iCompli Sustainability

Data Verification

You make sustainability claims. We back them up.

You want to show that your company’s sustainability metrics are credible. When you make a specific claim or report a specific number, you need to make sure that what you report is accurate. iCompli Sustainability can help. We can verify the accuracy of your metrics and data gathering processes.

At iCompli Sustainability, we have the expertise and the credentials to provide third-party assurance for any of your sustainability metrics. Whether you would like verification of specific sustainability KPIs as part of your annual report or third party assurance of your GRI sustainability report—we can make sure that what you say will stand up to the scrutiny of your stakeholders.

  • Review key organizational sustainability metrics and compare to requirements of GRI G4 Specific Standard Disclosures.
  • Assess the accuracy and integrity of systems and processes for gathering, processing and reporting sustainability performance data.
  • Conduct analytical review of data, including relevant trend analysis and overall reasonableness in terms of relevant industry benchmarks.

DJSI/CDP Verification

If your company is looking to improve its ranking on the Dow Jones Sustainability Index of sustainability leaders or is hoping to be named to the Carbon Disclosure Project Leadership Index, independent verification of KPIs will help. Both DJSI and CDP currently ask for independent verification of several environmental and health and safety metrics. iCompli can provide independent third party verification of Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions; energy and water consumption; waste generation; and occupational health and safety metrics. What’s more, since many of the DJSI and CDP disclosures align with GRI, iCompli verification of key data can work across multiple sustainability reporting platforms.

Conflict Minerals Reporting

Companies subject to the Conflict Minerals requirements of Dodd-Frank must file a report (Form SD) with the SEC by May 31st of each year describing their process for evaluating the conflict minerals (gold, tin, tungsten and tantalum) contained in their products. Companies are required to include a Conflict Minerals Report, and in certain circumstances, have the report audited. iCompli offers two services to help companies address Conflict Minerals requirements:

  1. Assessment and Analysis: We can help companies understand the conflict minerals reporting requirements and provide a readiness assessment service. This service includes a gap analysis where we check your existing procurement mechanism against the OECD standards and determine the gaps to be fixed. We help guide you through what’s involved in establishing a due diligence process.
  2. Audit: We provide the audit services required by the SEC – an assessment of whether or not your company is in compliance with the OECD due diligence process and has implemented it properly. The SEC does not require an audit that assesses if your company uses conflict minerals.

Download "10 Things you should know: OECD Due Diligence Framework for Conflict Materials" by completing the form below:

Assurance Readiness

An independent assessment of your organization's reporting process can be conducted prior to issuing a public assurance statement to determine what type of third party assurance is appropriate and attainable. Our assessment examines the sustainability report through the lens of a leading global sustainability assurance standard — the AccountAbility AA1000AS assurance standard. Using the AA1000AS key principles of Inclusivity, Materiality and Responsiveness, iCompli examines practices related to identifying and interacting with stakeholders (Inclusivity), determining significant economic, environmental and social impacts (Materiality), and developing a sound business strategy to deal with sustainability issues (Responsiveness).

iCompli’s Assurance Readiness Assessment involves a content-based analysis of the Report's completeness and alignment with GRI requirements, as well as an assessment of whether or not all material/significant assertions can be supported by an adequate trail of evidence. The organization's public documents — sustainability reports, annual reports, proxy statements, strategic frameworks, policies and statements, CDP Information Requests, and other voluntary policies, plans, and records — are reviewed for alignment with identified material issues. Select data sets are also examined for accuracy, consistency, completeness and reliability to determine strengths and weaknesses of the underlying processes and controls.

Report Assurance

We focus on your report content not just the numbers.

The widely-used GRI Sustainability Reporting Framework strongly encourages independent third-party assurance. Having your report assured adds to the credibility of the information presented. It also helps internally to improve your performance.

But, counting every tree in the forest is expensive. If you are looking into have your report assured by a Big 4 accounting firm their focus will be on data quality and verification. This approach serves big budget audits, but not budget conscious ones.

Our affordable approach to assurance focuses on the key elements of Materiality – stakeholder engagement, materiality assessment, and responsiveness – so it’s perfectly aligned with the latest version of GRI (G4). We look at how you identify and interact with your stakeholders, how you determine your organization’s significant economic, environmental and social impacts; and whether you have developed a sound business strategy to deal with your sustainability issues.

GRI has identified six key qualities for the external assurance of reports.

External assurance:

  1. Should be conducted by groups or individuals external to the reporting organization, who are demonstrably competent in the subject matter and assurance practices
  2. Should utilize groups or individuals who are not unduly limited by their relationship with the organization or its stakeholders to reach and publish an independent and impartial conclusion on the report
  3. Is implemented in a manner that is systematic, documented, evidence-based, and characterized by defined procedures
  4. Assesses whether the report provides a reasonable and balanced presentation of performance, taking into consideration the veracity of report data and the overall selection of content
  5. Assesses the extent to which the report preparer has applied the GRI Reporting Framework (including the Reporting Principles
  6. Results in an opinion or set of conclusions that is publicly available in written form, and a statement from the assurance provider on their relationship to the report preparer


AA1000AS Type 1 and Type 2 Assurance -- Our 10 Step principles-based approach focuses on the material issues driving sustainability in an organization.

  • Type I assurance involves a Content-based assessment of the Report’s completeness and alignment with GRI requirements, as well as an assessment of whether or not all material/significant assertions can be supported by an adequate trail of evidence.
  • Type II assurance examines additional data sets for accuracy, consistency, completeness and reliability.

UN Global Compact Communications on Progress (COP)

Assessment of the qualitative and quantitative information and performance data in the COP, as well as the management systems and processes that underlie the report. As of January 1 2014 signatories to the UN Global Compact that report at the Advanced level must have the accuracy and completeness of information in the COP assured by a credible third-party.





Download "10 Things you should know: OECD Due Diligence Framework for Conflict Materials" by completing the form below: