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

This indicator is scored as a two section indicator. Section 1 covers the checklist, i.e. the elements the entity has selected, and section 2 covers the evidence provided.

Section 1: Fractional points are awarded to each objective type and then aggregated to calculate the final fractional score. It is necessary to select all checkboxes in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator. The objectives are not assigned equal weights, with non-publicly available objectives scoring lower.

Section 2: Evidence is mandatory for this indicator. The validation status of the evidence affects the final score for the indicator through a multiplier, as below:

The aggregated score for the checkboxes selected in section 1 of the indicator will be multiplied by the evidence multiplier to give the final absolute score for the indicator.

This indicator is scored as a one section indicator consisting of a checklist of elements. Evidence is not required.

Points are evenly divided between the selected elements. Any ‘Other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘Other’ answers are accepted, only one will be counted towards the score.

This indicator is scored as a two section indicator. Section 1 covers the checklist, i.e. the elements the entity has selected, and section 2 covers the evidence provided.

Section 1: Fractional points are awarded based on the selected employee group(s) and then aggregated to calculate the final fractional score. It is not necessary to select all checkboxes in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator. The employee groups are not assigned equal weights. If an ‘Other’ answer has been provided, this will be eligible for a fractional score (depending on validation status).

Section 2: Evidence is mandatory for this indicator. The validation status of the evidence affects the final score for the indicator through a multiplier, as below:

The aggregated score for the checkboxes selected in section 1 of the indicator will be multiplied by the evidence multiplier to give the final absolute score for the indicator.

Any ‘Other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘Other’ answers are accepted, only one will be counted towards the score.

This indicator is scored as a two section indicator. Section 1 covers the checklist, i.e. the elements the entity has selected, and section 2 covers the evidence provided.

Section 1: For section 1 of the indicator, fractional points are awarded for those elements in the checklist that are:

1. Selected by the entity (i.e., the numerator)
2. Material to the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (see output and guidance under RC7) (i.e., the denominator)

It is therefore not necessary to select all checkboxes to receive maximum points; only the issues that are material will be scored. The obtained fractional points are aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

If an ‘Other’ answer is provided, this will first be manually validated and must be accepted before it will achieve a fractional score. If multiple ‘Other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score. Any accepted ‘Other’ answers will be scored at ‘Medium relevance’.

Section 2: Evidence is mandatory for this indicator. The validation status of the evidence affects the final score for the indicator through a multiplier, as below:

The aggregated score for the checkboxes selected in section 1 of the indicator will be multiplied by the evidence multiplier to give the final absolute score for the indicator.

Materiality-based scoring:

The scoring of this indicator links to the materiality for the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

Specific materiality weightings are assigned to the entity for each ESG issue as described in (RC7). The weightings are set at one of four levels for each of the ESG issues:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ it is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the issue counts towards the score with ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 1). If an issue is of 'High relevance' the issue counts towards the score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 2).

All issues of ‘Medium relevance’ and ‘High relevance’ need to be selected and addressed in the evidence to obtain the maximum score. For more details on how materiality is determined, download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

This indicator is scored as a two section indicator. Section 1 covers the checklist, i.e. the elements the entity has selected, and section 2 covers the evidence provided.

Section 1: For section 1 of the indicator, fractional points are awarded for those elements in the checklist that are:

1. Selected by the entity (i.e., the numerator)
2. Material to the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (see output and guidance under RC7) (i.e., the denominator)

It is therefore not necessary to select all checkboxes to receive maximum points; only the issues that are material will be scored. The obtained fractional points are aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

If an ‘Other’ answer is provided, this will first be manually validated and must be accepted before it will achieve a fractional score. If multiple ‘Other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score. Any accepted ‘Other’ answers will be scored at ‘Medium relevance’.

Section 2: Evidence is mandatory for this indicator. The validation status of the evidence affects the final score for the indicator through a multiplier, as below:

The aggregated score for the checkboxes selected in section 1 of the indicator will be multiplied by the evidence multiplier to give the final absolute score for the indicator.

Materiality-based scoring:

The scoring of this indicator links to the materiality for the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

Specific materiality weightings are assigned to the entity for each ESG issue as described in (RC7). The weightings are set at one of four levels for each of the ESG issues:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ it is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the issue counts towards the score with ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 1). If an issue is of 'High relevance' the issue counts towards the score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 2).

All issues of ‘Medium relevance’ and ‘High relevance’ need to be selected and addressed in the evidence to obtain the maximum score. For more details on how materiality is determined, download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

This indicator is scored as a two section indicator. Section 1 covers the checklist, i.e. the elements the entity has selected, and section 2 covers the evidence provided.

Section 1: For section 1 of the indicator, fractional points are awarded for those elements in the checklist that are:

1. Selected by the entity (i.e., the numerator)
2. Material to the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (see output and guidance under RC7) (i.e. the denominator)

It is therefore not necessary to select all checkboxes to receive maximum points; only the issues that are material will be scored. The obtained fractional points are aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

If an ‘Other’ answer is provided, this will first be manually validated and must be accepted before it will achieve a fractional score. If multiple ‘Other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score. Any accepted ‘Other’ answers will be scored at ‘Medium relevance’.

Section 2: Evidence is mandatory for this indicator. The validation status of the evidence affects the final score for the indicator through a multiplier, as below:

The aggregated score for the checkboxes selected in section 1 of the indicator will be multiplied by the evidence multiplier to give the final absolute score for the indicator.

Materiality-based scoring:

The scoring of this indicator links to the materiality for the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

Specific materiality weightings are assigned to the entity for each ESG issue as described in (RC7). The weightings are set at one of four levels for each of the ESG issues:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ it is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the issue counts towards the score with ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 1). If an issue is of 'High relevance' the issue counts towards the score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 2).

All issues of ‘Medium relevance’ and ‘High relevance’ need to be selected and addressed in the evidence to obtain the maximum score. For more details on how materiality is determined, download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

This indicator is scored as a two section indicator. Section 1 covers the checklist, i.e. the elements the entity has selected, and section 2 covers the evidence provided.

Section 1: For section 1 of the indicator, fractional points are awarded based on reporting level, alignment, and third party review. Disclosure methods are not equally scored. It is not necessary to select all reporting methods to receive maximum points. The obtained fractional points are aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

If an ‘Other’ answer is provided, this will first be manually validated and must be accepted before it will achieve the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘Other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score. Any accepted ‘Other’ answers will be awarded fractional points.

Section 2: Evidence is mandatory for this indicator. The validation status of the evidence affects the final score for the indicator through a multiplier, as below:

The aggregated score for the checkboxes selected in section 1 of the indicator will be multiplied by the evidence multiplier to give the final absolute score for the indicator.

This indicator is scored as a one section indicator consisting of a checklist of elements. Evidence is not required.

Fractional points are awarded based on the selection of the elements. This indicator applies a diminishing increase in score approach, which means that the fractional score achieved for the first data point will be higher than the fractional score achieved for the second, which again will be higher than for the third, and so on.

Any ‘Other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘Other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Diminishing Increase in Score approach: This indicator is scored based on a Diminishing Increase in Score approach, per additional checkbox selected. In the scoring document this is represented by the blue line.

NB: The information in RP2.1 and RP2.2 may be used as criteria for the recognition of 2024 Sector Leaders.

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

NB: The information in RP2.1 and RP2.2 may be used as criteria for the recognition of 2024 Sector Leaders.

This indicator is scored as a two section indicator. Section 1 covers the checklist, i.e. the elements the entity has selected, and section 2 covers the evidence provided.

Section 1: This section consists of three sub-sections: i.) accreditation to a management standard(s), ii.) alignment to a management standard(s) and iii.) management system with no accreditation. Fractional points are awarded based on selected accreditation or alignment to a management standard. No fractional points are awarded for having a management system with no alignment to an ESG-related management standard. It is not necessary to select all reporting methods to receive maximum points. The obtained fractional points are aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

If an ‘Other’ answer is provided, this will first be manually validated and must be accepted before it will achieve the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘Other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score. Any accepted ‘Other’ answers will be awarded fractional points.

Diminishing Increase in Score approach: This indicator is scored based on a Diminishing Increase in Score approach, per additional checkbox selected. In the scoring document this is represented by the blue line.

Section 2: Evidence is mandatory for this indicator. The validation status of the evidence affects the final score for the indicator through a multiplier, as below:

The aggregated score for the checkboxes selected in section 1 of the indicator will be multiplied by the evidence multiplier to give the final absolute score for the indicator.

This indicator is scored as a two section indicator. Section 1 covers the checklist, i.e. the elements the entity has selected, and section 2 covers the evidence provided.

Section 1: For section 1 of the indicator, fractional points are awarded for those elements in the checklist that are:

1. Selected by the entity (i.e., the numerator)
2. Material to the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (see output and guidance under RC7) (i.e., the denominator)

It is therefore not necessary to select all checkboxes to receive maximum points; only the issues that are material will be scored. The obtained fractional points are aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

If an ‘other’ answer is provided, this will first be manually validated and must be accepted before it will achieve a fractional score. If multiple ‘other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score. Any accepted ‘other’ answers will be scored at ‘Medium relevance’.

Section 2: Evidence is mandatory for this indicator. The validation status of the evidence affects the final score for the indicator through a multiplier, as below:

The aggregated score for the checkboxes selected in section 1 of the indicator will be multiplied by the evidence multiplier to give the final absolute score for the indicator.

Materiality-based scoring:

The scoring of this indicator links to the materiality for the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

Specific materiality weightings are assigned to the entity for each ESG issue as described in (RC7). The weightings are set at one of four levels for each of the ESG issues:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ it is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the issue counts towards the score with ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 1). If an issue is of 'High relevance' the issue counts towards the score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 2).

All issues of ‘Medium relevance’ and ‘High relevance’ need to be selected and addressed in the evidence to obtain the maximum score. For more details on how materiality is determined, download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

This indicator is scored as a two section indicator. Section 1 covers the checklist, i.e. the elements the entity has selected, and section 2 covers the evidence provided.

Section 1: For section 1 of the indicator, fractional points are awarded for those elements in the checklist that are:

1. Selected by the entity (i.e., the numerator)
2. Material to the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (see output and guidance under RC7) (i.e. the denominator)

It is therefore not necessary to select all checkboxes to receive maximum points; only the issues that are material will be scored. The obtained fractional points are aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

If an ‘Other’ answer is provided, this will first be manually validated and must be accepted before it will achieve a fractional score. If multiple ‘Other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score. Any accepted ‘Other’ answers will be scored at ‘Medium relevance’.

Section 2: Evidence is mandatory for this indicator. The validation status of the evidence affects the final score for the indicator through a multiplier, as below:

The aggregated score for the checkboxes selected in section 1 of the indicator will be multiplied by the evidence multiplier to give the final absolute score for the indicator.

Materiality-based scoring:

The scoring of this indicator links to the materiality for the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

Specific materiality weightings are assigned to the entity for each ESG issue as described in (RC7). The weightings are set at one of four levels for each of the ESG issues:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ it is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the issue counts towards the score with ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 1). If an issue is of 'High relevance' the issue counts towards the score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 2).

All issues of ‘Medium relevance’ and ‘High relevance’ need to be selected and addressed in the evidence to obtain the maximum score. For more details on how materiality is determined, download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

This indicator is scored as a two section indicator. Section 1 covers the checklist, i.e. the elements the entity has selected, and section 2 covers the evidence provided.

Section 1: For section 1 of the indicator, fractional points are awarded for those elements in the checklist that are:

1. Selected by the entity (i.e., the numerator)
2. Material to the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (see output and guidance under RC7) (i.e. the denominator)

It is therefore not necessary to select all checkboxes to receive maximum points; only the issues that are material will be scored. The obtained fractional points are aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

If an ‘Other’ answer is provided, this will first be manually validated and must be accepted before it will achieve a fractional score. If multiple ‘Other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score. Any accepted ‘Other’ answers will be scored at ‘Medium relevance’.

Section 2: Evidence is mandatory for this indicator. The validation status of the evidence affects the final score for the indicator through a multiplier, as below:

The aggregated score for the checkboxes selected in section 1 of the indicator will be multiplied by the evidence multiplier to give the final absolute score for the indicator.

Materiality-based scoring:

The scoring of this indicator links to the materiality for the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

Specific materiality weightings are assigned to the entity for each ESG issue as described in (RC7). The weightings are set at one of four levels for each of the ESG issues:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ it is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the issue counts towards the score with ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 1). If an issue is of 'High relevance' the issue counts towards the score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 2).

All issues of ‘Medium relevance’ and ‘High relevance’ need to be selected and addressed in the evidence to obtain the maximum score. For more details on how materiality is determined, download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

This indicator is scored as a one section indicator consisting of a checklist of elements. Evidence is not required.

Scoring for this indicator is based on the existence of a systematic process for identifying transition risks, the outcomes of that process, and whether those outcomes are at the entity level.

Evidence is mandatory for this indicator if 'Yes' was selected. The validation status of the evidence affects the final score for the indicator through a multiplier, as below:

The score for the checkbox selected in section 1 of the indicator will be multiplied by the evidence multiplier to give the final absolute score for the indicator.

Scoring for this indicator is based on the existence of a systematic process for identifying transition risks, the outcomes of that process, and whether those outcomes are at the entity level.

Evidence is mandatory for this indicator if 'Yes' was selected. The validation status of the evidence affects the final score for the indicator through a multiplier, as below:

The score for the checkbox selected in section 1 of the indicator will be multiplied by the evidence multiplier to give the final absolute score for the indicator.

Scoring for this indicator is based on the existence of a systematic process for identifying transition risks, the outcomes of that process, and whether those outcomes are at the entity level.

Evidence is mandatory for this indicator if 'Yes' was selected. The validation status of the evidence affects the final score for the indicator through a multiplier, as below:

The score for the checkbox selected in section 1 of the indicator will be multiplied by the evidence multiplier to give the final absolute score for the indicator.

Scoring for this indicator is based on the existence of a systematic process for identifying transition risks, the outcomes of that process, and whether those outcomes are at the entity level.

Evidence is mandatory for this indicator if 'Yes' was selected. The validation status of the evidence affects the final score for the indicator through a multiplier, as below:

The score for the checkbox selected in section 1 of the indicator will be multiplied by the evidence multiplier to give the final absolute score for the indicator.

Scoring for this indicator is based on the existence of a systematic process for identifying transition risks, the outcomes of that process, and whether those outcomes are at the entity level.

Evidence is mandatory for this indicator if 'Yes' was selected. The validation status of the evidence affects the final score for the indicator through a multiplier, as below:

The score for the checkbox selected in section 1 of the indicator will be multiplied by the evidence multiplier to give the final absolute score for the indicator.

Scoring for this indicator is based on the existence of a systematic process for identifying transition risks, the outcomes of that process, and whether those outcomes are at the entity level.

Evidence is mandatory for this indicator if 'Yes' was selected. The validation status of the evidence affects the final score for the indicator through a multiplier, as below:

The score for the checkbox selected in section 1 of the indicator will be multiplied by the evidence multiplier to give the final absolute score for the indicator.

This indicator is scored as a one section indicator consisting of a checklist of elements. Evidence is not required.

Fractional points are awarded based on the selection of the elements. This indicator applies a diminishing increase in score approach, which means that the fractional score achieved for the first data point will be higher than the fractional score achieved for the second, which again will be higher than for the third, and so on.

Other: Any ‘Other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘Other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Any ‘Other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

This indicator is scored as a one section indicator consisting of a checklist of elements. Evidence is not required.

Fractional points are awarded based on the selection of the elements. This indicator applies a diminishing increase in score approach, which means that the fractional score achieved for the first data point will be higher than the fractional score achieved for the second, which again will be higher than for the third, and so on.

Other: Any ‘Other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘Other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Diminishing Increase in Score approach: This indicator is scored based on a Diminishing Increase in Score approach, per additional checkbox selected. In the scoring document this is represented by the blue line.

This indicator is scored as a one section indicator consisting of a checklist of elements. Evidence is not required.

Fractional points are awarded based on the selection of the elements. This indicator applies a diminishing increase in score approach, which means that the fractional score achieved for the first data point will be higher than the fractional score achieved for the second, which again will be higher than for the third, and so on.

Other: Any ‘Other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘Other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Diminishing Increase in Score approach: This indicator is scored based on a Diminishing Increase in Score approach, per additional checkbox selected. In the scoring document this is represented by the blue line.

Materiality-based Scoring: This indicator applies materiality-based scoring. The materiality weighting for this indicator is determined by the materiality level of the ‘Energy’ issue in the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

The weighting of this indicator is determined by the materiality outcome of the issue, which is set at one of four levels:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ the indicator is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0%). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with ‘standard’ weighting. If an issue is of 'High relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting.

As a result, the weight of this indicator may differ for each participant based on its materiality profile. The weighting of the material (scored) indicators in the Performance Component is automatically redistributed to ensure that the Component retains its overall weighting of 60% of the Asset Assessment. For more details download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

Scoring of Metrics: This indicator is scored as a one-section indicator where evidence is optional. In the performance tables, fractional points are awarded based on disclosed data and coverage levels for this data. Only the metrics in the performance table cells shaded in light green, orange or red (depending on the asset’s sector) are used for scoring, as follows:

Performance Data (50% of EN1)

50% of the total indicator score is based on the data disclosed in performance tables:

• For participants whose primary sector is ‘Power Generation x-Renewables’ or ‘Renewable Power’, only the “Total” metric in “Energy exported / sold” table is scored, as indicated by orange shading of the cells:
  • 30% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a value for “Reporting-year performance”.
  • 10% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a value in “Reporting-year target”.
  • 10% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a value in “Future-year target”.
• For all other sectors, only the “Total” metric in the “Energy consumed” table is scored, as indicated by green shading of the cells. For the scored metric only, all columns (“Reporting-year performance”, “Reporting-year target” and “Future-year target”) should be completed to obtain points as follows:
  • 30% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a value in “Reporting-year performance”.
  • 10% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a value in “Reporting-year target”.
  • 10% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a value in “Future-year target”.

Data Coverage (50% of EN1)

50% of the total indicator score will be awarded based on data coverage levels for reporting-year performance data. Value reported for data coverage acts as a multiplier to the fractional points allocated to this metric:

• For participants whose primary sector is ‘Power Generation x-Renewables’ or ‘Renewable Power’,
  • 50% of the total indicator score will be based on value reported for “Total energy exported / sold: Reporting-year performance Data Coverage”.
• For all other sectors, data coverage scoring distribution will depend on what data the entity reports, and will be split equally between the “Totals” in all completed performance tables (energy exported / sold, energy imported / purchased, energy generated onsite):
  • If an entity answers “yes” to only one of the three questions (has the entity imported or purchased energy, has the entity generated energy on site and has the entity exported or sold energy), it must complete one performance table, and data coverage will be scored as 50% of the total indicator score, based on the data coverage value reported for “Total” in the completed performance table (energy exported / sold, energy imported / purchased or energy generated onsite).
  • If an entity answers “yes” to two of the three questions, it must complete two performance tables, and 25% of the total indicator score will be allocated to the data coverage value for “Total” metric reported in each performance table.
  • If an entity answers “yes” to all three questions, 16.7% of the total indicator score will be allocated to the data coverage value for “Total” metric reported in each performance table.
  • If an entity answers no to all three questions, data coverage levels will not be requested or scored given the entity is not a consumer, generator or exporter of energy.

Notes:

• In order to score for this indicator, participants reporting for all sectors must complete all cells with a green border.
• Participants need to input a target year under "Future-year target" as well as a numeric value in the underlying scored metric in order to score for this metric.
• Not all scored cells/metrics are mandatory. If a scored (shaded) cell is not outlined in dark green, leaving it blank will still result in a negative scoring impact. This applies to the following metrics:
  • For participants whose primary sector is ‘Power Generation x-Renewables’ or ‘Renewable Power’ – Total energy exported / sold: Reporting-year target; Future-year target
  • For all other sectors – Total energy consumed: Reporting-year target; Future-year target.
• Reporting of external data review is not scored in 2025.
• If the entity reports data in the energy exported/sold table, the red ‘Data coverage’ metric in this table will also be scored.

Materiality-based Scoring: This indicator applies materiality-based scoring. The materiality weighting for this indicator is determined by the materiality level of the ‘Greenhouse gas emissions’ issue in the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

The weighting of this indicator is determined by the materiality outcome of the issue, which is set at one of four levels:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ the indicator is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0%). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with ‘standard’ weighting. If an issue is of 'High relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting.

As a result, the weight of this indicator may differ for each participant based on its materiality profile. The weighting of the material (scored) indicators in the Performance Component is automatically redistributed to ensure that the Component retains its overall weighting of 60% of the Asset Assessment. For more details download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

Materiality for third-party review requirement is determined by the size of a corporate that reporting entity is part of, as determined in the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7). If the entity (or the corporate the entity is part of) falls under two out of the following three criteria, third-party review of reporting-year performance data becomes material:

• Balance sheet total of more than EUR 25m
• Net turnover of more than EUR 50m
• More than 250 employees during the financial year.

Scoring of Metrics: This indicator is scored as a one section indicator consisting of two components: GHG performance reporting and Net Zero target setting. Adding supporting evidence is required for entities to which third-party review requirement applies as determined in the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

1. GHG emissions performance reporting (80% of GH1)

In the performance table, fractional points are awarded based on disclosed data, coverage levels for this data and third-party review. Only the cells shaded in light green or orange (depending on the sector) are used for scoring. For entities to which third-party review requirement applies, 20% of total indicator score is allocated to that metric.

For participants whose primary sector is “Renewable Power”, only the “Emissions avoided” metric in the Total greenhouse gas emissions table is scored, as indicated by orange shading of the cells.

For the scored metric only, all columns (“Reporting-year performance”, “Reporting-year target” and “Future-year target”) should be completed to obtain points as follows:

• 60% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a value in “Reporting-year performance”.
• 10% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Reporting-year target”. The scoring is based on whether a target was set, not on whether the target was achieved.
• 10% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Future-year target”. The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the entity is on track to achieve the target.

For all other sectors, scored metrics are “Net GHG emissions (Scope 1 + 2)”, reporting year performance data coverage for Scope 1 and 2, and a third-party review of reporting-year Scope 1 and 2 emissions performance data (subject to materiality).

Reporting of location-based Scope 2 emissions is mandatory for scoring under Indicator GH1. Participants who fail to report location-based emissions will not score points for this indicator, even if market-based emissions are reported.

All cells with green shading must be completed to obtain points as follows:

1. If third-party review is not material to the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7):
   • 22.5% of total indicator score will be based on the reporting of a value in “Reporting-year performance” column for “Net GHG emissions (Scope 1 + 2). This field is automatically calculated from other mandatory fields in the same column (indicated by the dark green cell outline).
   • 3.75% of total indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Reporting-year target” column for “Net GHG emissions (Scope 1 + 2) location-based”. The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the target was achieved.
   • 3.75% of total indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Future-year target” column for “Net GHG emissions (Scope 1 + 2) location-based”. The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the entity is on track to achieve the target.
   • 25% of total indicator score will be based on the reporting of data coverage level for “Total scope 1”.
   • 25% of total indicator score will be based on the reporting of data coverage level for “Scope 2”.
2. If third-party review is material to the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7):
   • 7.5% of total indicator score will be based on the reporting of a value in “Reporting-year performance” column for “Net GHG emissions (Scope 1 + 2). This field is automatically calculated from other mandatory fields in the same column (indicated by the dark green cell outline).
   • 1.25% of total indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Reporting-year target” column for “Net GHG emissions (Scope 1 + 2). The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the target was achieved.
   • 1.25% of total indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Future-year target” column for “Net GHG emissions (Scope 1 + 2). The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the entity is on track to achieve the target.
   • 25% of total indicator score will be based on the reporting of data coverage level for “Total scope 1”.
   • 25% of total indicator score will be based on the reporting of data coverage for “Scope 2”.
   • 10% of total indicator score will be based on third-party review of Scope 1 reporting-year performance.
   • 10% of total indicator score will be based on third-party review of Scope 2 reporting-year performance.

Value reported for data coverage acts as a multiplier to the fractional points allocated to this metric.

The validation status of third-party review evidence (also see: ‘Validation’) affects the score of the “Third-party review” metric and ultimately the total indicator score. The score obtained for the “Third-party review” metric will be multiplied by the evidence multiplier to give the final score for this metric (up to 20% of the total indicator score):

Evidence: The evidence is manually validated and assigned a multiplier, according to the table below. The evidence must support the validation requirements. If any requirements are not met, the evidence may be partially accepted or not accepted depending on the level of alignment with the requirements.

2. Net Zero target setting (20% of GH1)

For all sectors, the remaining 20% of the indicator score will be awarded based on reporting the existence of a Net Zero target.

In order to earn the score for the Net Zero component of the GH1 indicator, participants must fill in Target Setting table and answer each of the embedded yes/no questions in the survey, including:

• Scope of the Net Zero target
• Scope 2 accounting method
• ‘Metric’ used for the Net Zero target
• Whether target is aligned with a Net Zero target-setting framework
• Whether the target is science-based
• Whether the target is validated by a third party
• Whether the target is publicly communicated.

GRESB does not perform automatic validation to ensure all questions are completed and will not prevent the submission of the assessment if a question is skipped. However, in order to achieve a score, answering all the questions from the list above is required. Only the ‘Offsets’ column in the Target Setting table is not required to get the score for Net Zero component of the indicator, and can be completed voluntarily for communication purposes only. If responses to any questions, other than offsets, are missing, none of the Net Zero section will be scored.

In the Target Setting table, to achieve the score associated with net zero target setting, Participants must report year and reduction target for 2 out of 3 of the following targets:

• Short-term target
• Medium-term target
• Long-term target

Notes:

• Participants must input a target year under "Future-year target" as well as a numeric value in the underlying scored metric to score for this indicator.
• Selecting market-based as Scope 2 method for Net Zero target requires reporting of current year market-based emissions to achieve the score associated with Net Zero target setting.
• Not all scored cells/metrics are mandatory. If a scored (light green) cell is not outlined in dark green, leaving it blank will still result in a negative scoring impact. This applies to the following metrics:
  • For participants whose primary sector is “Renewable Power”- Emissions avoided (export of renewable energy): Reporting-year target; Future-year target
  • For all other sectors – Net GHG emissions (scope 1 + 2) location-based: Reporting-year target; Future-year target

Materiality-based Scoring: This indicator applies materiality-based scoring. The materiality weighting for this indicator is determined by the materiality level of the ‘Air pollution’ issue in the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

The weighting of this indicator is determined by the materiality outcome of the issue, which is set at one of four levels:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ the indicator is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0%). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with ‘standard’ weighting. If an issue is of 'High relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting.

As a result, the weight of this indicator may differ for each participant based on its materiality profile. The weighting of the material (scored) indicators in the Performance Component is automatically redistributed to ensure that the Component retains its overall weighting of 60% of the Asset Assessment. For more details download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

Scoring of Metrics: This indicator is scored as a one-section indicator where evidence is optional. Only the metric in the performance table cells shaded in light green is used for scoring. The only scored metric for Air Pollution is “Non-compliances”.

For the scored metric only, all columns (“Reporting-year performance”, “Reporting-year target” and “Future-year target”) should be completed to obtain points as follows:

• 60% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a value in “Reporting-year performance”.
• 20% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Reporting-year target”. The scoring is based on whether a target was set, not on whether the target was achieved.
• 20% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Future-year target”. The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the entity is on track to achieve the target.

Notes:

• Participants must input a target year under "Future-year target" as well as a numeric value in the underlying scored metric in order to score for this metric.
• Not all scored cells/metrics are mandatory. If a scored (light green) cell is not outlined in dark green, leaving it blank will still result in a negative scoring impact. This applies to the following metrics: Non-Compliances: Reporting-year target; Future-year Target
• Reporting of external data review and exceptions are not scored in 2025.

Materiality-based Scoring: This indicator applies materiality-based scoring. The materiality weighting for this indicator is determined by the materiality level of the ‘Water inflows/withdrawal’ issue in the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

The weighting of this indicator is determined by the materiality outcome of the issue, which is set at one of four levels:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ the indicator is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0%). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with ‘standard’ weighting. If an issue is of 'High relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting.

As a result, the weight of this indicator may differ for each participant based on its materiality profile. The weighting of the material (scored) indicators in the Performance Component is automatically redistributed to ensure that the Component retains its overall weighting of 60% of the Asset Assessment. For more details download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

Scoring of Metrics: This indicator is scored as a one-section indicator where evidence is optional. Only the metric in the performance table cells shaded in light green is used for scoring. The only scored metric for Water inflows/withdrawals is “Total withdrawals”, as indicated by the light-green shading of the cells.

For the scored “Total withdrawals” metric, all columns (“Reporting-year performance”, “Reporting-year performance Data Coverage”, “Reporting-year target” and “Future-year target”) should be completed to obtain points as follows:

• 50% of the indicator score will be based on a value reported for “Reporting-year performance Data Coverage” with a full fractional score obtained when entity reports 100% data coverage for requested metric(s), and no score if reporting 0. Value reported for data coverage acts as a multiplier to the fractional points allocated to this metric.
• 30% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a value in “Reporting-year performance”.
• 10% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Reporting-year target”.The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the target was achieved.
• 10% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Future-year target”.The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the entity is on track to achieve the target.

Notes:

• Participants must input a target year under "Future-year target" as well as a numeric value in the underlying scored metric in order to score for this metric.
• Not all scored cells/metrics are mandatory. If a scored (light green) cell is not outlined in dark green, leaving it blank will still result in a negative scoring impact. This applies to the following metrics: Total water withdrawals: Reporting-year target; Future-year target.
• Reporting of external data review is not scored in 2025.

Materiality-based Scoring: This indicator applies materiality-based scoring. The materiality weighting for this indicator is determined by the materiality level of the ‘Water outflows/discharges’ issue in the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

The weighting of this indicator is determined by the materiality outcome of the issue, which is set at one of four levels:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ the indicator is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0%). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with ‘standard’ weighting. If an issue is of 'High relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting.

As a result, the weight of this indicator may differ for each participant based on its materiality profile. The weighting of the material (scored) indicators in the Performance Component is automatically redistributed to ensure that the Component retains its overall weighting of 60% of the Asset Assessment. For more details download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

Scoring of Metrics: This indicator is scored as a one-section indicator where evidence is optional. The only scored metric for Water outflows/discharges is “Total discharge to sensitive waterways”, as indicated by the light-green shading of the cells.

For the scored “Total discharge to sensitive waterways” metric only, all columns (“Reporting-year performance”, “Reporting-year performance Data Coverage”, “Reporting-year target” and “Future-year target”) should be completed to obtain points as follows:

• 50% of the indicator score will be based on a value reported for “Reporting-year performance Data Coverage” with a full fractional score obtained when entity reports 100% data coverage for requested metric(s), and no score if reporting 0. Value reported for data coverage acts as a multiplier to the fractional points allocated to this metric.
• 30% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a value in “Reporting-year performance”.
• 10% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Reporting-year target”.The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the target was achieved.
• 10% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Future-year target”.The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the entity is on track to achieve the target.

Notes:

• Participants must input a target year under "Future-year target" as well as a numeric value in the underlying scored metric in order to score for this metric.
• Not all scored cells/metrics are mandatory. If a scored (light green) cell is not outlined in dark green, leaving it blank will still result in a negative scoring impact. This applies to the following metrics: Total discharge to sensitive waterways: Reporting-year target; Future-year target.
• Reporting of external data review is not scored in 2025.

Materiality-based Scoring: This indicator applies materiality-based scoring. The materiality weighting for this indicator is determined by the materiality level of the ‘Waste’ issue in the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

The weighting of this indicator is determined by the materiality outcome of the issue, which is set at one of four levels:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ the indicator is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0%). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with ‘standard’ weighting. If an issue is of 'High relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting.

As a result, the weight of this indicator may differ for each participant based on its materiality profile. The weighting of the material (scored) indicators in the Performance Component is automatically redistributed to ensure that the Component retains its overall weighting of 60% of the Asset Assessment. For more details download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

Scoring of Metrics: This indicator is scored as a one-section indicator where evidence is optional. Only metrics in the performance table cells shaded in light green are used for scoring. The only scored metric for Waste is “Total diverted from landfill/incineration”.

For the scored metric only, all columns (“Reporting-year performance”, “Reporting-year target” and “Future-year target”) should be completed to obtain points as follows:

• 50% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a values in “Total diverted from landfill/incineration”, as follows:
  • 30% of the total indicator score will be based on the reporting of a value in “Reporting-year performance”.
  • 10% of the total indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Reporting-year target”. The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the target was achieved.
  • 10% of the total indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Future-year target”. The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the entity is on track to achieve the target.
• 50% of the indicator score will be based on a value reported for “Total waste disposed: Reporting-year performance Data Coverage” with a full fractional score obtained when entity reports 100% data coverage for requested metric(s), and no score if reporting 0. Value reported for data coverage acts as a multiplier to the fractional points allocated to this metric.

Notes:

• Participants must input a target year under "Future-year target" as well as a numeric value in the underlying scored metric in order to score for this metric.
• Not all scored cells/metrics are mandatory. If a scored (light green) cell is not outlined in dark green, leaving it blank will still result in a negative scoring impact. This applies to the following metrics: Total diverted from landfill/incineration: Reporting-year target, Future-year target
• Reporting of external data review is not scored in 2025.

Materiality-based Scoring: This indicator applies materiality-based scoring. The materiality weighting for this indicator is determined by the materiality level of the ‘Biodiversity & Habitat’ issue in the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

The weighting of this indicator is determined by the materiality outcome of the issue, which is set at one of four levels:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ the indicator is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0%). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with ‘standard’ weighting. If an issue is of 'High relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting.

As a result, the weight of this indicator may differ for each participant based on its materiality profile. The weighting of the material (scored) indicators in the Performance Component is automatically redistributed to ensure that the Component retains its overall weighting of 60% of the Asset Assessment. For more details download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

Scoring of Metrics: This indicator is scored as a one-section indicator where evidence is optional. Only the metric in the performance table cells shaded in light green is used for scoring. The only scored metric for Biodiversity & Habitat is “Net habitat gain”, as indicated by the light-green shading of the cells.

For the scored metric only, all columns (“Reporting-year performance”, “Reporting-year target” and “Future-year target”) should be completed to obtain points as follows:

• 60% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a value in “Reporting-year performance”.
• 20% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Reporting-year target”. The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the target was achieved.
• 20% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Future-year target”. The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the entity is on track to achieve the target.

Notes

• Participants must input a target year under "Future-year target" as well as a numeric value in the underlying scored metric in order to score for this metric.
• Not all scored cells/metrics are mandatory. If a scored (light green) cell is not outlined in dark green, leaving it blank will still result in a negative scoring impact. This applies to the following metrics: Net habitat gain: Reporting-year target, Future-year target
• Reporting of external data review and exceptions are not scored in 2025.

Materiality-based Scoring: This indicator applies materiality-based scoring. The materiality weighting for this indicator is determined by the materiality level of the ‘Health and Safety: employees’ issue in the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

The weighting of this indicator is determined by the materiality outcome of the issue, which is set at one of four levels:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ the indicator is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0%). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with ‘standard’ weighting. If an issue is of 'High relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting.

As a result, the weight of this indicator may differ for each participant based on its materiality profile. The weighting of the material (scored) indicators in the Performance Component is automatically redistributed to ensure that the Component retains its overall weighting of 60% of the Asset Assessment. For more details download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

Scoring of Metrics: This indicator is scored as a one-section indicator where evidence is optional. The scored metrics for Health & Safety: Employees are “Lost time injuries” and “Total recordable injuries”, as indicated by the light-green shading of the cells in the performance table.

For the scored metrics only, all columns (“Reporting-year performance”, “Reporting-year data coverage”, “Reporting-year target” and “Future-year target”) should be completed to obtain points as follows:

Lost Time Injuries (50% of HS1):

• 25% of total indicator score will be based on a value reported for “Reporting-year performance Data Coverage” with a full fractional score obtained when entity reports 100% data coverage for requested metric(s), and no score if reporting 0. Value reported for data coverage acts as a multiplier to the fractional points allocated to this metric.
• 15% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a value in “Reporting-year performance”.
• 5% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Reporting-year target”. The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the target was achieved.
• 5% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Future-year target”. The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the entity is on track to achieve the target.

Total Recordable Injuries (50% of HS1):

• 25% of total indicator score will be based on a value reported for “Reporting-year performance Data Coverage” with a full fractional score obtained when entity reports 100% data coverage for requested metric(s), and no score if reporting 0. Value reported for data coverage acts as a multiplier to the fractional points allocated to this metric.
• 15% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a value in “Reporting-year performance”.
• 5% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Reporting-year target”. The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the target was achieved.
• 5% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Future-year target”. The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the entity is on track to achieve the target.

Notes:

• Participants need to input a target year under "Future-year target" as well as a numeric value in the underlying scored metric in order to score for this metric.
• Not all scored cells/metrics are mandatory. If a scored (light green) cell is not outlined in dark green, leaving it blank will still result in a negative scoring impact. ‘This applies to the following metrics:
  • Lost time injuries: Reporting-year target, Future-year target
  • Total recordable injuries: Reporting-year target, Future-year target
• Reporting of external data review is not scored in 2025.

Materiality-based Scoring: This indicator applies materiality-based scoring. The materiality weighting for this indicator is determined by the materiality level of the ‘Health and Safety: contractors’ issue in the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

The weighting of this indicator is determined by the materiality outcome of the issue, which is set at one of four levels:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ the indicator is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0%). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with ‘standard’ weighting. If an issue is of 'High relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting.

As a result, the weight of this indicator may differ for each participant based on its materiality profile. The weighting of the material (scored) indicators in the Performance Component is automatically redistributed to ensure that the Component retains its overall weighting of 60% of the Asset Assessment. For more details download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

Scoring of Metrics: This indicator is scored as a one-section indicator where evidence is optional. Only the metric in the performance table cells shaded in light green is used for scoring. The scored metrics for Health & Safety: Contractors are “Lost time injuries” and “Total recordable injuries”, as indicated by the light-green shading of the cells in the performance table. For the scored metrics only, all columns (“Reporting-year performance”, “Reporting-year data coverage”, “Reporting-year target” and “Future-year target”) should be completed to obtain points as follows:

Lost Time Injuries (50% of HS2):

• 25% of total indicator score will be based on a value reported for “Reporting-year performance Data Coverage” with a full fractional score obtained when entity reports 100% data coverage for requested metric(s), and no score if reporting 0. Value reported for data coverage acts as a multiplier to the fractional points allocated to this metric.
• 15% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a value in “Reporting-year performance”.
• 5% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Reporting-year target”. The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the target was achieved.
• 5% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Future-year target”. The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the entity is on track to achieve the target.

Total Recordable Injuries (50% of HS2):

• 25% of total indicator score will be based on a value reported for “Reporting-year performance Data Coverage” with a full fractional score obtained when entity reports 100% data coverage for requested metric(s), and no score if reporting 0. Value reported for data coverage acts as a multiplier to the fractional points allocated to this metric.
• 15% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a value in “Reporting-year performance”.
• 5% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Reporting-year target”. The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the target was achieved.
• 5% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Future-year target”. The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the entity is on track to achieve the target.

Notes:

• Participants must input a target year under "Future-year target" as well as a numeric value in the underlying scored metric in order to score for this metric.
• Not all scored cells/metrics are mandatory. If a scored (light green) cell is not outlined in dark green, leaving it blank will still result in a negative scoring impact. ‘This applies to the following metrics:
  • Lost time injuries: Reporting-year target, Future-year target
  • Total recordable injuries: Reporting-year target, Future-year target
• Reporting of external data review is not scored in 2025.

Materiality-based Scoring: This indicator applies materiality-based scoring. The materiality weighting for this indicator is determined by the materiality level of the ‘Health and Safety: users’ issue in the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

The weighting of this indicator is determined by the materiality outcome of the issue, which is set at one of four levels:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ the indicator is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0%). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with ‘standard’ weighting. If an issue is of 'High relevance' the indicator counts towards the Performance Component score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting.

As a result, the weight of this indicator may differ for each participant based on its materiality profile. The weighting of the material (scored) indicators in the Performance Component is automatically redistributed to ensure that the Component retains its overall weighting of 60% of the Asset Assessment. For more details download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

Scoring of Metrics: This indicator is scored as a one-section indicator where evidence is optional. Only the metric in the performance table cells shaded in light green is used for scoring. The only scored metric for Health & Safety: Users is “Total recordable injuries”, as indicated by the light-green shading of the cells in the performance table.

For the scored metric only, all columns (“Reporting-year performance”, “Reporting-year performance data coverage”, “Reporting-year target” and “Future-year target”) should be completed to obtain points as follows:

• 50% of total indicator score will be based on a value reported for “Reporting-year performance Data Coverage” with a full fractional score obtained when entity reports 100% data coverage for requested metric(s), and no score if reporting 0. Value reported for data coverage acts as a multiplier to the fractional points allocated to this metric.
• 30% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a value in “Reporting-year performance”.
• 10% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Reporting-year target”. The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the target was achieved.
• 10% of the indicator score will be based on the reporting of a target in “Future-year target”. The scoring will be based on whether a target was set, not on whether the entity is on track to achieve the target.

Notes:

• Participants must input a target year under "Future-year target" as well as a numeric value in the underlying scored metric in order to score for this metric.
• Not all scored cells/metrics are mandatory. If a scored (light green) cell is not outlined in dark green, leaving it blank will still result in a negative scoring impact. This applies to the following metrics: Total recordable injuries: Reporting-year target, Future-year target.
• Reporting of external data review is not scored in 2025.