirect impact of construction sites.

Terminology

Manage waste by diverting construction and demolition materials from disposal: Support a low waste construction site and minimize down-cycling of materials with actions such as diverting, reusing or recycling construction and demolition materials.

Manage waste by diverting reusable vegetation, rocks, and soil from disposal: Minimize the disposal of reusable vegetation, minerals, rocks and soil with actions such as using these materials as resources in site design or to produce compost.

Protect air quality during construction: Protect air quality and reduce pollution by using construction equipment that reduces emissions of localized air pollutants and greenhouse gasses.

Protect surface water and aquatic ecosystems by controlling and retaining construction pollutants: Protect receiving waters (including surface water, groundwater, and combined sewers or stormwater systems) with measures such as the creation and implementation of a stormwater pollution prevention plan or erosion and sedimentation control plan.

Protect and restore habitat and soils disturbed during construction and/or during previous development: Support healthy plants, biological communities, water storage, and infiltration with actions such as the protection of on-site habitat, restoring disturbed soils, and supporting off-site land conservation.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

(1) site design/development criteria (2) alignment of site design/development criteria.

Other: State the sustainable site design/development requirement. It is possible to add multiple other answers. Other answers include, but are not limited to “Reduce heat island effect”, “Reduce light effect”, “Manage storm water”, etc.

Third-party rating system: Specify the applicable scheme(s)/sub-schemes(s). Examples include, but are not limited to: BREEAM International, New Construction, LEED v4, Building Design & Construction.

Third-party guidelines: Specify the applicable guidelines.

Evidence: Document upload or document name and date. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. In the absence of an upload, providing the document name AND date of publication is mandatory, and you may be asked to disclose the document to GRESB as part of the validation process.

If applicable, the evidence must provide information about alignment with third-party standards or rating systems.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded based on (1) selected answer options and validity of provided other answers, (2) validity of third party rating systems and/or guidelines or other alignment as well as the validity of the evidence based on the requirements above.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator.

References

SITES v2 Rating System for Sustainable Land Design and Development

LEED BD+C: New Construction, v4, Sustainable Sites; and Materials & Resources

BREEAM International New Construction, 2013, 04 Management; and 11 Land Use; and BREEAM Communities Manual, 2012

Materials and Certifications

2017 Indicator

2.5 points , MP, E

Intent

This Indicator examines the entity’s strategy to understand and manage health and environmental risks associated with building material supply chains. Including environmental and health requirements in the selection of construction materials assists organizations with conserving resources, reducing waste and limiting the impact (including embodied carbon) of new buildings. It also mitigates health risks associated with the use of harmful materials.

Terminology

Environmental Product Declarations: Products and materials for which life-cycle information is publicly available and which have positive, sustainable, life-cycle impacts. An Environmental Product Declaration should conform to ISO 14025, 14040, 14044, EN 15804 or ISO 21931, or have publicly available, critically reviewed life-cycle assessment, confirming to ISO 14044.

Health and environmental information: Fully disclosed and publicly available information about the human health and environmental impacts or characteristics of the products or materials used. (e.g., MSD sheets)

Health Product Declarations: Products and materials for which the inventory of all ingredients used is publicly available, with a full disclosure of all known hazards and associated effects.

Locally extracted or recovered: Materials that are extracted, harvested or recovered within a specified distance from the construction site.

Low embodied carbon materials: Embodied carbon is the sum of all the carbon required to produce materials, considered as if that carbon was incorporated or embodied in the product itself. Also known as “low embodied energy materials.”

Rapidly renewable materials: Materials made from agricultural products that are typically harvested within a 10-year or shorter cycle, such as bamboo, wool, cotton insulation, agrifiber, linoleum, wheatboard, strawboard and cork.

Recycled content materials: Products made from pre-consumer and/or post-consumer material diverted from the waste stream.

Third-party certified wood-based materials and products: Certification that encourages responsible and sustainable forest management. Certification bodies include, but are not limited to:

  • Forest Stewardship Council (FSC);
  • Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC);
  • Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI).

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Other:

  1. Other types of health and environmental information: State the type of health and environmental information.
  2. Other: State the building product specification.

Types of third-party certification used: Specify the third-party certification.

Evidence: Document upload or document name and date. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. In the absence of an upload, providing the document name AND date of publication is mandatory, and you may be asked to disclose the document to GRESB as part of the validation process.

Depending on the selected answer options, the document upload can represent a:

  1. Copy of the entity’s formal policy with respect to environmental attributes and performance of building materials, including specific information about individual requirements (e.g., red list) AND/OR
  2. Copy of the entity’s policy with respect to health attributes and performance of building materials AND/OR
  3. Copy of specific requirements for disclosure of health and environmental attributes from suppliers (e.g., embodied carbon, etc.) AND/OR
  4. Copy of specific building product specifications or certificates AND
  5. Information about compliance procedures (e.g., reporting, audit, job site accountability).

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded based on (1) selected answer options and validity of provided other answers, (2) validity of third party rating systems and/or guidelines or other alignment as well as (3) the validity of the evidence based on the requirements stated above.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator.

References

LEED BD+C: New Construction, v4, Materials & Resources

BREEAM, International New Construction, 2013: 09 Materials

SCS Ecolabels, Recycled Content, V6-0 Standard

ISO 14021, Environmental labels and declarations

GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards, 2016: GRI 301; 301-1; 301-2; 301-3

2 points , IM, E

Intent

This indicator is focused on green building rating standards utilized as part of the construction or major renovation process. Green building standards provides a measure of the intrinsic quality of the asset and its design in order to meet environmental standards requirements. Building certifications provide external assurance on the sustainability performance of an asset.

Terminology

Green building rating standard: A rating system/certificate for real estate assets that uses a wide set of environmental criteria. Successful completion of the rating assessment typically results in the award of a certificate that records (a) the completion of the rating assessment process and (b) the level achieved.

Level of certification: The level achieved with successful completion of the rating scheme.

Requirements

Select year or no. If yes, also (1) select all applicable sub-options (2) select portfolio coverage and (3) specify:

  1. Green building standard: include all applicable green building rating systems AND/OR
  2. Green building certificates: include all applicable green building certificates AND/OR
  3. Level of certification: include all applicable rating systems and levels adopted as a standard by the entity.

Portfolio coverage: Portfolio coverage is calculated based on floor area. The numerator is the floor area of to which the selected answer option applies. The denominator is the total floor area of all NC&MR projects as reported in RC-NC1.1 and RC-NC2.1. Project with multiple standard requirements should only report once, using the green building certification scheme that is most stringent in the region in which the project is located. The total combined portfolio coverage cannot exceed 100%.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded based on (1) selected answer options (2) percentage portfolio coverage and (3) validity of reported green building rating systems and/or certificates.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator

5 points , IM, E

Intent

This indicator is focused on green building rating standards utilized as part of the construction or major renovation process. Green building standards provides a measure of the intrinsic quality of the asset and its design in order to meet environmental standards requirements. Building certifications provide external assurance on the sustainability performance of an asset.

Terminology

Green Building Certificate: Recognition that a project has received a green building rating. A certificate indicates the name and location of the project, version of the rating system, date of certification, and level of recognition.

Level of certification: The level achieved with successful completion of the rating scheme.

Number of certified assets: The number of assets within the total portfolio for which green building certificates were obtained for projects (a) that are complete and/or (b) were in progress at the end of the reporting period.

Scheme name: The name of the Green Building Certification scheme.

Sub-scheme name: A Green Building Certificate’s sub-category to a Scheme name used to certify a particular property type and/or to specify the type of building certificate (whether a Green Building Certificate is an Operational Green Building Certificate or a New Construction Green Building Certificate).

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Scheme name and sub-scheme name: Select from the dropdown list or add a new scheme name and a sub-scheme name (if applicable).

Only include green building certificates that were awarded before or during the reporting period. Participants may list pre- or interim- assessments conducted by the official certification authority, but this needs to be designated in the sub-scheme name. Unofficial forms of pre-certification are not valid.

Some green building certificates are valid for a limited period only – the certificate should be effective and official during the reporting period.

Level of certification: Report the level of certification. In the case multiple levels are applicable, report them separately, divided by a comma. (see below Examples)

Projects registered to obtain a green building certificate: Report projects that have registered with the certification body to obtain (but not yet achieved) a green building certificate by the end reporting period.

Projects that obtained a green building certificate: Report projects that have obtained a green building certificate by the end of reporting period

Portfolio coverage: Portfolio coverage is calculated based on floor area. The numerator is the floor area of to which the selected answer option applies. The denominator is the total floor area of all NC&MR projects as reported in RC-NC1.1 and RC-NC2.1. Projects with multiple standard requirements should only report once, using the green building certification scheme that is on the most stringent in the region in which the project is located. The total combined portfolio coverage cannot exceed 100%.

Only report certification for building design, development and structure.

Number of certified projects: The number should be smaller than or equal to the number of reported assets in either RC-NC1.1 or RC-NC2.1.

Scoring

Each reported certification is validated and given one out the following four validation statuses which determine a scoring weight for each coverage percentage:

  • Full Points: 1.0
  • Partial(+): 0.6
  • Partial(-): 0.3
  • No Points: 0

Each coverage percentage is multiplied by its associated weight and then summed up to give an overall coverage percentage. This coverage percentage is then benchmarked against other coverage percentages from new construction and major renovation portfolios.

Examples

Answer structure: BREEAM/New Construction (Interim), Very Good

  • Scheme name: BREEAM International
  • Sub-scheme name: New Construction (Interim)
  • Level of certification: Very good

Answer structure: LEED/New Construction (precertification), Gold

  • Scheme name: LEED
  • Sub-scheme name: New Construction (precertification)
  • Level of certification: Gold

References

EPRA Best Practices Recommendations on Sustainability Reporting, 3rd version, September 2017: Cert-Tot, CRE8

Energy Efficiency

2017 Indicator

3 points , MP, E

Intent

This Indicator is intended to describe the entity’s strategy to integrate energy efficiency measures throughout design and construction activities. Implementing energy efficiency measures in the design and construction of a building contributes to reducing the energy consumption of the building during the operational phase.

Terminology

Air conditioning: Refers to energy efficient air-conditioning units, such as those rated with a high energy efficiency rating, and secondary measures to promote efficiency, such as strategic location and integration into building functionality design.

Commissioning: Quality-orientated review and verification process during the design and construction phase, to ensure that the performance of facilities, systems and assemblies meet defined objectives during the operational phase.

Energy codes or standards: Energy requirements set in building codes and standards such as US Energy Efficiency standards and International Energy Conservation Code (2012).

Energy modeling: Refers to a virtual or computerized simulation of a building that can be used to estimate the energy use of a building and evaluate its energy efficiency.

Energy use analytics: Analysis of energy use to determine discrepancies between baseline and actual energy use. Energy use analytics help determine whether energy use targets are reached, and can highlight opportunities to improve energy efficiency.

Integrative design: A design process that considers and involves multiple aspects, stakeholders and functions, instead of addressing each separately, to align and achieve objectives.

Lighting: Energy efficient lighting refers to units such as those rated with a high-energy efficiency rating. Common energy efficient lighting includes: LEDs, CFLs and halogen incandescents. It also includes aspects such as sensors, timers, and the promotion of natural daylight, to reduce the amount of light energy consumed.

Occupant controls: Individual controls for heating, cooling and other building systems. They support individual comfort of building occupants, while reducing energy consumption. Occupant controls also enable occupants to respond rapidly to alleviate discomfort when it is experienced.

Operational energy efficiency monitoring: Monitoring of energy consumed during the operational phase of a building. The operational energy consumption of buildings leads to substantial environmental impact. Monitoring consumption is an important basis for reducing this impact.

Post-construction energy monitoring: Monitoring of energy consumption during the operational phase of the building, to identify that energy use objectives are being met.

Requirements for planning and design: Legislative requirements such as planning obligations, building codes and standards.

Space heating: Energy efficient space heating systems for internal spaces within a building. This includes energy efficient mechanical systems, and maximizing the maintenance of internal heating via insulation, seals and windows and doors

Sub-meter: A system that allows the measurement of utility use by an individual occupant within a multi-tenant property, such as individual electricity meters.

Ventilation: The process of supplying and removing air through an indoor space. Energy efficient ventilation refers to the use of efficient mechanical or natural ventilation systems.

Water heating: Energy efficient water heating systems such as those with a high-energy efficiency rating, including those which are demand-based, that do not lose energy on stand-by heating. Also includes efficient hot water distribution systems to reduce energy losses throughout the building.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Other:

  1. Requirements for planning and design: Describe the entity’s requirement for planning and design. Energy efficiency measures: State the energy efficiency measure.
  2. Performance verification: Describe the entity’s actions to verify delivered performance.
It is possible to add multiple other answers.

Post-construction monitoring: If the entity has requirements on post-construction performance monitoring, please specify the required number of years. If the entity monitors performance for an infinite period, please enter “100”.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded based on (1) selected answer options for design, measures, and monitoring indicators and (2) validity of provided other answers.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator.

References

SITES v2 Rating System

BREEAM, International New Construction, 2013: 09 Materials

LEED BD+C: New Construction, v4: Sustainable Sites and Materials & Resources

BREEAM International New Construction, 2013: 04 Management and 11 Land Use; and BREEAM Communities Manual, 2012

3 points , IM, E

Intent

This Indicator intends to assess entity’s involvement in the design of on-site renewable energy generation. On-site renewable energy generation reduces environmental and economic impacts associated with fossil fuel energy use.

Terminology

Biofuels: Liquid of gaseous fuels, such as bioethanol and biodiesel, which are made from biomass.

Geothermal energy: Energy from heat generated by the earth’s matter (e.g. ground pump heating systems). This includes geothermal storage.

Hydro energy: Energy generated by the gravitational force of falling or flowing water.

On-site renewable energy: Any source of energy produced at the site that can be used without depleting reserves, including energy from the sun, wind, water and the earth’s core. Technologies should be available onsite, such as photovoltaic panels, wind turbines, transpired solar collectors, solar hot water heaters, small-scale hydroelectric power plants, ground pump heating systems, etc.

Solar/photovoltaic energy: Energy generated from solar heat and/or radiant light. This includes solar water heating. Photovoltaic energy results from the conversion of the sunlight by using solar panels or semiconductors.

Wind energy: Energy generated from wind power by using wind turbines.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Other: State the on-site renewable source. It is possible to add multiple other answers. Note that:

  1. On-site renewable sources do not include off-site generation, the use of green power, renewable energy credits (RECs) or carbon offsets.
  2. Co-generation and tri-generation systems are not seen as renewable energy sources. Although they may produce low-carbon energy, these systems typically use fossil fuels (e.g., natural gas).

Average design target for the fraction of total energy demand met with on-site renewable energy: Percentage of energy demand that by design should be provided by on-site renewable energy. The numerator is the total design capacity of all reported on-site renewable energy sources. The denominator is total energy demand for all projects reported in RC-NC1.1 and RC-NC2.1.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded based on (1) selected answer options and validity of provided other answer, (2) percentage of all projects.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator.

In 2018, the average design target will be for reporting purposes only.

References

LEED BD+C: New Construction, v4, Energy & Atmosphere

BREEAM, International New Construction, 2013: 06 Energy

SASB-Real Estate Owners, Developers & Investment Trusts, March 2016: IF0402-02

1 point , IM, E

Intent

This Indicator intends to examine the entity’s approach to define and achieve net-zero energy performance for its new construction and renovation projects.Net-zero energy (NZE) standards assist organizations with achieving zero greenhouse gas emissions, through energy-efficient design and the use of renewable energy technologies, on a net-zero energy basis. Net-zero standards are increasingly part of building codes.

Terminology

Net-zero energy: A net-zero energy building relies on energy-efficient design and renewable sources to produce as much energy as it consumes, usually measured over the course of a year.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, complete:

  1. Description of the entity’s definition of ‘net-zero energy’ AND
  2. Description of the applicable reference code of standard
  3. State the percentage of the projects achieving the entity’s definition of “net-zero energy”.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded based on (1) the validity of the provided descriptions, (2) the percentage of projects covered.

References

LEED BD+C: New Construction, v4, Energy & Atmosphere

BREEAM, International New Construction, 2013: 06 Energy

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

ICC IECC: 2012 International Energy Conservation Code

International Energy Agency: SHC Task 40

Water Conservation and Waste Management

2017 Indicator

2 points , MP, E

Intent

This Indicator intends to assess the entity’s strategy to water conservation through design and construction. Implementing water efficiency measures in the design and construction phases of a building contributes to reducing the water consumption of the building during the operational phase.

Terminology

Net-zero energy: A net-zero energy building relies on energy-efficient design and renewable sources to produce as much energy as it consumes, usually measured over the course of a year.

Drip/smart irrigation: Drip irrigation systems save water by irrigating, fertilizing and aerating trees, shrubs, plants and bushes directly at the roots. Smart irrigation systems save water by adjusting the watering schedule and amount of water used for irrigation based on a variety of factors and inputs, including weather, plant species and soil type.

Drought tolerant/low-water landscaping: Reduction of water use through landscaping characteristics such as areas requiring little to no irrigation.

Dry fixtures: Fixtures that do not require the use of water, such as composting toilet systems and waterless urinals.

Grey water: Wastewater generated from hand basins, showers and other water-using devices and equipment.

High-efficiency fixtures: Appliances and plumbing equipment that conserve water without compromising performance (also known as “ultra-low-flow” fixtures).

Indoor water: Water use that occurs within the constraints of the building interior.

Integrative design: A design process that considers and involves multiple aspects, stakeholders and functions, instead of addressing each separately, to align and achieve objectives.

Leak detection system: Systems that detect water leaks. Examples can include, but are not limited to: condensate water overflow, chiller water leaks, plumbing line cracks, heating/cooling piping leaks and outside seepage.

Non-potable applications: Use of non-potable water in applications such as toilet flushing and cooling tower make up water

Occupant sensors: Motion sensor devices that turn water fixtures on (or off) in response to the presence (or absence) of people.

On-site wastewater treatment: Process of water decontamination as a consequence of any anthropogenic, industrial or commercial use, before the water is released again into the environment or is re-used.

Operational water efficiency monitoring: Monitoring of water consumed during the in-use phase of a building’s life. The operational water consumption of buildings leads to substantial environmental impact. Monitoring consumption is an important basis for reducing this impact.

Outdoor water: Water use that occurs outside of the building structure.

Post-construction water monitoring: Monitoring of water consumption during the operational phase of the building, to identify that water conservation objectives are being met.

Process water: Water that is used for building systems and industrial processes, such as cooling towers, boilers, and chillers. It can also include water used for operational processes, such as dishwashing.

Requirements for planning and design: Legislative requirements such as planning obligations, building codes and standards.

Stormwater: Water that collects during precipitation, which can be stored on-site for eventual reuse for non-potable applications. Examples can include, but are not limited to: landscape irrigation and/or flush fixtures.

Sub-meter: A system that allows the measurement of utility use by an individual occupant within a multi-tenant property, such as individual electricity meters.

Water conservation: The standards, strategies and actions to manage and conserve water in a sustainable manner.

Water efficiency measures: Actions undertaken to reduce water consumption and improve efficient use of water as a sustainable resource.

Water supply: Provision of surface water, groundwater, rainwater collected directly or stored by the organization, waste water from another organization, municipal water supplies or other water utilities, usually via a system of pumps and pipes.

Water use analytics: Analysis of water use to determine discrepancies between baseline and actual energy use. Water use analytics help determine whether water use targets are reached, and can highlight opportunities to improve water efficiency and conservation.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Other:

  1. Requirements for planning and design: State the requirement for planning and design.
  2. Water efficiency measures: State the water efficiency measure.
  3. Operational water efficiency monitoring: State the operational water efficiency monitoring type.

Evidence: Document upload is mandatory. The evidence must demonstrate the promotion of water efficiency requirements and the elements that it covers. Depending on the selected answer options, the document upload must include information on the selected options of "Requirements for water efficient planning and design" (e.g., RFP language requesting integrated design process, above code design).

Post-construction monitoring: If the entity has requirement on post-construction performance monitoring, please specify the required number of years. If the entity monitors performance for an infinite period, please enter “100”.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are based on (1) selected answer options and validity of provided other answers, (2) validity of the evidence based on the requirements stated above.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator.

References

LEED BD+C: New Construction, v4, Indoor Environmental Quality/p>

BREEAM, International New Construction, 2013: 08 Water

GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards, 2016: 303, Water

2 points , MP, E

Intent

This Indicator is intended to describe the entity’s strategy to manage waste from construction and demolition. A waste policy assists organizations with reducing waste from construction and demolition disposed of in landfills and incineration facilities, by recovering, reusing and recycling materials.

Terminology

Construction waste signage: Visible signage that clearly indicates the process of properly dealing with waste generated during construction.

Education on waste management: Educating employees, contractors and crews on materials recovery techniques and procedures, such as sorting and storage methods, recoverable materials and removal techniques.

Hazardous waste: A solid waste, or combination of solid wastes, which because of its quantity, concentration, or physical/chemical/infectious characteristics may either cause, or significantly contribute to an increase in mortality/serious irreversible illness. Hazardous waste might also pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, disposed of, or otherwise managed.

Incentives for contractors: Incentives, for example, to allow contractors and crews to retain a portion of revenues and/or savings from materials recovery and sales.

Management and construction practices: Measures and strategies implemented by management and construction employees throughout the construction project.

Non-hazardous waste: Waste that does not have the potential to cause harm to humans, animals or the environment.

On-site waste monitoring: Monitoring of waste generated during the design and construction phase of the building, to identify that waste generation and disposal objectives are being met.

Recovering building materials: Diverting building material waste from landfill by recovery of the material from site to be recycled or sent for energy recovery.

Recycling building materials: Diverting building material waste from landfill to an on or off-site recycling facility.

Reusing building materials: Diverting building material from landfill by reemploying the material on site or on other approved sites in the same or related capacity as their original application.

Waste stream: The complete flow of waste from generation to final disposal.

Waste management plan: Plan that addresses the collection and disposal of waste generated during construction or renovation, usually including the collection, transfer, treatment and disposal of a variety of waste types.

Waste separation facilities: A designated facility where waste is separated into different elements to be correctly disposed of, recycled, or otherwise managed.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options for (1) management and construction practices (2) on-site waste monitoring.

Other:

  1. Management and construction practices: State the waste management practice.
  2. On-site waste monitoring: State the type of waste monitored.

Evidence: Document upload or document name and date. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. In the absence of an upload, providing the document name AND date of publication is mandatory, and you may be asked to disclose the document to GRESB as part of the validation process.

The evidence must demonstrate the promotion of efficient on-site solid waste management and the elements that it covers. Depending on the selected answer options, the document upload should include:
  1. Waste management plan or requirements typically provided to contractors (e.g., RFP language, etc.) including the selected answer options AND/OR
  2. Information about practices used to measure or monitor on-site waste monitoring during the construction phase of its applicable projects.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded based on (1) selected answer options for design, measures, and monitoring indicators and (2) validity of provided other answers.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator.

References

LEED BD+C: New Construction, v4, 09 Material & Resources

BREEAM, International New Construction 2013, 10 Waste

EPA, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Construction Sector (NAICS 23)

GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (2016): 303, Effluents and Waste

Supply Chain

2017 Indicator

2 points , MP, S

Intent

This Indicator examines the entity’s strategy to ensure contractors support the entity’s ESG objectives and follow ESG management requirements. Sustainability-specific requirements for contractors can ensure proper implementation of the entity’s sustainability policies for new construction and major renovation projects. Relationships with contractors and the written agreements that define those relationships make sustainability requirements enforceable upon a wider range of stakeholders.

Terminology

Environmental process standards: Minimum standards required during the procurement process in relation to environmental processes, such as requirements for disposal of waste generated by contractors.

Environmental product standards: Minimum standards required during the procurement process in relation to environmental products, such as requiring a certain percentage of products to be locally sourced or contain recycled content.

Human health-based product standards: Minimum standards for the health-related attributes of products, such as lists of prohibited chemicals.

Human rights: Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever their nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language or any other status.

On-site health and safety: Requirements that focus on protecting the safety, health and welfare of people engaged in construction work.

ESG-specific requirements: Includes specification and use of sustainable and energy efficient materials, systems, equipment and onsite operating practices, e.g. regarding access to the site, environmental impact, community impact, health and safety, etc..

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Percentage of all projects: Provide the percentage of all projects covered. The numerator is the floor area of the projects for which the applicable requirements are in place. The denominator is the total floor area of all projects reported in RC-NC1.1 and RC-NC2.1.

Other: State the sustainability-specific requirement. It is possible to add multiple other answers.

Evidence: Document upload or document name and date. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. In the absence of an upload, providing the document name AND date of publication is mandatory, and you may be asked to disclose the document to GRESB as part of the validation process.

The evidence must demonstrate the existence of the ESG requirements for its contractors in development projects. An example is a copy of contractor requirements (e.g., contract language or RFP).

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded based on (1) selected answer options for design, measures, and monitoring indicators and (2) validity of provided other answers.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator.

References

BREEAM, International New Construction, 2013: 04 Management

United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948

EPRA Best Practices Recommendations on Sustainability Reporting, 3rd version, September 2017: 5.6, H&S-Employee health and safety

2 points , IM, S

Intent

Monitoring measures ensure that contractors comply with the contractual specifications and requirements regarding sustainability issues.

Terminology

Ad hoc site visits: Visits without advance notice.

Audits: A systematic review and assessment performed by qualified personnel to determine by investigation, examination, or evaluation of objective evidence, the adequacy and compliance of the contractors with the sustainability-specific requirements.

Environmental issues: The impact on living and non-living natural systems, including land, air, water and ecosystems. This includes, but is not limited to, biodiversity, transport and product and service-related impacts, as well as environmental compliance and expenditures.

National or international standard: Standard related to environmental management, e.g. ISO 14001, etc.

Social aspects: Includes increased noise, traffic congestion, lack of housing, resettlement requirements or pressure on access to local services that arise from influx of personnel, site development work or operational processes that are new to the area, etc.

Requirements

SSelect yes, no, or not applicable if you answered no to NC10.1. If yes, select all applicable sub-options including the additional information requested.

Percentage of projects audited: Provide the percentage of all projects covered. The numerator represents the floor area of the projects for which the applicable requirements are in place. The denominator is the total floor area of all projects reported in RC-NC1.1 and RC-NC2.1.

External audits by third party: Report the name of the organization that performed the audit. You may be asked for additional information about the organization. It is possible to report multiple organizations for transparency purposes, however scores will not be aggregated.

Other: State the method of monitoring. It is possible to add multiple other answers.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded based on (1) selected answer options for design, measures, and monitoring indicators and (2) validity of provided other answers.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator.

References

ISO 14001, Environmental Management Standard

SITES v2 Rating System

LEED BD+C: New Construction, v4, Sustainable Sites

BREEAM International New Construction, 2013; and BREEAM Communities Manual, 2012

RobecoSAM Corporate Sustainability Assessment, 2017: 3.5.5, ESG integration in supply chain strategy

Health, Safety and Well-being

2017 Indicator

2 points , MP, S

Intent

This Indicator is intended to describe the entity’s strategy to design and build buildings that promote occupant health and well-being. Buildings designed with occupant health and well-being in mind lead to increased employee satisfaction and greater productivity.

Terminology

Access to spaces for active and passive recreation: Access to spaces designated for recreation, including but not limited to green spaces, picnic areas, sport facilities, or children’s playgrounds.

Active design features: Design features specifically aimed to positively contribute towards occupant health and well-being, e.g. centrally located staircases to get occupants to be more active.

Commissioning: Quality-orientated review and verification process during the design and construction phase, to ensure that the performance of facilities, systems and assemblies meet defined objectives during the operational phase.

Daylight: The capacity of a building to provide maximum daylight exposure to occupants, via building design (e.g. angle of orientation, number of and size of windows) and material (e.g. reflective coatings) features. Maximizing daylight exposure not only benefits occupant health and well-being, but also can reduce the need for artificial light, and therefore energy expenditure.

Health Impact Assessment: A mean of assessing the health impacts of policies, plans and projects using quantitative, qualitative and participatory techniques.

Indoor air quality:The physical or biological characteristics of air within buildings. Indoor air quality (IAQ) is typically the product of outdoor quality mediated by the design and operation of building systems.

Indoor air quality monitoring: The process of monitoring the fluctuations in IAQ, to promote efficient and successful IAQ maintenance and improvement. Monitoring can occur via portable or fixed sensors to measure a range of air pollutants.

Integrated planning process: A planning process that considers and involves multiple aspects, stakeholders and functions, instead of addressing each separately, to align and achieve objectives.

Natural ventilation: The process of supplying and removing air through an indoor space without using mechanical systems. There are two types of natural ventilation occurring in buildings: wind driven ventilation and buoyancy-driven ventilation.

Occupant controls: Individual controls for heating, cooling and other building systems. They support individual comfort of building occupants, while reducing energy consumption. Occupant controls also enable occupants to respond rapidly to alleviate discomfort when it is experienced.

Occupant education: Education and training of building occupants to increase knowledge on sustainability principles and the benefits to their health and well-being, including behavioral change and techniques

Occupant well-being: Health and comfort of building occupants. Healthy indoor environments (including indoor air quality, thermal comfort, lighting, visual quality and acoustic performance) are an essential part of realizing the potential benefits of occupant well-being.

Post-construction health and wellbeing monitoring: A structured approach towards measuring and managing the health and well-being of occupants, such as occupant comfort and satisfaction.

Provisions for active transport: Active transport is transport via walking or bicycling. Provisions for active transport include designating safe and accessible pedestrian walkways as a building design measure, bike storage areas and shower facilities.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options for (1) requirements for planning and design (2) common occupant health and well-being measures, (3) operational occupant health and well-being verification provisions and.

Other:

  1. Requirements for planning and design: State the requirement for planning and design.
  2. Occupant health and well-being measure: State the health and well-being measure. Measures should be related to the physical building. Location-related measures (e.g., walkability, proximity to public transport or to nearby amenities) are not valid.
  3. Occupant health and well-being monitoring: State the health and well-being measure.
It is possible to add multiple other answers.

Evidence: Document upload or document name and date. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. In the absence of an upload, providing the document name AND date of publication is mandatory, and you may be asked to disclose the document to GRESB as part of the validation process.

The evidence must demonstrate the promotion of occupant health and well-being and the elements selected of health and well-being "Requirements for planning and design". Examples of acceptable uploads include but are not limited to a description of typical project requirements (e.g., RFP language, owners project requirements, similar).

Post-construction monitoringIf the entity has requirement on post-construction performance monitoring, please specify the required number of years. If the entity monitors performance for an infinite period, please enter “100”.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded based on (1) selected answer options and validity of provided other answers, (2) validity of the evidence based on the requirements stated above.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator.

References

LEED BD+C: New Construction, v4, Indoor Environmental Quality

BREEAM, International New Construction, 2013: 05 Health and well-being

GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards, 2016: GRI 416; 416-1

1 point , MP, S

Intent

The dangerous nature of project construction work and some building services work can lead to hazardous and harmful events, such as incidents, injuries, and fatalities. These have the potential to undermine a business’ brand and long-term success. Occupational health and safety (OHS) performance can be seen as a key measure of an organization’s duty of care. Monitoring of and reporting on on-site occupational health and safety is an indicator of prudent risk management.

Terminology

On-site health and safety: Requirements that focus on protecting the safety, health and welfare of people engaged in construction work.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options for (1) promotion means and (2) requirements and standards.

Other: State the alternative means applied to promote on-site health and safety. It is possible to add multiple other answers.It is possible to add multiple other answers.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded based on (1) selected answer options and validity of provided other answers, (2) validity of the evidence based on the requirements stated above.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator.

References

BS OHSAS 18001/18002, Occupational Health and Safety Management

ISO 9001, Quality Management Systems; and ISO 14001, Environmental Management System

ILO-OSH 2001, Guidelines on Occupational Safety and Health Management Systems

NAICS 23

GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards, 2016: GRI 403 Occupational health and safety

1 point , IM, S

Intent

Monitoring of and reporting on on-site health and safety is an indicator of prudent risk management. Keeping records of the number of incidents, injuries and fatalities over time helps to identify patterns that can guide the implementation of measures needed to minimize health and safety risks.

Terminology

Fatalities: The death of a worker arising from an occupational injury or disease sustained or contracted while in the organization’s employ.

Injury: Any instance of being injured, (including occupational diseases and occupational disabilities, and fatalities) arising from operations. Includes incidents involving contractors/sub-contractors, site visitors and members of the public. The injury rate is expressed as a rate (e.g. a fraction). Use the open text box to explain the applied calculation method/formula.

Near misses: A work-related event with the potential to cause injury, disability or disease to workers or the public (also known as “dangerous occurrences”).

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options and complete the additional open fields.

Injury rate: Report the injury rate for the total workforce, i.e. total employees and supervised workers, as well as independent contractors working on site to whom the organization is liable for the general safety of the working environment.

Open text box: For injury rates, it is mandatory to use the open text box to explain the applied calculation method/formula.

Fatalities: Fatalities are expressed as a number.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are based on the number of indicators that are used for monitoring.

The validity of the injury rate is based on the open text box explanation. Provided figures are for reporting purposes only and do not have an impact on scoring.

References

GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards, 2016: 403-2

RobecoSAM Corporate Sustainability Assessment, 2017: 3.5.2 Risk culture

Community Impact and Engagement

2017 Indicator

1.5 points , IM, S

Intent

The built environment has a significant direct and indirect socio-economic impact, for example on social well-being, quality of life, and the prosperity of local communities and individuals. Assessing the social-economic impact helps to minimize the potential negative impact of new construction and major renovation projects and can create more livable, prosperous and sustainable communities.

Terminology

Housing affordability: Affordable housing refers to housing units that are affordable by the low-income section of society (for example, whose income is below the median household income).

Impact on crime levels: The impact of the use of the asset and related facilities on crime levels, e.g. inadequate lighting or security may lead to increased crime levels, including vandalism, theft, etc.

Local income generated: Contributing to local economic benefits, and creating business diversity and opportunities for economic development and innovation. For example, providing tax revenues.

Local residents’ well-being: Includes health and safety of local residents that may be impacted by the asset’s operation. For example, noise pollution issues.

Walkability score: A score designed to measure the walkability of a given address. In this context, within the surrounding community.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Other: It is possible to report multiple other answers.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded based on (1) selected answer options and (2) validity of provided other answers.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator.

References

Green Star, Communities PILOT Version 0.1

1.5 points , IM, G

Intent

New construction and major renovation projects are likely to impact/disrupt the local community. These disruptions will differ per project and per phase of the development process. Monitoring helps an organization to manage and reduce the impact of new construction and major renovation projects on the local community during the development process.

Terminology

Analysis and interpretation of monitoring data: A structured approach to analyzing and interpreting data obtained from monitoring processes, in order to make actionable use of the data.

Communication plan: A specific, objective-based plan identifying commitments to engaging with the community by obtaining their input and feedback during different stages of construction and renovation projects.

Community impact: Community refers to individuals or groups of people living and/or working in any areas that are economically, socially or environmentally impacted (positively or negatively) by the construction/renovation activities. Impact includes increased noise, traffic congestion, lack of housing, resettlement requirements or pressure on access to local services that arise from influx of construction personnel, site development work or operational processes that are novel to the area.

Community monitoring plan: A specific, objective-based plan to ensure that monitoring of the community during different stages of the construction and renovation projects is implemented and maintained.

Monitoring: A structured approach towards measuring and managing the impact of community engagement projects on the local community.

Nuisance and/or disruption risks: Risks that are likely to cause a nuisance or disruption to stakeholders/impacted groups/communities, such as excess noise or increase traffic congestion.

Risk mitigation plan: A structured and purposeful process of identifying risks and developing actions to eliminate or reduce the adverse impacts of the risk, and planned responses should the risk occur.

Stakeholders and impacted groups: All individuals or groups of people who may be affected by the objectives and/or actions of a construction/renovation project, either directly or indirectly.

Requirements

Select yes or no. If yes, select all applicable sub-options.

Other: State the alternative means through which the entity monitors impact on the local community.

It is possible to report multiple other answers.

Evidence: Document upload is mandatory for this indicator. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question.

The provided evidence must demonstrate the existence of the monitoring process and the elements that it covers. Examples of acceptable documents include but are not limited to impact reports or data illustrating the collection of relevant information.

Open text box: The content of this open text box is not used for scoring, but will be included in the Benchmark Report. Participate may use this open text box to communicate on

  1. An explanation of the approach per phase of the construction/renovation project;
  2. An explanation of how impact is monitored;
  3. The actions taken when an issue arises;
  4. The process for developing and implementing improvements.

Reporting period: Answers must refer to the reporting period identified in EC3.

Reporting level: Answers should be applicable at entity level.

Scoring

Points are awarded to each selected checkbox option and are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Reporting multiple other answers will not impact scoring; reported answer options in this field are validated individually, but scores will not be aggregated.

It is not necessary to select all answer options in order to obtain the maximum score for this question.

The reported answer options are validated based on the provided evidence, and points are contingent upon validity of the supporting evidence.

References

BREEAM Communities Manual, 2012

Appendix 1

Terminology Acronyms

ANREV The Asian Association for Investment in Non-listed Real Estate Vehicles
AL asset-level
APREA The Asia Pacific Real Estate Association
BPF The British Property Federation
BREEAM The Building Research Establishment’s Environmental Assessment Method
CASBEE The Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environment Efficiency
CDP Carbon Disclosure Project
DEC Display Energy Certificates
DGNB Deutsche Gessellschaft fur Nachhaltiges Bauen e.V.
EMS Environmental Management System
EPC Energy Performance Certificate
EPRA European Public Real Estate Association
FL Fund Level
GAV Gross Asset Value
GHG Greenhouse gas
GRA Green Rating Alliance
GRI Global Reporting Initiative
GRI CRESS The GRI Construction and Real Estate Sector Supplement
HVAC Heating Ventilation and Air-Conditioning
INREV The European Association for Investors in Non-Listed Real Estate Vehicles
ISA The International Sustainability Alliance
ISIN International Securities Identification Number
IPMS International Property Measurement Standard
IVBN Vereniging van Institutionele Beleggers in Vastgoed
JV Joint Venture
NABERS National Australian Built Environment Rating System
NAREIT National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts
NF HQE Normes Francaises Haute Qualité Environnementale
NOI Net operating income
OL Organization Level
PREA Pension Real Estate Association
REALpac Real Property Association of Canada
UN PRI The United Nations-supported Principles for Responsible Investment

Appendix 2a

Building Certification Schemes

List of design and/or construction green building certification schemes:

List of operational green building certification schemes:

This list indicates certifications that have been submitted to GRESB as part of participation and accepted for full or partial recognition. Additional schemes may also receive recognition if they meet GRESB’s criteria.

Appendix 2b

Green Building Certification Validation Questions

A

Certification scheme

  1. Certification scheme name _________________
  2. Certification sub-scheme name _________________
  3. Certification body name _________________
  4. Country where certification was granted _________________
B

Is the certification an in-house or external scheme?

  1. In-house certification scheme
  2. External scheme
C

Verification of compliance with scheme requirements is based on:

  • Third-party document review
  • Third-party on-site assessment
  • Both document and on-site assessment performed by a third party
  • No third-party document review or on-site assessment required

Note: If you use an in-house scheme, GRESB will ask for additional information on the scheme. If no third-party document review or on-site assessment required, GRESB will ask for an upload to provide specific information on the assessment method.

D

Public information

  1. Public website of the scheme _________________
  2. Public list of certified projects online _________________
E

Is the scheme required by a national or regional government agency?

  • Yes. Specify name of agency _________________
  • No

Note: Mandatory certification by a central government or regional/local government department or from an organization with delegated authority from such a department.

F

Is the scheme used by a national or regional government agency?

  • Yes. Specify name of agency _________________
  • No
G

Does the certification require:

  1. Performance-based design goals for energy efficiency and/or GHG emissions reduction
  2. Operational performance data for energy efficiency and/or GHG emissions reduction
  3. Both design and operational goals and data collection
  4. None
H

Select the topics included in the scheme assessment: (multiple answers possible)

  • Location (e.g., brownfield redevelopment, density, walkability)
  • Transportation (e.g., access to public transport)
  • Site design (including stormwater management, heat island reduction, etc.)
  • Energy efficiency
  • Greenhouse gas emissions
  • Indoor water conservation
  • Outdoor water conservation
  • Waste management (including waste diversion, recycling)
  • Indoor environmental quality
  • Operations/management
  • Materials selection
  • Biodiversity and habitat conservation
  • Public health and wellness
  • Social equity
  • Resilience
  • Other, please specify _________________

Note: Refers to the scheme in general, not to the topics included in each individual asset assessment of the portfolio.

I

Select the property types included in the scheme assessment: (multiple answers possible)

  • Data Centers
  • Healthcare
  • Hotel
  • Industrial, Business Parks
  • Industrial, Distribution Warehouse
  • Industrial, Manufacturing
  • Lodging, Leisure & Recreation
  • Medical Office
  • Office
  • Parking (indoors)
  • Residential
  • Residential, Family Homes
  • Residential, Multi-family
  • Residential, Student Housing
  • Retail, High Street
  • Retail, Shopping Center
  • Retail, Warehouse
  • Self-storage
  • Senior Homes
  • Other, please specify _________________
J

Assessment details

  1. Certificate duration _________________
  2. Certification levels _________________
  3. Assessor credential _________________
  4. Assessment method and criteria _________________
  5. Recertification requirements _________________
  6. Provide any additional information about the scheme (maximum 250 words) _________________

If you wish to add a new scheme in addition to the list that has been provided, please contact info@gresb.com, and you will be asked to complete the above-stated validation questions for the scheme.

Appendix 3

Assurance and verification schemes

Appendix 4

Name of Organization Validation Questions

Organization website _________________

Office location (city/country) _________________

Who could GRESB contact for validation purposes?

This information is only used for validation purposes where the organization is not yet confirmed as a valid answer in GRESB’s validation database.

Appendix 5

Conversion tables

Heat and energy
1 mega joule 239.0 kilocalories
947.8 Btu
0.278 kilowatt hours (kWh)
1 Gigawatt hour (GWh) 1000 Megawatt hour (MWh)
1 kilowatt hour (kWh) 860.4 kilocalories
0.001 Megawatt hour (MWh)
3412.1 Btu
1 million Btu 1055 mega joules
252.2 mega calories
293.1 kilowatt hours (kWh)
0.29307 Megawatt hour (MWh)
1 ton-hour 0.003516 Megawatt hour (MWh)
Cubic measures
1 liter 0.01 hectoliter
0.035 cubic foot
0.001 cubic meter
0.220 Imperial gallon
0.264 American gallon
1 American gallon 0.134 cubic foot
0.003785 cubic meter
3.785 liters
0.833 Imperial gallon
0.024 American barrel
1 cubic foot 0.028 cubic meter
28.317 liters
6.229 Imperial gallons
7.481 American gallons
0.1781 American barrel
1 Imperial gallon 0.161 cubic foot
0.00456 cubic meter
4.546 liters
1.201 American gallons
0.029 American barrel
1 American barrel 5.615 cubic feet
0.159 cubic meter
158.99 liters
34.973 Imperial gallons
42 American gallons
1 cubic meter 35.315 cubic feet
1.000 liters
219.97 imperial gallons
264.17 American gallons
6.290 American barrels
Areas
1 square foot 0.093 square meter
1 square meter 10.764 square feet
1 square yard 1.196 square meter
1 square mile 2.59 square kilometer
1 acre 4,046.86 square meter
43,560 square feet
Mass
1 metric ton 1,000 kilogram
1 pound 0.45359 kilogram
0.00045 metric tonnes
1 short ton 2,000 pounds
0.90718 metric tonnes

Appendix 6

Document upload cover page

Click to download

Appendix 7

Global Partners

CBRE

www.cbre.com

Andrew Baker, Head of Sustainability, EMEA

andrew.baker@cbre.com

London, United Kingdom

CBRE is the world’s leading commercial property and real estate services adviser, providing a comprehensive range of commercial property services to our clients - investors, occupiers and developers. Sustainability is ingrained into all specialisms across CBRE, with our Energy and Sustainability (E&S) team providing clients with a tailored approach to align property strategy with environmental, social and governance best practice. We help our clients navigate legislation, reduce costs, improve asset performance and create more productive and healthy working environments.

We have an extensive track record of stakeholder engagement, and unparalleled insight into sustainable property management, including translating GRESB requirements into meaningful strategies, performance and outcomes across investment portfolios. This ensures environmental programmes are accurately reported in order to optimise performance under GRESB. In addition, our E&S team also uses its knowledge and network to provide tailored sustainability programs to ensure, wherever possible, its clients are aligned to the GRESB scoring methodology.

Our offering is delivered through our globally integrated team which comprises over two hundred specialist energy and sustainability consultants across the Americas, EMEA and APAC. This enables us to leverage our unique position as the world’s largest outsourced property manager, with the most extensive existing green building certification track record, to help our clients. In summary, CBRE helps our clients develop and review sustainability strategies to achieve optimal GRESB scores and provide real competitive advantage to meet ongoing sustainable goals.

Delos

www.delos.com

New York, NY, United States

As the pioneer of Wellness Real Estate™ and founder of the WELL Building Standard™, Delos is transforming our homes, offices, schools and other indoor environments by placing health and wellness at the center of design and construction decisions. The Delos platform includes technology, consulting, research, design and innovative solutions for the built environment – creating spaces that nurture and promote human health and well-being.

Delos is breaking new ground and defining the conditions required for enhancing wellness in all sectors of the built environment. Informed by seven years of research and rigorous analysis of environmental health impacts on people, Delos has fostered research collaborations with the Cleveland Clinic, Mayo Clinic, a board of doctors from the Columbia University Medical Center and leading architects, scientists and wellness thought leaders to introduce wellness standards, programs and solutions into the built environment.

Exploring the intersection between people and the built environment, Delos creates spaces that actively contribute to human health, performance and well-being by marrying the best innovations in technology, health, science, design and enterprise. We see the built environment as an asset to maximize human potential, and we envision environments that enhance us – that are both proactive and reactive – to live better by cultivating healthy lifestyle choices and helping prevent health problems before they begin.

We have broadened the scope beyond environmental sustainability. By including the best concepts of green technology, we have developed integrated solutions that address human sustainability.

Inogen Environmental Alliance

www.inogenet.com

Alex Ferguson, Managing Director

alex.ferguson@deltasimons.com

Lincoln, United Kingdom

Inogen is a global corporation providing multi-national organisations with consistent, high quality and cost-effective environmental, health & safety and sustainability solutions. With 165 offices located around the world, 4,330 staff worldwide and projects completed in 120 countries, Inogen is able to deliver services for our clients using locally based experts tied together within the Inogen alliance.

JLL

jll.co.uk/sustainability

Tom Branczik, Senior Consultant

tom.branczik@eu.jll.com

London, United Kingdom

JLL is a global financial and professional services firm that specializes in commercial real estate services and investment management. Being responsible about sustainability is at the heart of our business – and we are fully equipped to help any organization throughout the world align their sustainability goals with their strategic business objectives, ultimately driving outcomes that benefit your people, processes, profitability and the planet.

Our global team is comprised of more than 1,500 sustainability-accredited professionals across the globe – and our deeply experienced Energy and Sustainability Services practice is part of an industry-leading platform of overall commercial real estate and financial services. Since we understand every aspect of operating portfolios toward both environmental and financial objectives, we can make sure a strategy that looks good on paper will support your sustainability, technology, ROI and social responsibility goals once it is implemented because we excel at execution.

Our sustainability consultants can help you to create and communicate your sustainability vision, strategy, activities, performance and future goals to a broad range of stakeholders. Whether helping you to draft your first corporate sustainability report or engaging your staff through sustainability training programs, our professionals can guide you from concept and design through implementation and performance measurement.

With unrivalled experience and expertise across a range of sectors and geographies, JLL’s team understands sustainability within the context of your real estate strategy, and is ready to partner with you on your sustainability journey.

Siemens

www.buildingtechnologies.siemens.com

Agustin Garcia del Castillo, Business Development Manager Real Estate

agustin.garcia@siemens.com

Zug, Switzerland

Siemens helps Asset Managers, Property Investors and Family Offices meet the growing demand for high performing work environments to improve occupancy rates, tenant satisfaction and valuations. Siemens supports the clients in their difficulties deploying energy efficiency programs and engaging tenants.

WSP

/www.wsp.com

Doug Webber, Vice President, Sustainability & Energy

douglas.webber@wsp.com

Toronto, ON, Canada

WSP is one of the world’s leading engineering professional services consulting firms. We provide services to transform the built environment and restore the natural environment. Our expertise ranges from environmental remediation to urban planning, from engineering iconic buildings to designing sustainable transport networks, and from developing the energy sources of the future to creating innovations that reduce environmental impact. We have approximately 34,000 employees, including engineers, technicians, scientists, architects, planners, surveyors, program and construction management professionals, and various sustainability experts, in more than 500 offices across 40 countries worldwide.

Premier Partners

Partners

Industry Partners