GRI 2: General Disclosures · Universal Standard
Disclosure GRI 2-4
Restatements of information
Practical guidance for preparing this disclosure. Use this card to identify datapoints, verify claims and organise supporting evidence. For exact requirements, always refer to the official GRI source.
Open official GRI source
↗ Share
Reviewed by
Dr Ross Kurinko · GRI Certified Trainer
To prepare this disclosure
2 datapoints ↓
4 claims to verify ↓
5 evidence areas ↓
3 report examples ↓
Disclosure focus
This disclosure asks an organisation to be transparent when it has changed information it reported previously. If a figure, description, or boundary has been corrected or updated, the organisation should say what was restated and why, so readers can understand that the current report is not directly comparable with the earlier version without that explanation.
The practical focus is on clarity and consistency across reporting periods. The organisation should help users see whether the restatement affects only a small part of the information or changes the picture more broadly across the reporting boundary, rather than leaving readers to assume that all reported data are unchanged from one year to the next.
* This LRA educational guidance supports disclosure preparation. For the exact requirements, always refer to the official GRI source.
Before you start
A quick mental checklist before you prepare this disclosure — tick each as you settle it.
Preparation
Key datapoints to prepare
| Datapoint | What to capture | Evidence hint | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prior-period restatement reasons | A clear note of any figures or narrative from an earlier reporting period that have been revised, plus the reason the earlier information was changed. | Version history, prior-year report, adjustment memo, sign-off note from finance or reporting team. | Finance / Reporting |
| Prior-period restatement impact | A clear note of any figures or narrative from an earlier reporting period that have been revised, plus the effect of the change on the reported information. | Revised schedules, bridge from old to new figures, prior-year report, finance review pack. | Finance / Reporting |
Show GRI 2-4 sub-elements (LRA working checklist)
- If you have revised figures or narrative from earlier periods, state what changed and what the revision means for the reported information.
- If you have revised figures or narrative from earlier periods, state what changed and why the revision was made.
LRA working checklist - paraphrased; see official source
How to prepare
- Identify any figures or statements you have changed from an earlier reporting period, so you know which items need to be carried forward into this year’s disclosure.
- For each changed item, set out why the earlier information has been revised, using a clear business explanation that a reader can follow.
- For each revision, capture what difference it makes to the reported information, so the impact of the change is visible alongside the updated figure or narrative.
- Gather the supporting records that show both the earlier version and the revised version, together with the basis for the change and its effect.
- Prepare the disclosure in a way that links each restated item to its explanation and impact, and make sure nothing relevant is left out.
- Check the final wording against the official source to confirm you have covered every required restatement and both explanations, without adding anything extra.
Request prior-period adjustment log and explanations
Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.
What changes were made to previously reported figures or statements, and why did those changes happen?
Use your organisation’s own wording first, then map it to this disclosure. For example, ask for prior-period adjustments, reclassifications, corrections, or revised figures if those are the terms your teams use. Keep the request in business language and check the source material before sign-off.
Weak request
Please provide the GRI 2-4 restatements disclosure data.
Why it fails: This uses framework language only and does not tell the owner what practical records to pull, which period to cover, or what details are needed to explain the change and its effect.
Better request
Please send the list of any prior-period updates to reported figures or narrative, with the reason for each update, the effect on the reported output, and the source record or version reference for each item.
Formal email template
Subject: Request for prior-period changes log and supporting notes Hi [name], We are preparing the sustainability report and need a summary of any changes made to figures or statements that were already shared for earlier periods. Could you please send: - a list of the items that were updated; - the reason each item was changed; - the effect of each change on the reported numbers or narrative; and - the source record or file showing the change. Please include the reporting period, business area, version reference, and the person who approved the update. A possible LRA training template is attached below for reference. Please adapt this to your organisation’s own terms, and check the source material before sign-off. Thanks, [preparer name]
Short Teams / Slack version
Hi [name] — could you share the log of any prior-period updates, plus the reason for each change and the impact on the reported figures/text? Please include the period, business area, version reference, and source file. Thanks.
Industry examples
Manufacturing
Context. A plant’s energy and waste figures were corrected after a meter mapping issue was found in the monthly reporting file.
Adapted request. Please share any prior-period corrections to plant reporting, including what was changed, why it was changed, the effect on the reported figures, and the workbook or system record that shows the update. Include the site, period, and approval details.
Example response. Site: Leeds Plant; Period: Q2 FY2025; Item updated: electricity use; Earlier value: 1,240 MWh; Revised value: 1,180 MWh; Reason for update: meter mapping error; Impact summary: reduced reported electricity use by 60 MWh; Source reference: Energy close workbook v4; Approved by: Site Controller; Approval date: 12 July 2025.
Financial services
Context. A group reporting pack was revised after a late change to the way a business line was classified in the internal management report.
Adapted request. Please provide any prior-period revisions to the group reporting pack, including the item changed, the reason, the effect on the reported output, and the pack version or control log entry. Please include the business line, period, and approver.
Example response. Business line: Retail lending; Period: FY2024; Item updated: customer count by segment; Earlier value: 48,200; Revised value: 46,900; Reason for update: segment mapping revised after review; Impact summary: reduced retail lending customer count by 1,300; Source reference: Group pack control log CL-2024-18; Approved by: Reporting Lead; Approval date: 03 February 2025.
The full request pack — response form, data table, evidence metadata and sign-off — is in the Download Centre.
Draft your disclosure
LRA training templates — adapt them to your organisation, and check the official source before sign-off.
Method note
State which earlier reporting periods were updated, explain the basis used to identify those revisions, and describe the approach taken to calculate their impact.
Context note
Explain what the revised figures mean for the reported story, including how the updates change the reader’s understanding of the earlier periods.
Fluctuation statement
If any revision is material or unusual, note what drove it and whether the effect was to raise, lower, or otherwise alter the previously reported numbers.
Content index entry
GRI 2-4 Restatements of information — [location / page] / [notes]
Download Centre
Professional preparation tools and forms for GRI 2-4. Each download includes a concise “How to use” guide.
Assurance readiness
For each claim, check the evidence
| Claim | Risk | Evidence to check |
|---|---|---|
| The information reported for this disclosure reconciles to the underlying source records. | What is reported cannot be traced back to the systems or documents it was drawn from, or does not tie out to them. | calculation_workbook reconciling the reported value to source_system_export |
| The information reported for this disclosure is current as at the reporting date. | The disclosure reflects a different period, a cut-off before the reporting date, or stale data carried over from a prior period. | approval_record showing the data cut-off date and the period covered |
| The scope behind the information reported for this disclosure is applied consistently. | Parts of the organisation are silently in or out of scope, or the scope differs from the prior period without that change being explained. | methodology defining the scope and a site_register of what it covers |
| Everything in scope is included in the information reported for this disclosure — nothing material is left out. | Parts of the population that should be reported are omitted, understating or overstating the disclosure. | site_register of the full population vs the calculation_workbook of what was actually included |
Evidence pack to prepare
- The governing policy or written commitment behind this disclosure
- A methodology / definition note setting out how the disclosure was scoped and prepared
- Source-system exports the figures or facts were drawn from
- The internal approval / sign-off record for the disclosure before publication
- Minutes or records evidencing the relevant engagement or consultation
Common reporting gaps
- The information is presented without a date or as-at point.
- The scope or boundary of the statement is left undefined.
- Key terms are used inconsistently across the report.
- Material changes since the previous period are not disclosed.
- Assertions are made without supporting detail or a source record.
- Boilerplate is used that does not actually answer what is asked.
Mistakes to avoid when collecting the data
- Wrong owner asked
The team chases the disclosure lead instead of the person who actually changed the figures, so the reason and the impact are collected from hearsay rather than the source team.
- Framework language used too early
People ask for answers in reporting jargon instead of the business terms used by finance, HR, operations or the data owner, which slows down retrieval and creates mismatches.
- Scope left vague
No one pins down which prior reporting periods, which datasets, or which business units are in scope, so some restatements are counted while others are missed.
- Timing basis not fixed
The collector mixes updates from different cut-off dates or reporting cycles, so the restatement relates to one period while the explanation is pulled from another.
- Counting basis mixed up
Headcount, monetary values and percentage changes are gathered together without separating the method used for each, which makes the effect impossible to compare cleanly.
- Original source labels lost
The team copies figures into a summary sheet without keeping the source file names, version tags or local labels, so the trail back to the original change is broken.
- Separate populations merged
Restatements for different entities, sites or data sets are blended into one total even though they should stay distinct, which hides where the change actually happened.
- Evidence notes missing
The collector saves the number but not the supporting context, such as who supplied it, when it was pulled and which file it came from, so later review cannot verify it.
- No sign-off trail
The final data pack is passed on without a named reviewer or approval record, leaving no clear proof that the reason and effect were checked before drafting.
Where judgement is often needed
- Acquisition or disposal changes the reporting perimeter
If a business bought or sold during the year changes what sits inside the reporting set, explain whether prior-period figures were rebuilt on the new perimeter or left as originally reported, and state the reason for that choice.
- Different country definitions for the same metric
Where local teams use different definitions for the same measure, pick one basis for the comparison set, describe the definition used, and explain any restated figures needed to keep the periods comparable.
- People or sites near the boundary of scope
For workers, locations, customers or other items that sit close to the inclusion line, set out the rule used to include or exclude them, and disclose any restatement if that rule changed from one period to the next.
- Cut-off date for bringing data into the period
If information is captured at different points in time across the business, state the cut-off used for the comparison figures and explain any later adjustment that led to a restatement.
- Measured data versus estimates
When some prior-period numbers come from direct records and others from estimates, say which figures were estimated, what changed in the later version, and how that change affected the restated amount.
- Rounding and small differences
If totals shift only because of rounding or minor reconciliation differences, explain the rounding basis used and whether the prior-period numbers were updated or left unchanged.
- Privacy limits on small-group reporting
Where small populations must be grouped or masked to protect privacy, describe the aggregation rule, note any impact on earlier figures, and explain whether that led to a restatement.
- System or methodology change after publication
If a new system, model or calculation method replaces the old one, state whether earlier periods were recalculated on the new basis and explain the effect on the reported numbers.
Examples
Illustrative examples
Synthetic, written by LRA — not from a company report, not text from any standard.
Consumer goods manufacturing · synthetic · written by LRA
This example shows how to flag a prior-period correction, say why the earlier numbers changed, and state the practical impact on the reported figures.
Synthetic illustration only. In our 2025 report, we corrected prior-year figures after a data review found that one site had been excluded from the 2024 consolidation set. The revision changed the 2024 total workforce from 4,800 to 5,000, so the reported figure increased by 200 people, and it also lifted the 2024 injury count from 24 to 25; we explain these changes because the earlier version was incomplete and the updated numbers now reflect the full group.
- The main reason was a boundary error in the earlier dataset.
- The effect was a higher headcount and a slightly higher incident total for the prior year, with no change to the current-year figures.
Retail logistics · synthetic · written by LRA
This example shows a restatement driven by improved data quality, with both the cause and the numerical effect explained in plain language.
Synthetic illustration only. We restated last year’s warehouse energy use after replacing an estimated value with meter-based data for one distribution centre. The 2024 electricity figure moved from 12,000 MWh to 11,400 MWh, and the share of renewable electricity in that same year changed from 40% to 42% because the corrected denominator was lower; we set out both the reason for the revision and its effect so readers can see what changed and by how much.
- The correction came from better source data for one facility.
- The effect was a lower total energy figure and a higher renewable share for the prior year.
Draft output & visualisation ideas
How to turn the collected data into a draft disclosure. Suggested visuals and a GRI content-index line generated from this disclosure's datapoints.
Suggested visuals
- Restatements by reporting period — table: A simple list of each prior period that has been revised, alongside the updated figure and a short note on why it changed.
- Why figures were revised — bar: A count or value-based comparison of the main reasons behind each revision, to show which drivers affected the reported numbers most.
- Effect of revisions on reported results — stacked bar: How the original and revised amounts compare for each affected period, making the size and direction of the change easy to see.
- Timeline of revised disclosures — line: The pattern of revisions across reporting periods, highlighting when changes were made and whether they increased or reduced the reported amounts.
- Revisions by affected area — bar: Which parts of the report were updated, and how often each area needed correction or adjustment.
From a number to a disclosure
What separates a figure from a disclosure.
Basic
I restated last year’s figures and noted the change.
Better
I restated prior-period figures, explained that a data mapping error was corrected, and said the revision increased reported headcount by 12.
Best
I restated our 2025 and 2024 figures after fixing a data mapping error in the payroll feed, and the revision increased reported headcount by 12 because two sites had been omitted from the earlier extract.
Real reports where this topic is disclosed. The confidence label shows how closely each match maps to GRI 2-4 — these are report practice, not exact disclosure examples.
| Company | Sector · Country | Year | Match | Page | Report | Assurance | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
Tanla Platforms Limited | Software and Services · India | 2025 | Partial | p. 194 → | Integrated Report FY25 → | Deloitte | |||||||||
Evidence in Tanla Platforms Limited’s reportWhat the report shows Tanla Platforms Limited’s Integrated Report FY25 includes a covered datapoint related to restatements aimed at ensuring consistency and comparability of information for the current and previous years, specifically referencing products and services under GRI 2-6 on page 194. However, there is no found evidence for narrative item (a-ii) in the report. Additional pages contain references to payment due periods and transactions with owners, but these do not clearly address the disclosure in question.
Evidence-based summary of this company’s own report — not a disclosure template to copy, and not a compliance verdict. Datapoint coverage
Source trail
|
||||||||||||||||
 |
Sims Limited | Solid Waste Management Utilities · Australia | 2025 | Partial | p. 47 →p. 53 → | Sims Sustainability Report FY25 → | ey | |||||||||
Evidence in Sims Limited’s reportWhat the report shows Sims Limited’s 2025 Sustainability Report includes a covered datapoint on restatements made in FY25 related to Scope 1 emissions, as noted on page 48. The report also references external assurance and restatements of information on page 62, indicating attention to data accuracy. However, there is no found evidence regarding narrative item (a-ii), suggesting that some specific disclosure elements remain unaddressed or unclear in the report.
Evidence-based summary of this company’s own report — not a disclosure template to copy, and not a compliance verdict. Datapoint coverage
Source trail
|
||||||||||||||||
 |
Kakao Corp. | Media · South Korea | 2024 | Partial | p. 142 → | 2024 Kakao ESG Report → | KPMG | |||||||||
Evidence in Kakao Corp.’s reportWhat the report shows Kakao Corp.'s 2024 ESG Report provides a reported value related to Scope 3 emissions and notes an expansion of calculation boundaries on page 144. There is partial supporting context regarding user protection activities and their significant effect on privacy protection and information security on page 18, though no headline value is given. Notably, the report lacks clear headline figures for some narrative items and detailed disclosures on governance roles or stakeholder engagement within the provided excerpts.
Evidence-based summary of this company’s own report — not a disclosure template to copy, and not a compliance verdict. Datapoint coverage
Source trail
|
||||||||||||||||
Check your understanding
Last year’s workforce figures were published before a payroll system fix was completed. After the fix, the team found that one prior-year headcount figure had been overstated, so the current draft includes the corrected number.How should the preparer handle this in the narrative for this disclosure?
Model answer. The draft should note that a figure from an earlier reporting period has been revised and give the reason for that revision. It should also explain what changed as a result, so readers can see both why the earlier number was adjusted and what the correction means for the reported information.
Why this matters. When an earlier-period figure is changed, explain both the cause of the change and its impact on the reported information.
A prior-year emissions total was recalculated after a data source was replaced with a more complete one. The revised total is lower than the figure previously published, and the reporting team is deciding whether to mention only the new number.What should the preparer include alongside the updated figure?
Model answer. The narrative should not stop at the new number. It should say that a previous-period figure has been restated, give the reason for the update, and describe the effect of the change on the reported information, so the reader understands both the adjustment and its consequence.
Why this matters. A restated figure needs context: why it changed and what difference the change makes.
A sustainability metric for the prior year was corrected after a calculation error was found. The team has the revised value and a short note about the error, but has not yet drafted any explanation of how the correction affects the published trend.What decision should the preparer make before sign-off?
Model answer. The preparer should add an explanation of the effect of the correction, not just the reason for it. The disclosure needs to show that an earlier-period item was revised, why that happened, and what the revision means for the information presented in the report.
Why this matters. Do not leave the reader guessing about the consequence of a restatement.
A comparative table shows last year’s water-use figure has been updated after a meter-reading issue was resolved. The team wonders whether a brief note saying 'prior year corrected' is enough.Is that enough for this disclosure, or is more explanation needed?
Model answer. That would be too thin on its own. The disclosure should identify that information from an earlier period has been revised, explain the reason for the revision, and explain the effect of the revision on the reported information. A bare note does not give enough context for the reader to understand the change.
Why this matters. A restatement note should be informative, not just a label for a corrected number.
Analyse this disclosure across real reports
See how companies actually report GRI 2-4 — drawn from their own published reports, with the exact pages, and an LRA AI-assistant that works through it with you. Available to LRA Community members and to students throughout their platform access.
Related framework references
How this disclosure maps across the major reporting frameworks.
Related & explore
Organizational details Guide ✓Nomination and selection of the highest g… Guide ✓Chair of the highest governance body Guide ✓Role of the highest governance body in ov… Guide ✓Delegation of responsibility for managing… Guide ✓Role of the highest governance body in su… Guide ✓Conflicts of interest Guide ✓Communication of critical concerns Guide ✓Collective knowledge of the highest gover… Guide ✓Evaluation of the performance of the high… Guide ✓Remuneration policies Guide ✓Entities included in the organization’s s… Guide ✓Process to determine remuneration Guide ✓Annual total compensation ratio Guide ✓Statement on sustainable development stra… Guide ✓Policy commitments Guide ✓Embedding policy commitments Guide ✓Processes to remediate negative impacts Guide ✓Mechanisms for seeking advice and raising… Guide ✓Compliance with laws and regulations Guide ✓Membership associations Guide ✓Approach to stakeholder engagement Guide ✓Reporting period, frequency and contact p… Guide ✓Collective bargaining agreements Guide ✓External assurance Guide ✓Activities, value chain and other busines… Guide ✓Employees Guide ✓Workers who are not employees Guide ✓Governance structure and composition Guide ✓
Questions this page answers
For GRI 2-4, what data do I need to collect before I start drafting the disclosure?
The page says to prepare the prior-period restatement reasons and the prior-period restatement impact. It also gives a step-by-step preparation section, so you can use that to turn the disclosure into a data-collection checklist. ↑ section
How do I use the step-by-step 'how to prepare' section for GRI 2-4 in practice?
Use it as a working guide to move from understanding the disclosure to gathering the right inputs, checking scope, and building a draft. The page is designed to help you prepare the disclosure rather than just describe it. ↑ section
What should I include in the evidence pack for GRI 2-4 if I want to be assurance-ready?
The page includes an evidence pack with five items for assurance readiness, so it is meant to help you assemble support for the disclosure before review. Use it alongside the assurance claims to make sure the draft can be traced back to source material. ↑ section
What are the assurance claims I need to verify for GRI 2-4?
The page lists four assurance claims to verify, each with a claim, risk and evidence prompt. That makes it useful for checking whether the disclosure is supported and where the main assurance risks sit. ↑ section
What are the most common mistakes or reporting gaps on GRI 2-4?
The page has a section on common reporting gaps and mistakes, which you can use as a pre-submission check. It is intended to help you spot missing detail, weak support or inconsistent reporting before the draft is finalised. ↑ section
How do I turn the GRI 2-4 data into a draft narrative and content-index line?
The page includes draft-output support, including narrative starters and a GRI content-index line. You can use those to turn the collected data into a first-pass disclosure and then tailor the wording to your company’s facts. ↑ section
Are there example disclosures for GRI 2-4 that I can use as a model?
Yes, the page shows synthetic illustrative examples, including a quantitative table where relevant. They are there to show how the disclosure might look in practice, but they are not real company disclosures. ↑ section
How should I use the Prep & Assurance workbook for GRI 2-4?
The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format, which is meant to support preparation and assurance readiness. Use it to organise the required inputs, evidence and review steps before drafting. ↑ section
What is the printable Library Card for GRI 2-4 used for?
The Download Centre also includes a printable Library Card in .pdf format. It is a practical companion for keeping the disclosure requirements, preparation steps and evidence prompts in one place. ↑ section
Where can I find real published company reports that disclose this topic?
The page has a 'From company reports' table that links to real published reports at the pages where the topic is disclosed. You can use it to see how other companies have presented the topic in practice. ↑ section
More questions this page can help with
- GRI 2-4 prior-period restatement reasons: what should I ask the data owner for?
- GRI 2-4 prior-period restatement impact: how do I capture it consistently for the draft?
- What evidence should I keep for the four GRI 2-4 assurance claims?
- How do I use the GRI 2-4 evidence pack to build an audit trail?
- What are the common GRI 2-4 reporting gaps I should check before sign-off?
- How do I use the GRI 2-4 synthetic example disclosure without copying it?
- What should the GRI 2-4 draft-output narrative starter help me write?
- How do I use the GRI 2-4 content-index line in a reporting workbook?
- What is included in the GRI 2-4 Prep & Assurance workbook download?
- How do I use the GRI 2-4 Library Card PDF during drafting and review?
- Where do I find company report examples for GRI 2-4 on the page?
- How can an assurance reviewer use the GRI 2-4 page to test the draft?
✓ LRA AI Assistant · human-in-the-loop
Ask Study Studio AI assistant about this disclosure
Get a practical answer for your reporting context. Your first answer is free — create a free account to continue the conversation.
Try
Sources, status and disclaimer
This LRA assistance tool is designed for educational and internal data-collection purposes. It is not an official interpretation of the GRI Standards, IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards or EU CSRD/ESRS requirements. When applying these frameworks in professional practice, users should consult and double-check the official standards, guidance and applicable regulatory sources.
