Reporting entity
Entity name: ____________
Fund Manager Organization Name (if applicable): ____________
GRESB is an industry-driven organization transforming the way capital markets assess the environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance of real asset investments.
GRESB data and analytical tools are used by over 70 institutional and retail investors, including pension funds and insurance companies, collectively representing over USD 17 trillion in institutional capital, to engage with investment managers to enhance and protect shareholder value.
For more information, visit gresb.com. Follow @GRESB on Twitter.
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.
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 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 Real Estate 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’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 40 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.
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 participants 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.
Participants will receive a GRESB Scorecard and have the opportunity to purchase a Benchmark Report for a more in-depth analysis of sustainability performance and a detailed indicator-level comparison with peers.
First time participants wishing to opt for the Grace Period can select the option from the settings section in the Assessment Portal.
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 Real Estate Assessment is only disclosed to the participants themselves and:
No other third parties will see the data. GRESB Investor Members must request access to a participant’s benchmark results and scores, allowing the participant the control to either accept or deny this request.
The GRESB 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.
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.
The Assessment Portal is accompanied by indicator-specific guidance, available under the “Guidance” tab that explains:
In addition to the guidance in the Portal, each Assessment is accompanied by a Reference Guide. The Reference Guide provides general introductory information to the Assessments and provides a report-format version of the indicator-by-indicator guidance that is available under the Guidance tab in the Portal. The Reference Guide will be available on March 1, 2018.
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 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 and Developer 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 to Investor Members, Fund Manager and Company Members.
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.
Assessment development process focused on creating alignment between the different GRESB business lines and recognizing topics that are directly aligned with investment rationaleAlignment 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 processThe 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 scopeThe 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 methodologyIn 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 yearThe 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 ModuleResilience 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:
| 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 reportingRationale 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 statesRationale 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. |
| MA1(DQ1) |
Open text box no longer scored, but used for reporting purposesRationale 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-beingRationale 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 removedRationale 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 onlyRationale 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 evidenceRationale 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. |
Adjusted the order of indicators within sectionRationale 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 removedRationale 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 issuesRationale 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 diversityRationale 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 indicatorRationale for change: DQ10 is overlapping with the updated PD2. Impact of change: Easier reporting. |
| DQ11 |
Remove the indicatorRationale 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 groupRationale 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 accidentsRationale 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. |
| ME1 |
DQ17.1 and DQ17.2 merged into one indicator RE4Rationale for change: Consolidation of the Assessment and validation process. Impact of change: Easier reporting, no impact on scoring. |
| DQ18 |
Remove the indicatorRationale 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 optionsRationale 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 metricsRationale 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 engagementRationale 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 AssessmentRationale 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. |
| NC1 |
Open text box no longer scored, but used for reporting purposesRationale 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 certificationRationale 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 exclusiveRationale 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 certificationRationale 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 scoringRationale 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 removedRationale 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 addedRationale 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 purposesRationale 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. |
EC1
Reporting entity
Entity name: ____________
Fund Manager Organization Name (if applicable): ____________
EC2
Nature of ownership:
Listed entity
Please specify ISIN: ____________
Year of commencement: ____________
Legal status:
Property company
Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT)
Non-listed entity
Year of first closing: ____________
Entity style classification:
Core
Value Added
Opportunistic
Open or closed end:
Open end
Closed end
Finite or infinite structure:
Finite structure
Specify termination date: ____________
Infinite structure
Government entity
EC3
The reporting period is:
Calendar year
Fiscal year
Specify the starting month Month
EC4
Is the organization a member of an industry association?
Yes (multiple answers possible)
Asian Association for Investors in Non-listed Real Estate Vehicles (ANREV)
Asia Pacific Real Estate Association (APREA)
British Property Federation (BPF)
European Association for Investors in Non-Listed Real Estate Vehicles (INREV)
European Public Real Estate Association (EPRA)
National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (NAREIT)
Pension Real Estate Association (PREA)
Real Property Association of Canada (REALpac)
Other: ____________
No
RC1
Values are reported in: Currency
RC2
What was the gross asset value (GAV) of the entity at the end of the reporting period in millions?
________________________
RC3
Metrics are reported in:
m2
sq. ft.
RC4
What is the entity's core business?
Management of standing investments only (continue with RC5.1, RC5.2, RC6)
Management of standing investments and development of new construction and major renovation projects (continue with RC5.1, RC5.2, RC6, RC-NC1, RC-NC2, RC-NC3)
Development of new construction and major renovation projects (continue with Developer Assessment)
RC-NC1.1
Describe the composition of the entity’s new construction projects during the reporting period:
![[PropertyConstructionTable]](/images/tables/property_construction_table/y2018-d6a0ec29.svg)
Note: The table above defines the scope of your 2018 GRESB submission on development projects and should include new construction projects that are in progress at the end of reporting period, as well as projects that are completed during the reporting period. The reporting scope reported above should exclude cash or other non real estate assets owned by the entity.
*GAV either according to fair value or based on construction costs
RC-NC1.2
Does the table above list all the entity’s new construction projects as per the reporting requirements described above?
Yes
Provide additional context for the reporting boundaries on new construction projects (maximum 250 words)
________________________
No
Provide additional context for the reporting boundaries on new construction projects (maximum 250 words)
________________________
RC-NC2.1
Describe the composition of the entity’s major renovation projects during the reporting period:
Note: The table above defines the scope of your 2018 GRESB submission on development projects and should include major renovation projects that are in progress at the end of reporting period, as well as projects that are completed during the reporting period. The reporting scope reported above should exclude cash or other non real estate assets owned by the entity.
*GAV either according to fair value or based on construction costs
RC-NC2.2
Does the table above list all the entity’s major renovation projects as per the reporting requirements described above?
Yes
Provide additional context for the reporting boundaries on major renovation projects (maximum 250 words)
________________________
No
Provide additional context for the reporting boundaries on major renovation projects (maximum 250 words)
________________________
RC-NC3
Which countries/states are included in the entity’s new construction and/or major renovation projects portfolio?
![[CountryGavTable]](/images/tables/country_gav_table/y2018-001d02db.svg)
ManagementMA1
Does the entity have specific ESG objectives?
Yes
The objectives relate to (multiple answers possible)
General sustainability
Environment
Social
Governance
Health and well-being
The objectives are
Fully integrated into the overall business strategy
Partially integrated into the overall business strategy
Not integrated into the overall business strategy
The objectives are
Publicly available
Please provide a hyperlink or a separate publicly available document
or URL____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
Not publicly available
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
Communicate the objectives and explain how the objectives are integrated into the overall business strategy (maximum 250 words)
________________________
No
DQ1
2 points , MP, G
MA2
Does the organization have one or more persons responsible for implementing the ESG objectives referenced in MA1?
Yes
Select the persons responsible (multiple answers possible)
Dedicated employee(s) for whom sustainability is the core responsibility
Provide the details for the most senior of these employees
Name: ____________
Job title: ____________
E-mail: ____________
LinkedIn profile (optional): ____________
Employee(s) for whom sustainability is among their responsibilities
Provide the details for the most senior of these employees
Name: ____________
Job title: ____________
E-mail: ____________
LinkedIn profile (optional): ____________
External consultants/manager
Name of the organization Service provider
Name of the main contact: ____________
Job title: ____________
E-mail: ____________
LinkedIn profile (optional): ____________
Investment partners (co-investors/JV partners)
Name of the main contact: ____________
Job title: ____________
E-mail: ____________
LinkedIn profile (optional): ____________
No
Not applicable
DQ2
3 points , MP, G
MA3
Does the organization have a sustainability taskforce or committee that is applicable to the entity?
Yes
Select the members of this taskforce or committee (multiple answers possible)
Asset managers
Board of Directors
External consultants
Name of the organization Service provider
Fund/portfolio managers
Property managers
Senior Management Team
Other: ____________
No
DQ3
2 points , MP, G
MA4
Does the organization have a senior decision-maker accountable for the entity's sustainability strategy?
Yes
Provide the details for the most senior decision-maker on sustainability issues
Name: ____________
Job title: ____________
E-mail: ____________
LinkedIn profile (optional): ____________
The individual is part of
Board of Directors
Senior Management Team
Fund/portfolio managers
Investment Committee
Other: ____________
Please describe the process of informing the most senior decision-maker on the sustainability performance of the entity (maximum 250 words)
________________________
No
DQ4 & DQ5
1 point , MP, G
MA5
Does the organization include ESG factors in the annual performance targets of the employees responsible for this entity?
Yes
Does performance on these targets have predetermined consequences?
Yes
Financial consequences
Non-financial consequences
No
Select the employees to whom these factors apply (multiple answers possible):
All employees
Board of Directors
Senior Management Team
Other: ____________
or document name____________ and publication date____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
No
(DQ6)
3 points , MP, G
Policy & DisclosurePD1
Does the organization have a policy/policies in place, applicable to the entity level, that address(es) environmental issues?
Yes
Select all environmental issues included (multiple answers possible)
Biodiversity and habitat
Climate/climate change adaptation
Energy consumption/management
Environmental attributes of building materials
GHG emissions/management
Resilience
Waste management
Water consumption/management
Other: ____________
or document name____________ and publication date____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
No
DQ8
3 points , MP, G
PD2
Does the organization have a policy/policies in place, applicable to the entity level, that address(es) social issues?
Yes
Select all social issues included (multiple answers possible)
Child labor
Diversity and equal opportunity
Forced or compulsory labor
Occupational safety (for employees)
Asset level safety (for tenants)
Labor-management relationships
Employee performance and career development
Stakeholder engagement
Worker rights
Other: ____________
or document name____________ and publication date____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
No
(DQ9, DQ10, DQ11)
2 points , MP, G
PD3
Does the organization have a policy/policies in place, applicable to the entity level, that address(es) governance issues?
Yes
Select all governance issues included (multiple answers possible)
Bribery and corruption
Data protection and privacy
Employee remuneration
Executive compensation
Fiduciary duty
Fraud
Political contributions
Shareholder rights
Whistleblower protection
Other: ____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
No
(DQ9)
2 points , MP, G
PD4
Does the organization monitor diversity indicator(s) for its governance bodies (i.e. C-suite, Board of Directors, Management Committees)?
Yes
Select all diversity metrics (multiple answers possible)
Age group distribution
Board tenure
Diversity of socioeconomic background
Gender ratio
International background
Racial diversity
Provide additional context for the response (maximum 250 words)
________________________
No
NEW
Not scored , MP, G
PD5.1
Does the organization disclose its ESG actions and/or performance?
Yes (multiple answers possible)
Section in Annual Report
Select the applicable reporting level
Entity
Investment manager
Group
or URL____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
Aligned with Guideline name
Stand-alone sustainability report(s)
Select the applicable reporting level
Entity
Investment manager
Group
or URL____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
Aligned with Guideline name
Integrated Report
*Integrated Report must be aligned with IIRC framework
Select the applicable reporting level
Entity
Investment manager
Group
or URL____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
Aligned with Guideline name
Dedicated section on corporate website
Select the applicable reporting level
Entity
Investment manager
Group
URL____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
Section in entity reporting to investors
Aligned with Guideline name
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
Other: ____________
Select the applicable reporting level
Entity
Investment manager
Group
or URL____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
Aligned with Guideline name
No
DQ7.1
4 points , MP, G
PD5.2
Does the organization have an independent third party review of its ESG disclosure?
Yes
Select all applicable options (multiple answers possible, selections must match answers in PD5.1)
Section in Annual Report
Externally checked by Service provider
Externally verified by Service provider using Scheme name
Externally assured by Service provider using Scheme name
Stand-alone sustainability report
Externally checked by Service provider
Externally verified by Service provider using Scheme name
Externally assured by Service provider using Scheme name
Integrated Report
Externally checked by Service provider
Externally verified by Service provider using Scheme name
Externally assured by Service provider using Scheme name
Section in entity reporting to investors
Externally checked by Service provider
Externally verified by Service provider using Scheme name
Externally assured by Service provider using Scheme name
Other: ____________
Externally checked by Service provider
Externally verified by Service provider using Scheme name
Externally assured by Service provider using Scheme name
No
Not applicable
DQ7.2
2 points , MP, G
PD6
Has the organization made a commitment to ESG leadership standards or groups that applies to investments in this entity?
Yes
Select all issues included (multiple answers possible)
Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (IIGCC)
Montreal Pledge
PRI signatory
RE 100
Science Based Targets initiative
Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD)
UN Environment Programme Finance Initiative
UN Global Compact
Other: ____________
Please provide applicable hyperlink
URL____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
No
NEW
Not scored , MP, G
PD7.1
Does the entity have a process to communicate about ESG-related misconduct, penalties, incidents or accidents?
Yes
The entity would communicate misconduct, penalties, incidents or accidents to:
Investors
Public
Other stakeholders: ____________
Describe the process (maximum 250 words): ____________
No
NEW
Not scored , MP, G
PD7.2
Has the entity been involved in any ESG-related misconduct, penalties, incidents or accidents in the reporting year?
Yes
Specify the total number of cases imposed: ____________
Specify the total value of fines and/or penalties result from these cases
________________________
Provide additional context for the response (maximum 250 words)
________________________
No
* The information in PD7.1 and PD7.2 may be used as criteria for the recognition of 2018 Sector Leaders
DQ14 & DQ16
Not scored , MP, G
RE1
Does the organization have systems and procedures in place to facilitate effective implementation of the governance policy/policies in PD3?
Yes
Select all applicable options (multiple answers possible)
Investment due diligence process
Training related to governance risks for employees (multiple answers possible)
Regular follow-ups
When an employee joins the organization
Whistle-blower mechanism
Other: ____________
or document name____________ and publication date____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
No
Not applicable
DQ12
1 point , IM, G
RE2
Did the entity perform entity-level governance and/or social risk assessments within the last three years?
Yes
Select all issues included (multiple answers possible)
Bribery and corruption
Child labor
Diversity and equal opportunity
Executive compensation
Forced or compulsory labor
Labor-management relationships
Shareholder rights
Worker rights
Other: ____________
or document name____________ and publication date____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
No
DQ13
2 points , IM, G
RE3
Does the entity perform asset-level environmental and/or social risk assessments as a standard part of its due diligence process for new acquisitions?
Yes
Select all issues included (multiple answers possible)
Building safety and materials
Climate change adaptation
Contamination
Energy efficiency
Energy supply
Flooding
GHG emissions
Health and well-being
Indoor environmental quality
Natural hazards
Regulatory
Resilience
Socio-economic
Transportation
Water efficiency
Waste management
Water supply
Other: ____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
No
Not applicable
DQ15
2 points , IM, E
RE4
Does the organization have an Environmental Management System (EMS) that applies to the entity level?
Yes
The EMS is aligned with a standard
ISO 14001
EMAS (EU Eco-Management and Audit Scheme)
Other: ____________
The EMS is externally certified by an independent thrid party
Name of the organization Service provider
ISO 14001
EMAS (EU Eco-Management and Audit Scheme)
Other: ____________
The EMS is not aligned with a standard nor certified externally
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
No
DQ17.1 & DQ17.2
3 points , MP, G
Stakeholder EngagementSE1
Does the organization provide regular trainings for the employees responsible for the entity?
Yes
Percentage of employees who received professional training in 2017
________________________
Percentage of employees who received sustainability-specific training in 2017
________________________
Sustainability-specific training focuses on the following elements (multiple answers possible)
Training topics on environmental issues
Contamination
Greenhouse gas emissions
Energy
Natural hazards
Regulatory standards
Supply chain environmental impacts
Waste
Water
Other: ____________
Training topics on social issues
Community social and economic impacts
Safety
Community safety
Customer / tenant safety
Employee safety
Supply chain safety
Health and well-being
Community health and well-being
Customer / tenant health and well-being
Employee health and well-being
Supply chain health and well-being
Other: ____________
No
DQ19
2 points , IM, S
SE2.1
Has the organization undertaken an employee satisfaction survey during the last three years?
Yes
The survey is undertaken (multiple answers possible)
Internally
Percentage of employees covered: ____________%
Survey response rate: ____________%
By an independent third party
Percentage of employees covered: ____________%
Name of the organization Service provider
Survey response rate: ____________%
The survey includes quantitative metrics
Yes
Metrics include
Net Promoter Score
Overall satisfaction score
Other: ____________
No
or document name____________ and publication date____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
No
DQ20.1
1.5 points , IM, S
SE2.2
Does the organization have a program in place to improve its employee satisfaction based on the outcomes of the survey referred to in SE2.1?
Yes
Select all applicable options (multiple answers possible)
Development of action plan
Feedback sessions with Senior Management Team
Feedback sessions with separate teams/departments
Focus groups
Other: ____________
No
Not applicable
DQ20.2
1 point , IM, S
SE3.1
Does the organization monitor employee health and well-being needs?
Yes
Select all applicable options (multiple answers possible)
Employee surveys on health and well-being
Percentage of employees: ____________%
Physical and/or mental health checks
Percentage of employees: ____________%
Other: ____________
Percentage of employees: ____________%
No
Not applicable
DQ21.1
1 point , IM, S
SE3.2
Has the organization monitored conditions for and/or tracked indicators of employee safety during the last three years?
Yes
Select all applicable options (multiple answers possible)
Work station and/or workplace checks
Percentage of employees: ____________%
Absentee rate: ____________
Injury rate: ____________
Lost day rate: ____________
Other metrics: ____________
Rate of other metric(s): ____________
Explain the employee occupational health and safety indicators calculation method (maximum 250 words)
________________________
No
DQ21.2
0.5 points , IM, S
SE4.1
Does the entity include ESG-specific requirements in the procurement processes to drive sustainable procurement?
Yes
Select all topics included (multiple answers possible)
Business ethics
Environmental process standards
Environmental product standards
Human rights
Human health-based product standards
Occupational safety
Health and well-being
Sustainability-specific requirements for sub-contractors
Other: ____________
Select the external parties to whom the requirements apply (multiple answers possible)
Contractors
Property/asset managers
Suppliers
Supply chain (beyond 1 tier suppliers and contractors)
Other: ____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
No
Not applicable
DQ23
3 points , MP, G
SE4.2
Does the entity engage with its supply chains to ensure the specific ESG requirements in SE4.1 are met?
Yes
Describe the process (maximum 250 words): ____________
No
Not applicable
NEW
Not scored , MP, G
NC1
Does the entity have a sustainability strategy in place for new construction and major renovation projects?
Yes
Elements addressed in the strategy (multiple answers possible)
Biodiversity and habitat
Climate/climate change adaptation
Energy consumption/management
Environmental attributes of building materials
GHG emissions/management
Green building certifications
Building safety
Health and well-being
Location and transportation
Resilience
Supply chain
Water consumption/management
Waste management
Other: ____________
The strategy is
Publicly available
Please provide a hyperlink or a separate publicly available document
or URL____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
Not publicly available
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
Communicate the objectives and explain how the objectives are integrated into the overall business strategy (maximum 250 words)
________________________
No
NC1
1 point , MP, G
NC2
Does the entity have sustainable site selection criteria in place for new construction and major renovation projects?
Yes
Select all criteria included (multiple answers possible)
Connect to multi-modal transit networks
Locate projects within existing developed areas
Protect, restore, and conserve aquatic ecosystems
Protect, restore, and conserve farmland
Protect, restore, and conserve floodplain functions
Protect, restore, and conserve habitats for threatened and endangered species
Redevelop brownfield sites
Other: ____________
The entity’s sustainable site selection criteria are aligned with
Third-party guidelines
Specify: ____________
Third-party rating system(s)
Specify scheme(s)/sub-scheme(s): ____________
Other: ____________
Not aligned
or document name____________ and publication date____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
No
Not applicable
NC2
3 points , MP, G
NC3
Does the entity have sustainable site design/development requirements for new construction and major renovation projects?
Yes
Select all applicable options (multiple answers possible)
Manage waste by diverting construction and demolition materials from disposal
Manage waste by diverting reusable vegetation, rocks, and soil from disposal
Protect air quality during construction
Protect surface water and aquatic ecosystems by controlling and retaining construction pollutants
Protect and restore habitat and soils disturbed during construction and/or during previous development
Other: ____________
The entity’s sustainable site design/development criteria are aligned with
Third-party guidelines
Specify: ____________
Third-party rating system(s)
Specify scheme(s)/sub-scheme(s): ____________
Other: ____________
Not aligned
or document name____________ and publication date____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
No
NC3
1.5 points , MP, G
NC4
Does the entity require that the environmental and health attributes of building materials be considered for new construction and major renovation projects?
Yes
Select all issues addressed (multiple answers possible)
Formal adoption of a policy on health attributes of building materials
Formal adoption of a policy on the environmental attributes and performance of building materials
Requirement for information (disclosure) about the environmental and/or health attributes of building materials (multiple answers possible)
Health and environmental information
Environmental Product Declarations
Health Product Declarations
Other types of health and environmental information: ____________
Material characteristics specification, including (multiple answers possible)
Preference for materials that disclose environmental impacts
Preference for materials that disclose potential health hazards
“Red list” of prohibited materials or ingredients that should not be used on the basis of their human and/or environmental impacts
Locally extracted or recovered materials
Rapidly renewable materials, low embodied carbon materials, and recycled content materials
Materials that can easily be recycled
Third-party certified wood-based materials and products
Types of third-party certification used: ____________
Low-emitting materials
Other: ____________
or document name____________ and publication date____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
No
Not applicable
NC4
2.5 points , MP, E
NC5.1
Does the entity’s new construction and major renovation portfolio include projects that are aligned with green building rating standards
Yes
Select all applicable options (multiple answers possible)
The entity requires projects to align with requirements of a third-party green building rating system but does not require certification
Percentage portfolio covered
Green building rating systems (include all that apply): ____________
The entity requires projects to achieve certification with a green building rating system but does not require a specific level of certification
Percentage portfolio covered
Green building rating systems (include all that apply): ____________
The entity requires projects to achieve a specific level of certification
Percentage portfolio covered
Green building rating systems (include all that apply): ____________
Level of certification adopted as a standard by the entity (include all applicable rating systems):
________________________
No
NC5.1
2 points , IM, E
NC5.2
Does the entity’s new construction and major renovation portfolio include projects that obtained or are registered to obtain a green building certificate?
Yes
Specify the certification scheme(s) used and the percentage of the portfolio registered and/or certified (multiple answers possible)
![[CertificationLevelTable]](/images/tables/certification_level_table/y2018-f1f91967.svg)
No
Not applicable
NC5.2
A list of provisionally validated certification schemes is provided in Appendix of the Reference Guide. If you wish to add a new scheme, please contact info@gresb.com, and you will be asked to complete the validation questions for the scheme (see Reference Guide Appendix).
5 points , IM, E
NC6
Does the entity have minimum energy efficiency requirements for new construction and major renovation projects?
Yes
Requirements for planning and design include (multiple answers possible)
Integrative design process
To exceed relevant energy codes or standards
Other: ____________
Common energy efficiency measures include (multiple answers possible)
Air conditioning
Commissioning
Energy modeling
Lighting
Occupant controls
Space heating
Ventilation
Water heating
Other: ____________
Operational energy efficiency monitoring (multiple answers possible)
Energy use analytics
Post-construction energy monitoring for on
Average years: ____________
Sub-meter
Other: ____________
No
NC6
3 points , MP, E
NC7.1
Does the entity incorporate on-site renewable energy in the design of new construction and major renovation projects?
Yes
Projects designed to generate on-site renewable energy (multiple answers possible)
Biofuels
Percentage of all projects: ____________%
Geothermal
Percentage of all projects: ____________%
Hydro
Percentage of all projects: ____________%
Solar/photovoltaic
Percentage of all projects: ____________%
Wind
Percentage of all projects: ____________%
Other: ____________
Percentage of all projects: ____________%
Average design target for the fraction of total energy demand met with on-site renewable energy
________________________
No
Not applicable
NC7.1
3 points , IM, E
NC7.2
Are the entity’s new construction and major renovation projects designed to meet net-zero energy codes and/or standards?
Yes
Applicable net-zero standard:
Description of the entity’s definition of “net-zero energy” (max 150 words)
____________
Description of the applicable reference code and/or standard (max 150 words)
____________
Other: ____________
Percentage of projects covered: ____________%
No
NC7.2
1 point , IM, E
NC8
Does the entity promote water conservation in its new construction and major renovation projects?
Yes
The entity promotes water conservation through (multiple answers possible)
Requirements for planning and design include (multiple answers possible)
Development and implementation of a commissioning plan
Integrative design for water conservation
Requirements for indoor water efficiency
Requirements for outdoor water efficiency
Requirements for process water efficiency
Requirements for water supply
Other: ____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
Common water efficiency measures include (multiple answers possible)
Commissioning of water systems
Drip/smart irrigation
Drought tolerant/low-water landscaping
High-efficiency/dry fixtures
Leak detection system
Occupant sensors
On-site wastewater treatment
Re-use of stormwater and grey water for non-potable applications
Other: ____________
Operational water efficiency monitoring (multiple answers possible)
Post-construction water monitoring for on
Average years: ____________
Sub-meter
Water use analytics
Other: ____________
No
Not applicable
NC8
2 points , MP, E
NC9
Does the entity promote efficient on-site solid waste management during the construction phase of its new construction and major renovation projects?
Yes
The entity promotes efficient solid waste management through (multiple answers possible)
Management and construction practices (multiple answers possible)
Construction waste signage
Education of employees/contractors on waste management
Incentives for contractors for recovering, reusing and recycling building materials
Targets for waste stream recovery, reuse and recycling
Waste management plans
Waste separation facilities
Other: ____________
On-site waste monitoring (multiple answers possible)
Hazardous waste monitoring
Non-hazardous waste monitoring
Other: ____________
or document name____________ and publication date____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
No
NC9
2 points , MP, E
NC10.1
Does the entity have ESG requirements in place for its contractors?
Yes
Select all topics included (multiple answers possible)
Business ethics
Community engagement
Environmental process standards
Environmental product standards
Fundamental human rights
Human health-based product standards
On-site occupational safety
ESG-specific requirements for sub-contractors
Other: ____________
Percentage of projects covered: ____________%
or document name____________ and publication date____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
No
NC10.1
2 points , MP, S
NC10.2
Does the organization monitor its contractors' compliance with its ESG-specific requirements in place for this entity?
Yes
Select all applicable options (multiple answers possible)
Contractors provide update reports on environmental and social aspects during construction
External audits by third party
Percentage of projects audited during the reporting period: ____________%
Name of the organization Service provider
Internal audits
Percentage of projects audited during the reporting period: ____________%
Weekly/monthly (on-site) meetings and/or ad hoc site visits
Percentage of projects visited during the reporting period: ____________%
Other: ____________
No
Not applicable
NC10.2
2 points , IM, S
NC11
Does the entity promote occupant health and well-being in its new construction and major renovation projects?
Yes
The entity addresses health and well-being in the design of its product through (multiple answers possible)
Requirements for planning and design, including (multiple answers possible)
Health Impact Assessment
Integrated planning process
Other planning process: ____________
or document name____________ and publication date____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
Common occupant health and well-being measures, including (multiple answers possible)
Access to spaces for active and passive recreation
Active design features
Commissioning
Daylight
Indoor air quality monitoring
Indoor air quality source control
Natural ventilation
Occupant controls
Provisions for active transport
Other: ____________
Provisions to verify health and well-being performance include (multiple answers possible)
Occupant education
Post-construction health and well-being monitoring (e.g., occupant comfort and satisfaction) for on
Average years: ____________
Other: ____________
No
Not applicable
NC11
2 points , MP, S
NC12.1
Does the entity promote on-site safety during the construction phase of its new construction and major renovation projects?
Yes
The entity promotes on-site safety through (multiple answers possible)
Availability of medical personnel
Communicating safety information
Continuously improving safety performance
Demonstrating safety leadership
Entrenching safety practices
Managing safety risks
Personal Protective and Life Saving Equipment
Promoting design for safety
Training curriculum
Other: ____________
No
Not applicable
NC12.1
1 point , MP, S
NC12.2
Does the organization monitor safety indicators at construction sites?
Yes
Select all applicable options (multiple answers possible)
Injury rate: ____________
Explain the injury rate calculation method (maximum 250 words)
________________________
Fatalities: ____________
Near misses: ____________
Other metrics: ____________
Rate of other metric(s): ____________
No
NC12.2
1 point , IM, S
NC13
Does the entity assess the potential socio-economic impact of its new construction and major renovation projects on the community as part of planning and pre-construction?
Yes
Select the areas of impact that are assessed (multiple answers possible)
Housing affordability
Impact on crime levels
Livability score
Local income generated
Local residents‘ well-being
Walkability score
Other: ____________
No
NC13
1.5 points , IM, S
NC14
Does the entity have a systematic process to monitor the impact of new construction and major renovation projects on the local community during different stages of the project?
Yes
The entity’s process includes (multiple answers possible)
Analysis and interpretation of monitoring data
Development and implementation of a communication plan
Development and implementation of a community monitoring plan
Development and implementation of a risk mitigation plan
Identification of nuisance and/or disruption risks
Identification of stakeholders and impacted groups
Management practices to ensure accountability for performance goals and issues identified during community monitoring
Other: ____________
Describe the monitoring process (maximum 250 words): ____________
Indicate where in the evidence the relevant information can be found____
No
NC14
1.5 points , IM, G