Disclosure focus
This disclosure is about when an organisation must report and whether it has filed on time. In practical terms, it asks for a clear account of the reporting period covered, the status of the filing, and any relevant timing milestones so readers can see whether the organisation has met the required deadline or is still in progress.
The practical focus is on the organisation’s reporting coverage and readiness, not just a single site or a headline figure. The explanation should make clear whether the filing relates to the organisation as a whole and how far the reporting has been completed across the relevant operations included in the submission.
This LRA educational guidance supports disclosure preparation. For the exact requirements, always refer to the official CARB source.
Before you start
A quick mental checklist before you prepare this disclosure — tick each as you settle it.
Preparation
Key datapoints to prepare
＋ Show SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE sub-elements (LRA working checklist)
State whether this disclosure must be prepared every year.
Identify the first financial year covered by the reporting requirement.
Record the first deadline for reporting Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions.
Indicate whether the first year can be filed on a good-faith basis.
Confirm that Scope 3 reporting comes only after the Scope 1 and Scope 2 disclosure.
Specify the year when Scope 3 reporting begins.
Note the current filing status.
How to prepare it
1Confirm whether this is an annual filing for the organisation, then pin down the first reporting year or fiscal period that applies so the timeline is anchored to the right cycle.
2Set the first date for Scope 1 and Scope 2 disclosure, and record the current submission status so you can see whether the filing is planned, in progress, or complete.
3Check whether the first year allows a good-faith initial submission, and keep evidence showing how that judgement was reached.
4Work out when Scope 3 information becomes due after the Scope 1 and Scope 2 filing, and note the number of days used to calculate that follow-on deadline.
5Identify the year when Scope 3 reporting begins, then gather the supporting records for the figures or narrative that will be reported from that point onward.
6Keep a clear audit trail for any exclusions, timing changes, or restatements, and compare the final timeline against the official source before submission.
Request the data
Request the filing timeline and status details
Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.
What filing dates, status, and timing milestones should we use for the company’s climate reporting pack?
Use your organisation’s own filing and governance terms first, then map them to the reporting timeline items below. Keep the ask in the language your team already uses for board papers, statutory filings, and sustainability reporting, and check the source material before sign-off.
Weak request
Can you confirm the disclosure items for the reporting timeline and filing status?
Why it fails: It uses framework language instead of the team’s own filing terms, and it does not specify the period, entity boundary, source record, or the exact timing and status fields needed to complete the pack.
Better request
Please send the filing calendar details for [entity / group] for [reporting period]: whether this is an annual cycle, the first reporting year, the planned date for the first Scope 1 and 2 filing, whether the first-year filing was made on a good-faith basis, the number of days allowed before the Scope 3 filing, the year Scope 3 starts, and the current filing status. Include the source record and owner.
Industry examples
Draft your disclosure
Notes that turn data into a disclosure
LRA training templates — adapt them to your organisation, and check the official source before sign-off.
Method note
This draft should explain which reporting year is being covered, how the organisation has defined the relevant fiscal period, whether the filing is treated as the first submission or a later one, and which emissions sources are included at each stage.
Context note
The figures should be read as a staged reporting journey: the organisation first discloses direct emissions and purchased-energy emissions, then adds wider value-chain emissions in the later phase, so the numbers reflect a phased build-up rather than a single all-at-once filing.
Fluctuation statement
If the reported position changes from one period to the next, the narrative can point to the move from the first filing year to later years, the shift from the initial deadline to the broader reporting stage, or a change in submission status as the reason for the difference.
Content index entry
SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE Reporting timeline and filing status — [location / page] / [notes]
Download Centre
Preparation tools & forms
Professional preparation tools for SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE — free with an LRA Community membership. Register once (it's free) and every download unlocks, together with the Disclosure Library, templates and the LRA AI-assistant.
Free · Community members
Assurance readiness
For each claim, check the evidence
Evidence pack to prepare
Common reporting gaps
Figures are stated without the supporting narrative, or narrative without figures.Scope is inconsistent between the text and the numbers.The reporting boundary is left undefined.Material changes since the previous period are not disclosed.Estimates and measured values are not distinguished.Source records for the figures are not identified.
Common gaps
Mistakes to avoid when collecting the data
Wrong owner
The request goes to a team that does not hold the filing calendar or status record, so the answer comes back from the wrong part of the business.
Framework language only
People ask for the data using reporting-framework terms instead of the company’s own labels, and the owner cannot map the request to their working records.
No boundary set
The team never agrees which legal entity, business unit, or reporting population is in scope, so different people pull different sets of records.
Wrong time basis
Someone uses the wrong year, period end, or cut-off date, which means the timeline is built from the wrong reporting cycle.
Mixed counting basis
Dates and durations are calculated from different reference points, so the deadline and start-year fields no longer line up with each other.
Source labels lost
The original file names, system tags, or record titles are stripped away during collection, making it hard to trace where each timeline value came from.
Populations merged
Separate filing groups are combined into one extract even though they should stay distinct, which hides differences in status or timing.
No evidence trail
The team captures the values but not the supporting metadata, so there is no clear record of who provided them, when, or from which source.
No sign-off record
The final set of dates and status flags is used without a visible review trail, so nobody can show who checked it before it was passed on.
Where judgement is often needed
Set the first reporting year after a deal closes
If an acquisition or disposal changes the group during the year, choose one cut-off date for the reporting population, explain which entities were included or removed, and keep the same basis for the first year and the filing status you report.
Decide how to handle businesses with mixed-country operations
Where local records, calendars or entity definitions differ across countries, use one group-wide approach for the timeline fields, explain any country-specific exceptions, and show how those differences affect the year and deadline you state.
Draw the line for entities near the reporting boundary
For joint ventures, minority holdings, newly formed entities or dormant operations, state the inclusion rule you applied, explain any exclusions, and make clear whether the choice changes the first year or the submission status.
Choose one timing basis and stick to it
If internal reporting, statutory filing and operational close dates do not match, pick one basis for the timeline fields, describe why it was used, and disclose any gap between the date you used and the date other teams track.
Explain when you used estimates instead of direct records
If the first-year submission or later timeline data relies on estimates, say which parts were estimated, why measured data was not available in time, and how you will replace or refine the estimate in later cycles.
State how you treated rounding in dates and day counts
If you round a deadline, day interval or year label for presentation, disclose the rounding rule, keep the underlying calculation traceable, and ensure the rounded result still matches the filing sequence you describe.
Aggregate sensitive timing data before sharing it
If detailed entity-level dates could expose personal or commercially sensitive information, combine them into a higher-level view, explain the aggregation method, and confirm that the summary still supports the filing status you report.
Clarify whether the first-year submission was complete or partial
If the first filing was made with limited information, state whether it was a full or good-faith submission, identify what was missing, and explain how that affects the first reporting year and the next deadline.
Examples
Illustrative examples
Synthetic, written by LRA — not from a company report, not text from any standard.
Illustrative (synthetic) example — manufacturing
We treat this as an annual filing cycle, with our first year of reporting set to FY2026. Our initial Scope 1 and Scope 2 filing would be due by 30 June 2027, and that first submission may be made on a good-faith basis. - Scope 3 comes later, after the first Scope 1/2 filing has been made; for us, that starts in FY2027. - Status: we would mark the first filing as submitted, with Scope 3 not yet due in that opening year.
Illustrative only; shows the timing sequence for the first year, the later start for value-chain emissions, and the possibility of a good-faith opening submission.
Illustrative (synthetic) example — financial services
We report on an annual basis, with our first reporting period set to FY2027. Our first Scope 1 and Scope 2 return would be due by 30 June 2028, and we would use the good-faith option for that opening submission. - The wider value-chain disclosure follows after the first direct-emissions and purchased-electricity filing; in our case, that begins in FY2028. - Status: the first return would be filed, while the later value-chain piece would remain pending until its start year.
Illustrative only; shows a different sector, a later first year, the first deadline, the good-faith opening filing, and the later start for value-chain reporting.
How companies report SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE in practice
Real reports where this topic is disclosed. These are report practice, not exact disclosure templates to copy.
Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.
Real Estate · United States · 2025
Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.'s 2025 Corporate Responsibility Report provides detailed data on Scope 1 greenhouse gas emissions, reporting 92,608 MT CO2e for 2024 on page 54 and historical emissions data from 2020 to 2024 on page 53. The report also references Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions, with some figures and context found on pages 18, 54, and 58, though the exact reporting timeline for Scope 1 and 2 deadlines remains unclear (p.4). Notably, the report does not include explicit information on the first reporting year under SB253, good faith first-year submission, or Scope 3 reporting deadlines and start year.
Sands China Ltd.
Hotels, Restaurants, Leisure, Tourism Services · Macao · 2025
Sands China Ltd.’s 2025 ESG Report provides verified data on Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, energy, water, and waste, with verification conducted by LRQA to a reasonable level (p.26). The report includes a detailed GHG emissions summary from 2018 to 2025, showing Scope 1 emissions figures and a breakdown of Scope 3 emissions by category for 2025 (p.31). However, there is no evidence regarding the reporting timeline requirements such as annual reporting, first reporting year, or submission status.
Cargill
Food Production — Agricultural · United States · 2025
Cargill's 2025 Impact Report provides partial coverage of the SB253 reporting timeline disclosure, with some context on Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and related reductions, including a 10% absolute operational GHG emissions reduction target by 2025 from a 2017 baseline (p.14) and a 23.2% improvement in Scope 1 and 2 GHG intensity in Norway in 2024 (p.58). The report also references Scope 3 emissions and due diligence efforts, though without a clear headline value or specific timeline for Scope 3 reporting (p.14, p.99). Notably, there is no clear disclosure of the first reporting year, the first Scope 1 and 2 deadline, submission status, or good faith first-year submission, and the timeline for annual reporting is not found (p.109; no page).
✓ LRA AI Assistant · Human-in-the-loop
Ask Study Studio AI assistant about this disclosure
Get practical answers for your reporting context. Your first two answers are free — join LRA Community for free to continue without a limit.
TryHow do I prepare SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE?What data do I need to collect?Where can I see a real-report example?What mistakes should I avoid?
2 free answers
Check your understanding
Scenarios to work through
A preparer has confirmed the organisation will report every year, but the first filing cycle is still being mapped because the finance team uses a non-calendar fiscal year. The draft pack also shows the first greenhouse-gas filing date has been set, but no one has yet agreed whether the first-year pack will be treated as a good-faith first submission.
QHow should the preparer decide the first reporting year, the first Scope 1 and 2 filing date, and whether the first-year submission is being treated as a good-faith first filing?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑The preparer should record the first reporting year using the organisation’s actual reporting cycle, then lock in the first Scope 1 and 2 filing date that matches that cycle. If the first year is being handled as an initial good-faith filing, that status should be marked clearly; if not, it should be marked accordingly. The key is to align the timeline fields with the organisation’s real filing plan and evidence, not with a generic calendar assumption.
Why this matters · Use the organisation’s actual reporting cycle and document the first-year filing status clearly.
A sustainability lead is preparing the next disclosure pack and notices that Scope 1 and 2 data will be filed first, while Scope 3 work is still being gathered from suppliers. The team is unsure whether the Scope 3 deadline should be shown as a fixed number of days after the earlier filing or as a separate date.
QWhat is the right way to set the Scope 3 timing field when Scope 3 follows the earlier emissions filing?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑The preparer should express Scope 3 timing as the number of days after the Scope 1 and 2 disclosure, because the timing is linked to that earlier filing. The entry should reflect the organisation’s chosen interval and be consistent with the actual submission plan. If the organisation has not yet reached the Scope 3 reporting start year, that should be shown separately in the start-year field rather than folded into the timing value.
Why this matters · When Scope 3 follows the earlier emissions filing, show the delay as a day count and keep the start year separate.
A reporting manager is reviewing a draft and sees the status field marked as “in progress” even though the first filing has already been sent to the regulator. The pack also includes the first reporting year and the first emissions deadline, both of which match the submission that was sent.
QWhat filing status should be shown once the first submission has actually been sent?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑The status should show that the filing has been submitted, because the pack is no longer describing a draft or work-in-progress state. The preparer should make sure the status matches the real position of the filing at the time of sign-off, and that it is consistent with the first reporting year and deadline already recorded.
Why this matters · The filing status should match what has actually happened, not the drafting stage.
An internal reviewer finds that the organisation plans to report annually, but the draft template leaves the annual reporting field blank because the team assumed it was obvious from the narrative. The same draft also lists a first-year date and a Scope 3 start year, but there is no clear yes/no entry for annual reporting.
QShould the annual reporting field be completed even if the narrative already explains the cycle?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑Yes. The annual reporting field should be completed directly, because the timeline record needs an explicit yes/no answer rather than relying on narrative context. The preparer should also keep the first reporting year, the first Scope 1 and 2 deadline, the Scope 3 start year, and the submission status aligned with that same timeline so the record is complete and internally consistent.
Why this matters · Do not leave the annual-cycle field implicit; record it directly and keep the timeline fields aligned.
Framework references
Related framework references
How this disclosure maps across the major reporting frameworks.
California
SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE
within California SB 253: Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act
Open official source →Related & explore
FAQ
Questions this page answers
For SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE, what data points do I need to gather before I start the disclosure draft?+−
The page says to prepare seven datapoints: annual filing flag, first reporting year, initial emissions deadline, first-year good faith flag, carbon report lag, value-chain start year, and filing progress status. Use those as the starting checklist before you draft anything.
How do I use the step-by-step 'how to prepare' section for SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE in practice?+−
Use it as a working sequence for getting the disclosure ready, rather than as a final answer key. The page is designed to help you move from data gathering to a draft and then to assurance readiness.
What should I include in the evidence pack for SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE assurance readiness?+−
The page includes an evidence pack with five items to support assurance readiness. Build it alongside the disclosure so the claim, the underlying data, and the supporting records stay aligned.
What are the six assurance claims I need to verify for SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE?+−
The page says there are six assurance claims to check, each with a claim, risk and evidence angle. Use that section to test whether your draft is supported and whether the evidence pack covers the main risks.
What are the common reporting gaps or mistakes on the SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE page, and how do I avoid them?+−
The page lists common reporting gaps and mistakes to watch for. Use that section as a pre-submission check so you can spot missing datapoints, weak evidence, or inconsistent drafting before the disclosure is finalised.
How do I use the Prep & Assurance workbook for SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE?+−
The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format. Use it to organise the datapoints, evidence and draft status so the disclosure is easier to review and hand over.
What is the printable Library Card PDF for SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE for?+−
The Download Centre also includes a printable Library Card in PDF format. It is there as a practical reference you can keep alongside the workbook while you prepare the disclosure.
Can I use the synthetic illustrative example disclosures on the SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE page as a template for my own draft?+−
Yes, but only as a synthetic example to show how the disclosure might look in practice. The page also includes a quantitative table in the example, so you can see how the data may be presented without treating it as a real company disclosure.
What kind of draft output does the SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE page help me produce?+−
The page includes draft-output ideas such as visualisation options, narrative starters and a content-index line. Use those to turn your prepared data into a first-pass disclosure draft.
How does the SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE page help an assurance reviewer check the disclosure before sign-off?+−
It gives you the assurance claims to test, the evidence pack to assemble, and the common mistakes to look for. That makes it easier to check whether the draft is internally consistent and backed by records.
How can I reuse data from SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE for ESRS E1 (Climate Change)?+−
The page says ESRS E1 (Climate Change) is the closest correspondence, so the data may be reusable across both contexts. Treat that as a practical cross-framework pointer, not as a statement that the requirements are identical.
More questions this page can help with
SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE workbook download: what should I fill in first?SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE evidence pack checklist for assurance readinessSB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE common mistakes before filingSB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE draft narrative starters and content index lineSB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE synthetic example disclosure tableSB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE annual filing flag and first reporting year explained for practitionersSB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE initial emissions deadline and carbon report lag data collectionSB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE value-chain start year and filing progress statusSB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE assurance claims claim risk evidenceSB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE from company reports examplesSB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE ESRS E1 data reuseSB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE how to prepare disclosure step by step
How this library is built
312 published reports indexed
63171 pages with page-level citations
247 practitioner guides
Free · LRA Community
Get your SB253-REPORTING-TIMELINE tools — free
Your preparation tools are free for LRA Community members and students. Register once (it's free) and your download starts right away — plus the Disclosure Library, templates and the LRA AI-assistant.
✓
You're in — your download is starting
Your file is downloading now. Your Community Cabinet — with the Disclosure Library, templates and the LRA AI-assistant — is ready too.
Open your Cabinet →