GRI 201: Economic Performance 2016 · Topic Standard · Cross-sectoral
Disclosure GRI 201-3
Defined benefit plan obligations and other retirement plans
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
9 datapoints ↓
6 claims to verify ↓
5 evidence areas ↓
3 report examples ↓
Disclosure focus
This disclosure asks an organisation to explain its retirement plan obligations in a way that shows the real financial commitment behind them. In practice, that means describing the main defined benefit and other retirement arrangements it supports, and setting out the obligations, assets and any funding position that are relevant to understanding the scale of those commitments at the reporting date.
The practical focus is on completeness and consistency across the organisation, not just on a single flagship plan or one location. Report the arrangements that matter to the business as a whole, and make clear whether the figures cover all operations, only certain countries or entities, or only specific plans, so readers can see how broad the coverage is and how representative the numbers are.
* 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Liability value if unfunded | Capture the estimated amount that would need to be met from the organisation’s own resources if the plan’s obligations were not covered by a separate fund. | Actuarial valuation, pension trustee report, finance note, or scheme funding papers showing the estimate and the date used. | Finance / Pensions |
| Separate pension fund exists | Confirm whether the plan has its own ring-fenced fund used to meet pension obligations, rather than relying only on the employer’s general resources. | Scheme rules, trust deed, pension plan documentation, or trustee confirmation. | Pensions / Legal |
| Funding coverage estimate | Capture the estimated share of the plan’s obligations that is covered by the assets set aside for them. | Actuarial funding statement, trustee valuation, or funding report showing the coverage estimate. | Finance / Pensions |
| Coverage estimate basis | Record the method, assumptions, and source data used to produce the coverage estimate. | Actuarial methodology note, valuation assumptions paper, or trustee report explaining how the estimate was derived. | Pensions / Actuarial |
| Coverage estimate date | Capture the date on which the funding coverage estimate was prepared. | Valuation report date, trustee paper date, or actuarial certificate date. | Pensions / Actuarial |
| Recovery plan and timing | If the fund is not fully covered, capture the employer’s explanation of the approach being used to move toward full coverage and the expected timeframe for reaching it. | Recovery plan, employer funding statement, trustee agreement, or board-approved pension strategy paper. | Finance / Pensions |
| Employee contribution rate | Capture the employee’s contribution rate as a percentage of salary for the plan being reported. | Payroll rules, benefits schedule, or plan terms showing the employee rate. | Payroll / Benefits |
| Employer contribution rate | Capture the employer’s contribution rate as a percentage of salary for the plan being reported. | Finance contribution schedule, pension agreement, or payroll/benefits configuration showing the employer rate. | Finance / Payroll |
| Retirement plan participation | Describe how many eligible people take part in retirement plans, and the level or pattern of participation across the workforce. | Benefits enrolment report, HRIS participation extract, or pension provider summary by eligible population. | HR / Benefits |
Show GRI 201-3 sub-elements (LRA working checklist)
- State the basis used for the estimate.
- Confirm whether a separate pot of money exists to meet the pension obligations.
- If the obligations are met from general company resources, give the estimated amount owed.
- Where the pension fund is not fully covered, explain the employer’s plan to reach full cover and the expected timeframe.
- Show how much of the scheme’s obligations are covered by the assets reserved for them.
- Report the level of take-up in retirement plans.
- State the employee contribution rate as a share of pay.
- State the employer contribution rate as a share of pay.
- Give the date when the estimate was prepared.
LRA working checklist - paraphrased; see official source
How to prepare
- Map the retirement arrangements in scope and decide which ones you will report on, so you can separate plans backed from the organisation’s own resources from those supported by a dedicated pot of assets.
- Set the reporting boundary and define the figures and narrative you will treat as reportable: the estimated liability amount, whether a separate funding vehicle exists, the share of liabilities covered by set-aside assets, the method used to make that estimate, the date it was calculated, any recovery plan if coverage is incomplete, the employee and employer contribution rates, and the level of participation.
- Gather the source records that support each item, such as actuarial or trustee papers, funding statements, payroll records, scheme documents, and internal approvals, so every reported point can be traced back to evidence.
- Prepare the disclosure content in the required form: use a clear text explanation for the liability estimate and funding position, provide the two contribution percentages, and describe participation in retirement arrangements in a way that is consistent with the underlying records.
- Record any exclusions, assumptions, estimation basis, calculation date, or changes in method or scope, and explain them plainly so readers can understand how the numbers and narrative were produced.
- Check the draft against the official source and the underlying evidence to confirm nothing required is missing, the wording matches the facts, and the reported amounts, dates, and percentages are internally consistent.
Request the pension plan evidence pack
Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.
What do we need to report about our retirement arrangements, funding position, and employee/employer contribution rates for the reporting period?
Use your organisation’s own names for the pension scheme, retirement arrangement, funding vehicle, and employee groups first; then map those terms to the reporting fields. Keep the ask in the language the finance or pensions team already uses, rather than framework wording.
Weak request
Please provide the GRI 201-3 data for the pension disclosure, including the defined benefit obligation, funding status, contribution rates, and participation information.
Why it fails: This uses framework language that may not match how the business stores the information, and it does not tell the owner which internal reports, dates, entities, or source files to pull. It is also too broad to return a clean evidence pack.
Better request
Please send the latest finance or trustee pack for [plan name(s)] covering [reporting period] and [entity/boundary], including the liability estimate, whether a separate fund exists, the latest coverage view with method and date, any recovery plan and timeframe if the fund is not fully covered, employee and employer contribution rates, and participation levels. Attach the source documents and note the assumptions used.
Formal email template
Subject: Request for pension and retirement plan data for [reporting period] Hi [name/team], We are preparing the sustainability reporting pack and need the latest information on our pension and retirement arrangements for [reporting period]. Please send the figures and supporting documents for [plan name(s)] covering [entity/boundary]. Please include: - the estimated liability amount if the obligation were met from the organisation’s general resources; - whether there is a separate fund or similar vehicle set aside for the pension obligation; - the latest view of how far the set-aside assets cover the obligation, including the method used and the date of the estimate; - any plan or recovery approach in place if the fund is not fully covered, including the expected timeframe; - employee and employer contribution rates as a share of salary; - the current level of participation in the retirement arrangements. Please attach the source documents and note any assumptions, definitions, or exclusions used. If any figures are not available, please explain why and identify the closest internal source. Please adapt this to your organisation’s own terminology and check the official source before sign-off. Thanks, [preparer name]
Short Teams / Slack version
Hi [name] — could you share the latest pension / retirement plan pack for [reporting period] for [plan name(s)]? We need the liability estimate, whether there’s a separate fund, the latest coverage view and method/date, any recovery plan if it’s not fully covered, employee/employer contribution rates, and participation levels. Please include the source docs and any assumptions. Please use your team’s usual terms and we’ll map them for reporting. Thanks.
Industry examples
Manufacturing
Context. A UK manufacturer with a legacy final-salary scheme and a newer workplace pension for current staff.
Adapted request. Please share the latest scheme valuation pack for the legacy pension arrangement and the current workplace pension summary for [reporting period]. We need the liability estimate, whether the legacy scheme has a separate funding vehicle, the latest coverage view and date, any recovery plan and timetable, the employee and employer contribution rates for the workplace plan, and participation levels across eligible staff.
Example response. Legacy scheme liability estimate: GBP 42.8m; separate fund exists: Yes; coverage estimate: 86%; basis: trustee funding valuation; estimate date: 30 September 2025; recovery plan: additional employer cash payments over 6 years; employee contribution rate: 5%; employer contribution rate: 7%; participation: 91% of eligible employees enrolled.
Professional services
Context. A services firm with only a defined contribution workplace pension and no legacy defined benefit arrangement.
Adapted request. Please confirm whether any legacy pension obligation exists for [reporting period]. If not, provide the workplace pension summary showing employee and employer contribution rates and the level of participation among eligible colleagues, together with the source payroll or benefits report.
Example response. Legacy pension obligation: None identified; separate fund: Not applicable; employee contribution rate: 4%; employer contribution rate: 6%; participation: 97% of eligible employees enrolled; source: benefits administration report dated 31 December 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 how the funding coverage figure was calculated, including the basis used for the estimate and the date it was prepared, so readers can understand what the numbers are built on.
Context note
Explain what the figures mean in practice by linking the liability estimate, any dedicated fund, the level of asset cover, contribution rates and participation levels to the plan’s overall funding position.
Fluctuation statement
If the coverage position, contribution rates or participation levels have changed, briefly explain the main drivers and whether any recovery actions or revised timing assumptions were put in place.
Content index entry
GRI 201-3 Defined benefit plan obligations and other retirement plans — [location / page] / [notes]
Download Centre
Professional preparation tools and forms for GRI 201-3. Each download includes a concise “How to use” guide.
Assurance readiness
For each claim, check the evidence
| Claim | Risk | Evidence to check |
|---|---|---|
| I used the latest actuarial or scheme figures available at the reporting date to estimate the amount that would be needed if the obligation were met from the organisation’s own resources. | Assurer checks whether the amount is based on current, supportable inputs rather than an outdated or selectively chosen estimate, and whether the reporter has blurred a liability estimate with a funding position. | Actuarial report or scheme valuation, calculation workbook, date of the estimate, assumptions used, sign-off from finance or pensions lead, and any reconciliation to the reported figure. |
| I stated clearly whether the arrangement has a ring-fenced pot or other dedicated assets set aside for the obligation. | Assurer probes whether the reporter has correctly identified the existence of a separate funding arrangement and has not overstated segregation where assets are only notionally earmarked. | Trust deed, plan rules, funding agreement, trustee or administrator confirmation, and internal note explaining how the arrangement was classified for reporting. |
| I reported the coverage level by comparing the obligation estimate with the assets earmarked for it, using the same measurement basis for both sides of the comparison. | Assurer checks whether the coverage percentage is mathematically correct, whether the asset and liability measures are comparable, and whether any exclusions or adjustments are explained. | Coverage calculation, source data for assets and obligation estimate, methodology note, reconciliation to underlying records, and review evidence showing the arithmetic was checked before publication. |
| I explained the method used to derive the coverage estimate, including the main assumptions, valuation approach, and any judgement calls that affect the result. | Assurer probes whether the basis is transparent enough to understand how the figure was produced and whether the method is consistent with the underlying records and assumptions. | Valuation methodology paper, actuarial assumptions, model or spreadsheet logic, management review notes, and evidence of consistency with prior periods or approved policy where relevant. |
| I identified the date on which the coverage assessment was prepared, so readers can see how current the information is. | Assurer checks whether the timing is accurate and whether the disclosed date matches the source valuation or calculation date used in the report. | Valuation date, calculation timestamp, draft and final report versions, approval trail, and any note explaining if the estimate was prepared before the reporting period end. |
| Where the dedicated pot was not fully sufficient, I described the plan to move towards full funding and the expected timeframe for doing so. | Assurer probes whether the narrative is specific, internally consistent, and supported by an actual recovery or funding plan rather than a vague aspiration. | Recovery plan, trustee or employer funding agreement, board papers, timetable, contribution schedule, and correspondence showing the plan and timescale were agreed. |
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
- A percentage is stated without the underlying counts (numerator and denominator).
- The denominator — what the figure is a share of — is not explained.
- Partial scope is reported as if it were complete coverage.
- One-off activities are counted as if they were ongoing programmes.
- Boundary or period changes that move the figure are not flagged.
- Exclusions from the reported scope are not listed or explained.
Mistakes to avoid when collecting the data
- Wrong owner, wrong desk
The request goes to payroll or finance in framework language, so the team that actually holds pension files, trustee updates, or scheme notes is never asked.
- Scope left vague
The collector does not pin down which plans, employee groups, or locations are in scope, so separate arrangements get blended into one file.
- No boundary check
Data is pulled without confirming whether the plan sits on the organisation’s own books or is backed by assets set aside for it, which changes what needs to be captured.
- Mixed measurement basis
One source gives a year-end balance while another uses an actuarial or management estimate, and the two are merged as if they were the same basis.
- Timing not fixed
The team records figures from different dates, so the liability estimate, funding position, and contribution rates do not line up to the same reporting cut-off.
- Source labels stripped out
When figures are copied into a tracker, the original file names, table headings, and note references are lost, making it hard to trace each number back to its source.
- Separate populations merged
Employee and employer contribution rates, or different retirement arrangements, are combined into one total even though they should stay distinct.
- Evidence trail missing
The pack contains numbers but no supporting note, calculation basis, or reviewer sign-off, so nobody can show how the data was checked before drafting.
- Coverage status not tested
The collector records whether a fund exists but forgets to capture how far the assets go toward meeting the liabilities, so the funding picture is incomplete.
- Action plan not captured
Where the fund is short, the team omits the employer’s plan and target timing for moving toward full coverage, leaving the follow-up story blank.
Where judgement is often needed
- Set the reporting boundary after a deal closes
If a pension arrangement comes in or leaves through an acquisition, disposal or similar change, explain whether you have included it for the full year, from the change date, or excluded it, and keep the approach consistent with the rest of the report.
- Translate local pension labels into one group view
Where countries use different pension labels or legal setups, decide which schemes sit in scope for this disclosure and describe the mapping you used so readers can see how local plans were grouped.
- Decide how to treat people near the edge of the scheme
For workers whose status is unclear, such as recent joiners, leavers, secondees or part-time staff, state the rule used to include or exclude them and note any material population left out.
- Choose the measurement date for the funding view
If the funding position is taken from a point in time other than the reporting date, say when the estimate was made and explain why that date was used.
- Explain whether the funding figure is modelled or directly observed
If the liability or cover level is based on an estimate rather than a full measurement, say what method or source underpins it and make clear that it is an estimate.
- State the basis used for the cover percentage
When showing how far the set-aside assets go toward meeting the obligations, explain the calculation basis, including whether you used gross or net amounts, and keep the same basis across periods unless you explain a change.
- Describe any rounding used in contribution rates
If employee or employer contribution rates are rounded, say the rounding convention and make sure the published percentages still reflect the underlying payroll basis.
- Aggregate sensitive plan data before publication
If scheme-level detail could identify individuals or small groups, combine the figures to a level that protects privacy and say that the published view has been grouped for confidentiality.
Examples
Illustrative examples
Synthetic, written by LRA — not from a company report, not text from any standard.
Utilities · synthetic · written by LRA
Synthetic illustration only. Shows how to combine funding status, valuation basis and date, contribution rates, participation, and the recovery approach in one concise disclosure.
| Measure | Funded amount | Unfunded amount | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plan liabilities (£m) | 410 | 90 | 500 |
| Assets set aside (£m) | 410 | 0 | 410 |
| Eligible staff (people) | 1,200 | 300 | 1,500 |
| Participants (people) | 1,200 | 0 | 1,200 |
We report a synthetic pension snapshot for illustration only. Our scheme has a separate fund, and at the date shown the assets set aside were estimated to cover 82% of the liabilities; the estimate was based on an actuarial valuation completed in March 2026. The plan liabilities were estimated at £500 million, with £410 million held in the fund and £90 million expected to be met from our general resources; employees contribute 5% of salary, we contribute 10%, and 1,200 of our 1,500 eligible staff take part. Because the fund is not yet fully covered, we are working to close the gap through higher employer payments and investment returns, with full coverage targeted by 2031.
Food manufacturing · synthetic · written by LRA
Synthetic illustration only. Demonstrates a second plausible reporting pattern with different figures, while keeping the same required content and internal arithmetic consistent.
| Measure | Funded amount | Unfunded amount | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plan liabilities (£m) | 201 | 99 | 300 |
| Assets set aside (£m) | 201 | 0 | 201 |
| Eligible staff (people) | 540 | 60 | 600 |
| Participants (people) | 540 | 0 | 540 |
This is a synthetic example for training purposes. We have a separate retirement fund, and our latest estimate, made in September 2025 using the trustee valuation, put coverage at 67%: liabilities were £300 million, assets held for the plan were £201 million, and £99 million would fall to our general resources if needed. Staff pay 4% of salary, we pay 8%, and 540 of 600 eligible colleagues are enrolled; to move towards full cover, we plan to raise employer contributions and review the investment mix, aiming for full funding by 2030.
Draft output & visualisation ideas
How to turn the collected data into a draft disclosure. The charts below are drawn from the illustrative figures above — swap in your own data.
Other views you could build
- Pension liability position and funding cover — stacked bar: How the estimated obligation compares with the assets set aside to meet it, including the portion covered and any shortfall.
- Separate fund status — table: Whether the plan is backed by a dedicated fund or relies on the organisation’s wider resources to meet the obligation.
- Employee and employer contribution rates — bar: The percentage of pay paid in by workers and by the employer, shown side by side for easy comparison.
- Participation in retirement arrangements — bar: The level of employee take-up in the retirement arrangements, so readers can see how widely the plan is used.
- Coverage assessment date and basis — table: When the funding assessment was made and the method or assumptions used to calculate the coverage estimate.
- Recovery plan and target timing — line: The intended path to full funding, including the steps being taken and the expected timeframe to reach it.
From a number to a disclosure
What separates a figure from a disclosure.
Basic
I estimate our pension promise would cost £120 million if met from our own resources.
Better
I estimate our pension promise would cost £120 million, and the separate fund set aside for it covers 85% of that amount based on the year-end actuarial review.
Best
I estimate our pension promise would cost £120 million; the separate fund covers 85% of it at 31 December 2025 on an actuarial basis, and the shortfall narrowed because we increased employer contributions and investment returns improved.
Real reports where this topic is disclosed. The confidence label shows how closely each match maps to GRI 201-3 — these are report practice, not exact disclosure examples.
| Company | Sector · Country | Year | Match | Page | Report | Assurance | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Limited | Retailing · India | 2025 | Partial | p. 107 →p. 247 →p. 294 → | Integrated Annual Report 2024-25 → | Bureau Veritas | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Evidence in Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Limited’s reportWhat the report shows Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Limited’s Integrated Annual Report 2024-25 provides reported values related to interest income on plan assets and actuarial gains or losses recognised in OCI, with figures noted on pages 222 and 294. The report also includes information on the estimated useful lives of assets, reflecting a fair approximation of their usage period, as detailed on page 195. However, several narrative items and percentage values relevant to the disclosure are not found or remain 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
Zydus Wellness Limited | Food Production — Agricultural · India | 2025 | Partial | p. 51 →p. 173 →p. 188 → | Integrated Annual Report 2024-25 → | EY | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Evidence in Zydus Wellness Limited’s reportWhat the report shows Zydus Wellness Limited’s Integrated Annual Report 2024-25 provides some coverage of financial data related to foreign currency transactions on page 224 and details about insurance plan assets as a percentage of total plan assets on page 246. Additionally, there is evidence of examination of company records on page 78. However, several narrative items, including parts (b-ii), (b-iii), (c), and (e), as well as specific percentage values, are not found 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
China Airlines, Ltd. | Air Transportation — Airlines · Taiwan | 2024 | Partial | p. 35 →p. 37 →p. 90 → | China Airlines Sustainability Report 2024 → | Deloitte | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Evidence in China Airlines, Ltd.’s reportWhat the report shows China Airlines' Sustainability Report 2024 provides detailed coverage of water resource management, including interactions with water as a shared resource, water withdrawal, discharge, and consumption, as outlined on page 36. The report also includes financial data related to employee benefits and pension reserves on page 130, and asset values on page 171. Additionally, it reports a 100% risk assessment ratio for tier-1 suppliers on page 72 and work-related fatality rates on page 182. However, the report lacks information on certain narrative items such as item (b-iii) and item (e), and no percentage values were found for some disclosures.
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
A preparer is drafting the pensions note for a group with one closed final-salary arrangement. The scheme is not fully funded, and the latest trustee valuation was completed nine months ago.What should be checked before the note is signed off about the funding position and the date used for that estimate?
Model answer. The note should explain how much of the scheme’s liabilities are expected to be met by the assets already set aside, state the method used to reach that view, and give the date when that assessment was made. Because the fund is not fully covered, it should also describe the employer’s plan for getting to full coverage and the timeframe it is aiming for.
Why this matters. When a pension fund is short of full cover, the disclosure needs both the funding picture and the employer’s recovery plan, including timing.
A preparer has a figure for the amount the company would need to pay if it had to meet the retirement promises from its own general resources. The number came from finance, but no supporting note has been attached.What needs to be confirmed before using that amount in the disclosure?
Model answer. The preparer should confirm that the amount is the estimated value of the liabilities on the assumption that the organisation would meet them from its own general resources, and that there is evidence behind the estimate. The figure should be presented as the liability value under that assumption, not as a separate funding measure.
Why this matters. The liability figure is about the cost if the organisation had to meet the promises itself, so the basis for the estimate must be clear.
An employer contributes 6% of salary to a retirement arrangement, while employees contribute 4%. The plan is open to most staff, but the HR team has not described how many people actually take part.What else should the preparer include about the arrangement beyond the contribution rates?
Model answer. The disclosure should include the employee and employer contribution percentages, and it should also describe the level of participation in the retirement arrangements. If there is a separate fund backing pension promises, the preparer should also say whether it exists and, if relevant, explain the extent of cover, the basis for that estimate, and when it was made.
Why this matters. Contribution rates alone are not enough; the note also needs a plain description of how widely the retirement arrangements are used.
A company has a pension fund that is only partly covered by assets. Management wants to say simply that it is “working on it” and leave out the timeline because the target date is still being discussed.How should the preparer handle the recovery narrative?
Model answer. The disclosure should not stop at a vague statement. It needs a clear explanation of the approach being used to move towards full cover and the period the employer expects to take to reach that point, even if the date is still an estimate. The wording should be based on the current plan and supported by evidence available at sign-off.
Why this matters. If the fund is under-covered, readers need a concrete recovery approach and an expected timescale, not a general reassurance.
Analyse this disclosure across real reports
See how companies actually report GRI 201-3 — 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.
→
ESRSRelated
ESRS E1
Climate Change — closest topical match (post-Omnibus ESRS catalogue).
→
IFRSNo equivalent
—
No direct IFRS S1/S2 topical equivalent.
Related & explore
Questions this page answers
How do I prepare GRI 201-3 Economic Performance using this page without missing any of the required datapoints?
Start with the page’s datapoint list and the step-by-step preparation section, then check your draft against the six assurance claims and the evidence pack. The page is designed to help you move from raw data to a draft disclosure, not to replace your own reporting process. ↑ section
What data do I need to collect for GRI 201-3 Economic Performance on this page?
The page points you to nine datapoints: liability value if unfunded, whether a separate pension fund exists, funding coverage estimate, the basis and date for that estimate, recovery plan and timing, employee and employer contribution rates, and retirement plan participation. Use those as your starting data set before drafting the disclosure. ↑ section
How should I set the scope and methodology for the GRI 201-3 Economic Performance disclosure?
Use the page’s plain-language explainer, the datapoint list, and the coverage estimate basis/date fields to define what is in scope and how the figures were prepared. The page also flags common gaps, which is useful for checking whether your method is consistent and complete. ↑ section
Who should own the GRI 201-3 Economic Performance data in practice?
The page is aimed at sustainability/ESG managers, HR or data owners, and assurance reviewers, so ownership should sit with the person or team that can source the pension and funding data and explain the method. The workbook and evidence pack are there to help that owner coordinate inputs and keep an audit trail. ↑ section
What evidence should I keep for assurance on GRI 201-3 Economic Performance?
The page includes an evidence pack with five items and six assurance claims to verify, so you should keep the source documents that support each datapoint and the method used to derive them. That gives reviewers a clearer line from the reported figure back to the underlying records. ↑ section
What are the common mistakes or reporting gaps on GRI 201-3 Economic Performance that I should avoid?
The page lists common reporting gaps and mistakes, so use that section as a pre-submission check before you finalise the draft. In practice, the safest approach is to make sure every datapoint is covered, the basis and date are stated, and the evidence pack matches the numbers you report. ↑ section
How do I use the Prep & Assurance workbook for GRI 201-3 Economic Performance?
The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format, which is intended to help you organise the datapoints, evidence, and assurance checks. Use it alongside the step-by-step preparation section so you can turn source data into a draft more efficiently. ↑ section
Can I use the synthetic example disclosure on the GRI 201-3 Economic Performance page as a template for my own draft?
Yes, the page includes synthetic illustrative example disclosures and a quantitative table to show how the disclosure can be presented. Treat it as a drafting aid only, and make sure your own figures, scope, and wording match your actual data. ↑ section
What should the draft output for GRI 201-3 Economic Performance look like?
The page gives draft-output ideas including visualisation options, narrative starters, and a GRI content-index line. Use those to turn your prepared data into a clear first draft that is easier for internal review and assurance. ↑ section
Is there any cross-framework reuse I can get from this GRI 201-3 Economic Performance page with ESRS E1?
The page says the closest ESRS correspondence is ESRS E1 (Climate Change), so you may be able to reuse some of the same underlying data and evidence. It does not say the requirements are identical, so check the ESRS reporting need separately before reusing anything. ↑ section
More questions this page can help with
- GRI 201-3 Economic Performance checklist for pension liability, funding coverage and contribution rates
- GRI 201-3 Economic Performance evidence pack items for assurance readiness
- How to draft GRI 201-3 Economic Performance from source data and workbook
- GRI 201-3 Economic Performance common mistakes and reporting gaps
- GRI 201-3 Economic Performance synthetic example disclosure and narrative starters
- GRI 201-3 Economic Performance coverage estimate basis and date guidance
- GRI 201-3 Economic Performance recovery plan and timing data point
- GRI 201-3 Economic Performance employee and employer contribution rate data
- GRI 201-3 Economic Performance retirement plan participation data point
- GRI 201-3 Economic Performance printable library card PDF and workbook download
- GRI 201-3 Economic Performance content index line example
- GRI 201-3 Economic Performance ESRS E1 data reuse question
✓ 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.
