Disclosure focus
This disclosure asks an organisation to explain what it is doing, and what it is putting in place, to address the material impacts, risks and opportunities linked to its own workforce. In practice, that means describing the main actions underway, the resources assigned to them, and how these measures are intended to improve outcomes for workers over time. The focus is not just on intentions or policies, but on the concrete steps being taken and the support behind them.
The practical emphasis is on whether the response is broad enough to cover the parts of the business where the workforce is affected, rather than being limited to a few visible or flagship sites. An organisation should be able to show how actions are prioritised, where they apply, and whether the resources are sufficient to deliver them across relevant operations, functions or locations. The aim is to give a clear picture of implementation, not just commitment.
This LRA educational guidance supports disclosure preparation. For the exact requirements, always refer to the official EFRAG 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 S3-3 sub-elements (LRA working checklist)
Set out the steps already put in place.
Describe any local community initiatives carried out.
Explain the measures used to stop or reduce the issue.
State what action was taken.
Identify what kind of impact it was.
Describe any balancing choices, such as land use against business needs.
List the key measures used to track progress.
Say how often those measures are checked.
Give the indicators used to show results.
State how many incidents occurred.
Explain how serious the incidents were.
Identify the incident category, such as land, rights, or protests.
How to prepare it
1Set the reporting boundary first: decide which sites, operations, projects, and community-facing activities belong in the answer, so you only gather information for the parts of the business that are in scope.
2Translate the disclosure into your own internal categories before drafting: separate the response into the actions already carried out, the measures used to avoid or reduce harm, and any community programmes, then map each one to the relevant part of the business.
3For the impact section, classify each issue by its nature, record what was done in response, and note any balancing choices where one objective may have affected another, such as land use against business needs.
4Pull together the performance information and monitoring trail: collect the key measures used, the indicators showing results, and the cadence at which those results are checked, making sure the figures and narrative line up.
5For incidents, compile a complete log with the count, the kind of event, and an assessment of how serious each case was, using the same basis across the period so the totals and descriptions are comparable.
6Before finalising, document any exclusions, boundary changes, or restatements, then compare the draft against the official source to confirm nothing material has been missed or reworded in a way that changes meaning.
Request the data
Request the community actions and tracking evidence
Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.
What actions, programmes, measures, indicators and incident tracking do we have in place for our affected local communities, and how are we monitoring whether they are working?
Use your organisation’s own terms first, then map them to the disclosure items. For example, if you talk about neighbourhood engagement, site liaison, social investment, grievance handling or local impact tracking, use those labels in the request and only translate them afterwards for reporting. This is a possible LRA training template; adapt it to your organisation and check the source material before sign-off.
Weak request
Please provide the ESRS S3:S3-3 actions and resources data, including all actions implemented, prevention and mitigation measures, community programmes, impact types, actions taken, trade-offs, KPIs, outcome indicators, monitoring frequency, and incidents.
Why it fails: It uses framework language that many operational teams will not recognise, so the owner may not know which records to pull. It also does not say which sites, systems, time period or internal labels to use, so the response is likely to be incomplete or inconsistent.
Better request
Please send the community engagement, local impact and incident-tracking records for [period] across [sites/boundary]. Include the actions already in place, any reduction measures, local programmes, the impact categories you use, the follow-up actions, any balancing decisions, the measures you track, how often you review them, and any land/community-rights/protest incidents. Use your own team labels and add the source system and file reference.
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
Explain which definitions were used for each topic, how the figures were compiled from the underlying records, and what basis was used to classify actions, impacts, indicators, incidents and severity.
Context note
Set out what the numbers show about the organisation’s management of community-related impacts, including the scale of actions taken, the kinds of outcomes tracked, and the nature of any incidents recorded.
Fluctuation statement
If the figures moved materially, describe the operational or community factors behind the change, noting whether it reflects more activity, different impact types, altered monitoring, or a change in incident severity.
Content index entry
S3-3 Actions & Resources — [location / page] / [notes]
Download Centre
Preparation tools & forms
Professional preparation tools for S3-3 — 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 asked
The request goes to a team that only sees part of the work, so the record misses actions, budgets, or monitoring details held elsewhere.
Framework terms used too early
People are asked for answers in disclosure language instead of the business terms they use day to day, which leads to mismatched or unusable source data.
Scope not pinned down
The team never agrees which sites, communities, projects, or time period belong in the pull, so different contributors send different populations.
Wrong timing basis
Data is gathered using a different reporting window or cut-off date from the one used in the rest of the pack, so the figures do not line up.
Counting bases mixed
One source counts programmes, another counts activities, and another counts cases, but the collector merges them as if they were the same measure.
Source labels lost
Original system names, file titles, or local category labels are stripped out during collection, making it hard to trace what each item actually came from.
Separate groups merged
Impacts, actions, or indicators that should stay in distinct buckets are combined into one list, which hides differences that matter for the disclosure.
Evidence trail incomplete
The pack is assembled without the underlying files, dates, and reviewer sign-off, so no one can show how the numbers or descriptions were checked.
Where judgement is often needed
What counts after a buy-in or sale-out
Use the reporting cut-off you have set for the period, then explain whether newly added or removed sites, teams, or communities are included only from the date control changed or for the full period.
When local labels do not line up
Where the same issue is described differently in different countries, map each local label to one internal category and disclose the mapping rule so readers can see how like-for-like grouping was done.
People or places near the boundary of scope
Decide in advance how you will treat groups that are partly affected, indirectly linked, or only occasionally touched by the activity, and state the inclusion rule you used.
Choosing the timing basis for actions and results
If implementation, monitoring, and outcome data are captured on different dates, pick one timing basis for the narrative and say which date or period drives the figures.
Measured figures versus estimates
If some values come from site records and others from assumptions or sampling, identify which parts are estimated, describe the method used, and keep the split clear in the explanation.
Rounding small numbers without losing the story
Apply one rounding rule across the disclosure, note it if it affects totals or percentages, and make sure the rounded figures still reconcile to the underlying counts.
Protecting privacy when the group is too small
Where naming a community, household, or individual could expose personal data, combine the information to a higher level and explain the aggregation rule used.
Counting the same action across several workstreams
If one initiative supports prevention, mitigation, and community programmes at the same time, decide whether to report it once or in each relevant bucket and explain the approach so it is not double counted.
Separating operational actions from wider programmes
When a measure serves both day-to-day site management and a broader community effort, describe the main purpose you assigned to it and why that classification was chosen.
Examples
Illustrative examples
Synthetic, written by LRA — not from a company report, not text from any standard.
Illustrative (synthetic) example — Food processing
We are providing this as a synthetic example only. During the year, we put in place land-use controls, supplier checks, and local engagement measures to reduce pressure on nearby communities, and we also ran community support programmes covering water access and grievance handling. - The main issue was a change in land access linked to a new site expansion; we paused one parcel, redesigned access routes, and offered compensation and livelihood support where needed. - We tracked the work through monthly site reviews and quarterly community reporting, using indicators such as hectares affected, households reached, complaints closed, and restoration progress; the latest review showed 18 hectares affected, 12 hectares restored, 240 households engaged, and 36 complaints received, of which 33 were closed. - We recorded 4 incidents in total: 2 related to land access, 1 involving community rights concerns, and 1 protest at a site gate; all were assessed as medium severity, with no fatalities or permanent displacement.
Synthetic illustration for practitioner learning only; not legal or compliance advice.
Illustrative (synthetic) example — Renewable energy development
This is a synthetic example for illustration only. We implemented mitigation steps for a transmission corridor by narrowing the footprint, adjusting tower locations, and strengthening consultation with nearby residents and land users, while also funding local skills and access programmes. - The issue involved land take and temporary access restrictions; we chose a slightly longer route to avoid sensitive areas, accepted higher build costs, and kept a record of the trade-off between land protection and project economics. - Our indicators were reviewed every two months and included land disturbed, compensation paid, meetings held, and restoration completion; at the latest check, 9 hectares were disturbed, 7 hectares were restored, 14 meetings were held, and 95% of agreed compensation had been paid. - We logged 3 incidents: 1 land access dispute, 1 complaint about community consultation, and 1 peaceful protest; each was rated low severity, and all were resolved without escalation.
Synthetic illustration for practitioner learning only; not legal or compliance advice.
How companies report S3-3 in practice
Real reports where this topic is disclosed. These are report practice, not exact disclosure templates to copy.
SNCF Group
Ground Transportation — Railroads · France · 2025
SNCF Group’s 2025 Full-Year Financial Report includes some related context on monitoring measures introduced and evaluating their effectiveness concerning resource use and the circular economy, as noted on page 55. The report also references processes for repairing negative impacts and channels for stakeholder dialogue, with mentions of risk mapping and actions to mitigate serious damage (p.55) and community engagement (p.80, p.193). However, there is no clear or detailed disclosure of specific actions, resources, or numeric data related to this topic, and several expected narrative items are not found or remain unclear in the report.
bioMérieux S.A.
Healthcare Providers, Services and Technology · France · 2024
bioMérieux S.A.'s 2024 Universal Registration Document includes a narrative mention of actions taken in 2022 to promote workplace health, specifically noting the launch of a review of these activities (p.142). However, the report does not provide further detailed or quantitative information on this topic, as no additional quotable evidence or numeric values related to workplace health promotion were found. Other related sections referenced in the source trail do not contain explicit findings on this disclosure within the report.
Saipem SpA
Oil and Gas · Italy · 2025
Saipem SpA's 2025 Consolidated Sustainability Statement includes some references to human rights issues, noting on page 52 that a new material topic in 2025 relates to violations of human rights concerning discrimination affecting workers in the value chain. The report also mentions targets related to managing material negative impacts on affected communities (p.3) and states that human rights problems or incidents concerning affected communities have been reported (p.173). However, no detailed or quotable evidence specifically addressing the disclosure is found elsewhere in the report.
✓ 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 S3-3?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 farming supplier has started a grievance hotline, a land-access mediation process, and a community skills fund after complaints from nearby residents. The draft note also mentions a new road project, but it is not clear whether that is part of the response or just a separate capital plan.
QHow should you decide what to include in the actions-and-resources note for this issue?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑Include the practical steps the business has actually put in place to address the social issue, and separate those from unrelated investment plans. If the road project is genuinely part of the response, explain its role; if it is only a separate business project, leave it out of this disclosure. The point is to describe the response itself, not to blur it with general spending.
Why this matters · Keep the disclosure focused on the measures used to address the issue, not on unrelated projects.
A site team has introduced extra site checks, revised contractor rules, and a local dialogue forum after tensions with an indigenous community over access to customary land. Management wants to say the actions were taken, but not mention that the new rules slowed operations and increased transport costs.
QWhat should you do when the response creates a business trade-off?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑Describe the response and also explain the main trade-off it created, such as slower operations or higher costs, where that matters to understanding the action. The disclosure should show the balance the organisation had to manage, rather than presenting the response as cost-free or one-sided.
Why this matters · If a response has a material downside or balancing effect, explain it plainly alongside the action.
A preparer has data showing that a community training programme reached 120 people this quarter, while a land-restoration project covered 45 hectares. The team also tracks complaint resolution time and attendance at stakeholder meetings, but no one has agreed how often these figures are reviewed.
QHow do you decide what performance information belongs in the note, and what else must be stated about it?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑Use the key measures that the organisation relies on to follow progress on the response, and include the indicators that show whether the action is working. Then state how often those measures are checked, so readers can see the rhythm of monitoring rather than just a snapshot of numbers.
Why this matters · Pair the measures with the outcome signals and say how regularly they are reviewed.
A company has recorded two separate incidents this year: one protest at a project gate and one complaint about restricted access to grazing land. The draft says both were “minor issues” because no one was injured, but the community says the access restriction affected livelihoods for several weeks.
QHow should you describe the incidents and their seriousness?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑State how many incidents there were, identify the kind of issue each one involved, and describe seriousness using the real effect on people and land access rather than only whether there was physical injury. A protest and a land-access complaint are different in nature, and the seriousness should reflect the scale and impact of each event.
Why this matters · Count the events, classify them clearly, and judge seriousness by actual impact, not just by injury or damage.
Framework references
Related framework references
How this disclosure maps across the major reporting frameworks.
Primary
Related & explore
FAQ
Questions this page answers
How do I prepare ESRS S3-3 Affected Communities using this page step by step?+−
Use the page’s plain-language explainer, then work through the step-by-step preparation section to gather the listed datapoints, build the evidence pack and shape a draft. The page is designed to help you turn source material into a disclosure-ready narrative rather than to act as an official standard.
What data do I need to collect for S3-3 Affected Communities on this page?+−
The page says to prepare actions carried out, prevention and mitigation, community programmes, impact category, response actions, business trade-offs, performance measures, outcome measures, review cadence, incident count, incident type and incident seriousness. Use that list as your collection checklist before drafting.
How should I set the scope and methodology for an S3-3 Affected Communities draft?+−
The page does not give a formal methodology, but it does give a step-by-step preparation flow and a set of datapoints to organise your scope around. In practice, use those items to define what you are covering, what evidence you need and how often the information is reviewed.
Who should own the S3-3 Affected Communities data and evidence pack?+−
The page is written for sustainability/ESG managers, HR or data owners and assurance reviewers, so ownership should sit with the people who can source the underlying data and sign off the evidence. Use the workbook and evidence pack to make responsibilities clear before drafting.
What are the six assurance claims I need to verify for S3-3 Affected Communities?+−
The page says there are six assurance claims to verify, each with a claim, risk and evidence prompt. Use that section to check the draft against the supporting documents before it goes to review.
What should go into the S3-3 Affected Communities evidence pack for assurance readiness?+−
The page includes an evidence pack with five items to support assurance readiness. Build it alongside the draft so the underlying records are easy to trace, check and hand over to reviewers.
What are the common reporting gaps or mistakes for S3-3 Affected Communities?+−
The page lists common reporting gaps and mistakes to help you spot weak or incomplete drafting. Use that section as a pre-submission check so the narrative, data and evidence line up.
How do I use the Prep & Assurance workbook for S3-3 Affected Communities?+−
The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format. Use it to organise the preparation steps, track the required datapoints and assemble the assurance evidence before turning it into a draft.
How do I use the printable Library Card PDF for S3-3 Affected Communities?+−
The Download Centre also includes a printable Library Card in .pdf format. It is there as a quick reference while you prepare the disclosure, check the evidence pack and review the draft output.
What does the synthetic example disclosure for S3-3 Affected Communities show?+−
The page includes synthetic illustrative example disclosures, including a quantitative table where relevant. Use them as a drafting aid to see how the information can be presented, but treat them as examples only.
How do I turn S3-3 Affected Communities data into a draft disclosure?+−
The page has a draft-output section with visualisation ideas, narrative starters and a content-index line. Use those prompts to convert your collected data into a structured draft that is easier to review and assurance-check.
More questions this page can help with
S3-3 Affected Communities checklist for data collection and evidence packS3-3 Affected Communities assurance-ready evidence pack contentsHow to draft S3-3 Affected Communities from workbook dataS3-3 Affected Communities common mistakes to avoidS3-3 Affected Communities review cadence and incident data questionsS3-3 Affected Communities business trade-offs and response actions examplesS3-3 Affected Communities narrative starters for a disclosure draftS3-3 Affected Communities content index line exampleS3-3 Affected Communities synthetic example table explanationS3-3 Affected Communities from company reports linksS3-3 Affected Communities plain-language explainer summaryS3-3 Affected Communities how to use the downloadable workbook and PDF
How this library is built
312 published reports indexed
63171 pages with page-level citations
247 practitioner guides
Free · LRA Community
Get your S3-3 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 →