Disclosure readiness

Every question asks what you can produce, not how ready you feel. The output is a list of artefacts to go and find, grouped by who usually holds them.

Showing every criterion

Pick your role to narrow this to the questions you are accountable for. Your answers are held in this browser only. They are not sent to us and do not follow you to another device. Export the evidence pack to keep a copy.

Disclosure readiness progress

Answered 0 of 38. The average below describes the answers you gave. It is not a score, a grade, or a statement that anything is adequate.

Can you produce a charter or terms of reference that names which body or individual oversees climate-related risks and opportunities?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
No document assigns climate oversight to anyone.
Oversight is understood in practice but is not written into any charter or terms of reference.
A current charter names the responsible body and describes how oversight is exercised.
The charter is current and the arrangement has been reviewed by internal audit or an external adviser.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Board or committee charter naming climate oversight responsibility
Documented delegation of climate responsibilities to named management roles
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce minutes or papers showing the responsible body actually considered and decided climate matters during the period?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
No record of climate matters reaching the responsible body.
Climate appears in papers occasionally, without a clear record of decisions.
Minutes show climate matters were considered on a regular cadence, with decisions recorded.
The cadence and quality of information reaching the body has been reviewed independently.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Minutes evidencing climate matters were considered and decided
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you show how the responsible body satisfies itself that it has the skills to oversee climate-related matters?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
Skills for climate oversight have not been considered.
Skills have been discussed informally but no assessment is recorded.
A skills assessment or matrix records climate competency and how gaps are addressed.
The assessment is externally facilitated or reviewed and drives appointments or training.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Board or committee charter naming climate oversight responsibility
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you state, from policy documents, whether climate performance affects executive remuneration, and how?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
The relationship between climate performance and remuneration has not been determined.
There is an intention to link them, not yet reflected in policy.
Policy documents state the linkage, or state explicitly that there is none.
The linkage is disclosed publicly and the outcome is reported against the measure each year.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Remuneration policy showing whether climate performance affects incentives
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce a documented identification of your climate-related risks and opportunities across short, medium and long term horizons?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
Climate risks and opportunities have not been documented.
A list exists but time horizons are not defined or applied.
Risks and opportunities are documented against defined horizons and reviewed periodically.
The identification has been challenged by an independent party and revised as a result.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Risk register showing climate and environmental risks with treatments and owners
Analysis of current and anticipated financial effects of climate risks
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce analysis of the current and anticipated financial effects of your climate-related risks on the financial statements?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
Financial effects have not been analysed.
Qualitative commentary exists without quantification or linkage to line items.
Analysis connects climate risks to specific financial statement effects, with assumptions stated.
The analysis has been reviewed by finance and tested by the auditor or an independent specialist.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Analysis of current and anticipated financial effects of climate risks
Financial provisioning for closure and rehabilitation, with the basis of estimate
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce scenario analysis documentation showing the scenarios used, why they were chosen, and the inputs and assumptions?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
No scenario analysis has been undertaken.
Scenarios have been discussed but the analysis and its assumptions are not documented.
Documented analysis states the scenarios, sources, inputs, horizons and how results informed strategy.
The methodology has been externally reviewed and results are reported publicly.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Scenario analysis documentation with scenarios used, inputs and time horizons
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce a transition plan setting out actions, timing, responsible owners and the capital allocated to them?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
No transition plan exists.
Ambition has been stated publicly without a plan behind it.
A documented plan names actions, owners, timing and funding, and is reviewed against progress.
The plan is publicly disclosed, progress is reported against it, and the assumptions have been externally reviewed.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Documented transition plan with actions, timing and capital allocation
Target statement covering scope coverage, base year, target year and how it was set
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you show how capital expenditure decisions test alignment with your stated climate commitments?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
Capital decisions do not consider stated climate commitments.
Climate is considered informally in investment cases.
The investment framework requires a documented climate assessment, including any internal carbon price.
Alignment of the capital programme is reported publicly and tested independently.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Documented transition plan with actions, timing and capital allocation
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce a documented process for identifying, assessing, prioritising and monitoring climate-related risks?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
No documented process for climate-related risk.
Climate risks are handled ad hoc, outside the risk framework.
Climate risk follows the documented enterprise risk process, with criteria and cadence set.
The process has been independently audited and findings closed.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Risk management framework document approved by the governing body
Risk register showing climate and environmental risks with treatments and owners
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you show that climate-related risks sit in the same register and escalate through the same path as other enterprise risks?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
Climate risks are tracked separately, if at all.
Climate risks are mapped to the enterprise register but escalate differently.
Climate risks are fully integrated, with the same criteria, owners and escalation thresholds.
Integration has been tested by internal audit and reported to the governing body.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Risk register showing climate and environmental risks with treatments and owners
Risk management framework document approved by the governing body
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce a current register of your environmental compliance obligations and evidence that compliance is evaluated?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
No consolidated register of compliance obligations.
A register exists but is not current or not evaluated.
The register is current and compliance is evaluated on a defined cycle with results recorded.
Evaluation is subject to internal audit or external certification.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Environmental aspects and impacts register with compliance obligations identified
Internal audit report covering sustainability data or controls
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce documentation stating your organisational boundary and the consolidation approach used?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
The boundary and consolidation approach are not documented.
An approach is applied in practice but not written down or not applied consistently.
The approach is documented, applied consistently, and joint ventures are explicitly treated.
The boundary has been tested by an assurance provider.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Organisational boundary documentation stating the consolidation approach used
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce a scope 1 and scope 2 inventory with the methodology, emission factors and data sources documented?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
No inventory, or figures that cannot be traced to a method.
Figures exist but the method and factors are not documented end to end.
The inventory is documented so that a third party could reproduce it from the records.
The inventory has been independently assured, and findings have been actioned.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Greenhouse gas inventory for scopes 1 and 2 with methodology documented
Documentation of the estimation method used for each source and why it qualifies
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce your submitted National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting report and the records that allow the figures to be verified?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
No report has been prepared, or registration status is unresolved.
A report was submitted but underlying records are incomplete or dispersed.
The report and a complete, retrievable record trail exist for the reporting period.
The report trail has been tested by an external auditor or under a Regulator audit.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Submitted National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting report for the financial year
Documentation of the estimation method used for each source and why it qualifies
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
For each significant source, can you show which estimation method was used and evidence that the criteria for using it were satisfied?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
Method selection is not documented by source.
Methods are recorded but the justification for higher-order methods is not.
Each source records its method and the evidence that the criteria are met.
Method selection has been reviewed by an independent measurement specialist.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Documentation of the estimation method used for each source and why it qualifies
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
For each covered facility, can you produce the baseline determination and your projected position against the declining trajectory?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
Baseline position and forward projection are not tracked.
The current baseline is known but no forward projection exists.
Baselines and a multi-year projection are maintained, with the management strategy documented.
The projection is reviewed independently and reported to the governing body each year.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Facility baseline determination and any application for a varied baseline
Documented transition plan with actions, timing and capital allocation
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you state which methane reporting level you report at, and produce the measurement and reconciliation records behind it?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
Methane is estimated with generic factors only, and the level is not stated.
Some source-level measurement exists without a documented plan.
A documented plan sets the reporting level, and source-level estimates are reconciled with site-level measurement.
Reconciliation is independently verified and differences are explained publicly.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Methane measurement plan showing reporting level and reconciliation approach
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce a screening of all fifteen scope 3 categories showing which are relevant and which are excluded, with the reason?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
No screening of scope 3 categories has been done.
Some categories are estimated without a documented screening of the rest.
All fifteen categories are screened, with exclusions stated and justified.
The screening and exclusions have been tested by an assurance provider.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Scope 3 inventory by category, with excluded categories and the reason stated
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce the accounting for emissions from processing and from use of sold products, which for resources and fuels producers is typically the largest part of the footprint?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
Downstream emissions from sold products are not accounted for.
A figure exists but the method, allocation and assumptions are not documented.
The accounting is documented and reproducible, and its scale is disclosed alongside scopes 1 and 2.
The accounting has been independently assured and is reported without netting it against other categories.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Scope 3 inventory by category, with excluded categories and the reason stated
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce records of the emissions and human rights data you have requested from suppliers and what they returned?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
No supplier data has been requested.
Requests are made inconsistently and responses are not tracked.
Requests follow a defined programme, responses are tracked, and gaps are escalated.
Supplier data quality is independently reviewed and drives sourcing decisions.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Records of emissions data requested from suppliers and what was returned
Supplier code of conduct covering emissions data and human rights expectations
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce a supplier code of conduct that states your emissions data and human rights expectations, and evidence it is applied?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
No supplier code covering these expectations.
A code exists but is not referenced in contracts or monitored.
The code is contractually binding and compliance is monitored on a risk basis.
Monitoring includes independent audit of higher-risk suppliers.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Supplier code of conduct covering emissions data and human rights expectations
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
For each public target, can you produce a statement of its scope coverage, base year, target year, and how it was set?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
Targets are stated publicly without documented parameters.
Parameters exist internally but are not disclosed alongside the target.
Every public target discloses scope, base year, target year and the basis on which it was set.
Targets are externally validated, and revisions are disclosed with the reason.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Target statement covering scope coverage, base year, target year and how it was set
Base year statement and recalculation policy
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you state the extent to which each target relies on carbon credits, and produce a register of the credits by scheme, type and vintage?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
Reliance on credits is not quantified.
Credits are used but the extent of reliance is not separated from abatement.
Reliance is quantified and disclosed separately from own abatement, with credit type and scheme stated.
The register is independently verified and removals are reported separately from avoidance credits.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Register of carbon credits held, retired or planned, by scheme and vintage
Target statement covering scope coverage, base year, target year and how it was set
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
For each public environmental claim, can you produce the substantiation that was held at the time the claim was made?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
No substantiation file exists for public claims.
Supporting material exists but was assembled after the claim was published.
A dated substantiation file was held before each claim was made and is retained.
Claims pass a documented review, including legal sign-off, before publication.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Substantiation file held at the time the claim was made, not assembled afterwards
Public statement of what the claim covers and what it excludes
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
For each claim, is what it covers and what it excludes stated as prominently as the claim itself?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
Claims are made without stating their boundary.
The boundary appears only in a report footnote or a linked document.
The boundary is stated with the claim wherever the claim appears.
Boundary wording is reviewed by legal counsel and tested for how a reader would understand it.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Public statement of what the claim covers and what it excludes
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce documented controls over sustainability data equivalent to those over financial data?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
Sustainability data has no documented control environment.
Some controls exist informally, without documentation or testing.
Controls are documented, operated and evidenced, with segregation of preparation and review.
Controls have been tested by internal audit or an assurance provider.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Documented controls over sustainability data, equivalent to financial data controls
Internal audit report covering sustainability data or controls
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce an independent assurance report over your sustainability information?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
No external assurance has been obtained.
Assurance has been scoped or quoted but not performed.
Limited assurance has been obtained over the reported information.
Assurance coverage matches or exceeds what the phase-in requires, and findings are actioned and tracked.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Independent assurance report over sustainability information
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
For each tailings facility, can you produce a current consequence classification and the basis on which it was assigned?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
Consequence classification has not been assigned or is not current.
A classification exists but the supporting assessment is not retrievable.
Each facility has a current classification with the supporting assessment on file.
Classifications have been reviewed by an independent technical reviewer.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Consequence classification for each tailings facility, with the basis recorded
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce appointments for an Accountable Executive and an Engineer of Record, and the findings of independent technical review?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
Accountability for tailings is not formally assigned.
Roles are filled in practice but not formally appointed or documented.
Appointments are documented and an independent technical review operates on a set cycle.
Review findings are tracked to closure and reported to the governing body.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Appointment of an Engineer of Record and of an Accountable Executive
Independent technical review board findings and the response to them
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce emergency response plans developed with public authorities and affected communities, and evidence they have been tested?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
No tailings emergency response plan.
A plan exists but was developed without authorities or affected communities.
Plans were developed jointly and have been exercised within the last cycle.
Exercises involve external participants and findings are published to affected communities.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Emergency preparedness and response plan, tested and dated
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce a site water balance that places your withdrawals and discharges in their catchment context?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
No documented water balance.
Volumes are tracked without catchment context or a reconciled balance.
A reconciled balance exists and is read against catchment conditions and other users.
The balance is externally reviewed and reported publicly.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Site water balance and water accounting, including catchment context
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you show the mitigation hierarchy was applied to biodiversity impacts, with avoidance considered before offsets?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
Biodiversity impacts have not been assessed against the mitigation hierarchy.
Offsets are proposed without a documented record of avoidance and minimisation options.
The hierarchy is documented step by step, with reasons where avoidance was not adopted.
The assessment has been independently reviewed and outcomes are monitored against targets.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Biodiversity assessment applying the mitigation hierarchy to habitat impacts
Referral decision and approval conditions under the EPBC Act, or a documented assessment that none is required
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce either your referral and approval conditions under the EPBC Act, or a documented assessment concluding that no referral is required?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
No documented position on whether the Act is engaged.
An informal view exists without a documented assessment.
A documented assessment exists, and approval conditions are tracked where applicable.
The assessment was prepared or reviewed by an independent specialist and conditions are audited.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Referral decision and approval conditions under the EPBC Act, or a documented assessment that none is required
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce a closure plan with completion criteria and an agreed post-closure land use?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
No closure plan beyond what the tenement minimally requires.
A plan exists but completion criteria and post-closure land use are undefined.
The plan defines completion criteria and a post-closure land use developed with affected parties.
The plan is externally reviewed, costed and updated on a set cycle.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Mine closure plan with post-closure land use and completion criteria
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce the basis of estimate for your closure and rehabilitation provision?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
The provision is not supported by a documented basis of estimate.
An estimate exists but has not been refreshed against the current closure plan.
The provision follows a current, documented basis of estimate aligned to the closure plan.
The estimate is independently reviewed and tested through the financial statement audit.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Financial provisioning for closure and rehabilitation, with the basis of estimate
Mine closure plan with post-closure land use and completion criteria
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you produce records of consultation and participation of workers, including non-managerial workers, on health, safety and environmental matters?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
No records of worker consultation.
Consultation happens but is not recorded or does not reach non-managerial workers.
Consultation is recorded, reaches non-managerial workers, and outcomes are fed back.
The effectiveness of consultation is reviewed with worker representatives and changes are made.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Records of consultation and participation of workers, including non-managerial workers
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.
Can you show the hierarchy of controls was applied, with elimination and engineering controls considered before protective equipment?
Which of these describes what you can produce today?
Controls default to protective equipment and administrative measures.
The hierarchy is referenced in policy but not evidenced in risk assessments.
Risk assessments record why higher-order controls were or were not adopted.
Application of the hierarchy is audited and challenged independently.
Which of these can you actually put your hands on?
Records showing the hierarchy of controls was applied, not just protective equipment issued
Note (optional). This travels into your evidence pack.

Showing every criterion

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help

Sources and help