A listed company preparing disclosure
The board asks for a figure that will survive a question from an analyst, an auditor or a regulator — not one that survives only internal review.
Your annual emissions figure, examined at source.
We independently test the organizational boundary, reporting boundary, source completeness, activity data, emission factors, calculations and evidence trail behind the reported inventory.
Standards applied
When it is needed
Three situations that put an inventory under real pressure.
A supplier answering a customer
A European or multinational customer has asked for a documented figure for its own Scope 3 accounting, and will not accept an unverified spreadsheet.
An applicant for finance
A lender applying a disclosure or transition framework needs the emissions basis to be independently examined before the facility is approved.
What we examine
From the reported total back to the meter reading.
Verification is not a document review. Every material figure has to be traceable to a primary record, and every judgement in the model has to be visible.
- Organizational and operational boundaries, and the units consolidated inside them
- Classification of emissions across Scope 1, Scope 2 and the selected Scope 3 categories
- Primary data sources — meter readings against invoices, production records against commercial records
- Emission factors: source, version, year and applicability to your process
- The calculation file, its formulas and the path of every figure from source to total
- Treatment of missing data, estimates and stated assumptions
- Base-year consistency and any recalculation applied
- Internal controls over data collection and approval
What you prepare
The pack we will ask for.
- The inventory report and its methodology.
- Organizational and operational boundary map.
- Twelve months of energy and fuel invoices.
- Production records for the period.
- Emission-factor sources with version and year.
- The calculation file, open — not a PDF.
- Change log and any recalculation record.
- Calibration certificates for the principal meters.
- Any prior verification statement.
How it runs
Seven steps, three responsibilities that never meet in one person.
Pre-engagement
We check whether your request is inside the schedule, whether we hold the sector competence, and whether any conflict exists. We may decline here.
May be declinedPlanning
Assurance level, materiality threshold and the sampling plan are set and agreed before any testing begins.
Agreed in writingStrategic analysis
Understanding the entity, its data sources and where a material misstatement would most plausibly arise.
Engagement teamTesting
Document review and site visits, allocated by risk. Figures are traced back to their primary records.
Engagement teamFindings
Findings are issued to you with the requirement each one relates to. We examine your response. We do not propose the correction.
No corrections proposedIndependent technical review
A technical reviewer who took no part in the engagement examines the file.
Independent reviewerDecision and issuance
Taken by an authorised person who neither performed nor reviewed the work.
Authorised decision-maker
The output
What you receive — and what it does not mean.
A verification statement naming: the assertion verified · the reporting period · the assurance level · the materiality applied · the intended user and intended use · the type of opinion · exclusions and limitations.
What it does not mean: It is not a certificate. It is not an endorsement of environmental performance. It does not mean your emissions are low or acceptable. It does not cover periods, units or categories that are not named in it.
Why we might decline
The engagements we do not take.
- The sector falls outside Accreditation Schedule 1225009B.
- A conflict of interest exists that cannot be reduced to an acceptable level.
- Base data is missing to a degree that prevents any opinion being formed.
- We are asked to propose corrections or to help build the inventory.
- The requested timetable does not allow the depth of testing the risk requires.
Frequently asked
It is determined by risk and data quality, not by the calendar. We give you a range after the pre-engagement review, and the range narrows once we have seen the evidence pack.
Yes, provided we can trace each figure back to its primary source. A system export is a starting point, not evidence in itself.
No. We describe the finding and link it to the requirement it relates to. You decide what to do about it — internally or with an adviser of your choosing.
Not freely. Accreditation symbols are used under defined rules; the statement and our mark rules set out exactly what is permitted.
There is a published rule for new facts arising after issuance: we evaluate promptly, and the action may include additional work, independent review, revision or withdrawal.
Read next
Describe the claim — not the service.
Tell us what must be relied on, who will rely on it and by what date. We will confirm the correct programme, evidence requirement and responsible entity — or tell you it is outside our scope.