Disclosure focus
This disclosure asks an organisation to say how many new suppliers were checked against environmental criteria before or when they were brought on board, and to present that information in a way that shows the scale of that screening. The focus is on whether environmental checks are part of supplier onboarding, rather than on describing a few isolated examples or only the most visible suppliers.
In practice, the main question is coverage: did the organisation apply environmental screening across the relevant supplier base, or only in selected areas such as major contracts, flagship sites, or a limited pilot? The reporting should make clear the extent of the screening and the basis used to identify which new suppliers were included.
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
＋ Show GRI 308-1 sub-elements (LRA working checklist)
Check what share of newly onboarded suppliers was assessed against environmental criteria.
How to prepare it
1Set the reporting boundary first: decide which supplier onboarding activity is in scope for the period you are reporting, and make sure the same boundary is used consistently throughout the disclosure.
2Agree what counts as a screened new supplier: define the population you will include, the environmental checks that qualify, and any internal rules used to classify a supplier as new for this metric.
3Gather the underlying records: pull together the supplier list, screening logs, approval files, or other source documents that show which new suppliers were assessed against environmental factors.
4Calculate the percentage: count the new suppliers that met the environmental screening test, divide by the total number of new suppliers in scope, and present the result as a percentage.
5Record any exclusions or changes: explain any suppliers left out, any changes to the method or data source, and any assumptions needed to produce the figure so the result can be traced back clearly.
6Check the final disclosure against the source material: confirm the number, wording, and supporting evidence align with the official reporting basis before sign-off.
Request the data
Request the supplier screening data from Procurement
Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.
What share of newly onboarded suppliers had an environmental check recorded during the period?
Use your organisation’s own supplier and onboarding terms first, then map them to the reporting wording. For example, if your team talks about vendor setup, due diligence, or onboarding checks, use those terms 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 official source before sign-off.
Weak request
Please provide the GRI 308-1 evidence for the percentage of new suppliers screened using environmental criteria.
Why it fails: This uses framework language only, so the owner may not know which internal records to pull, how to define the population, or which system to use. It also does not say what period, scope, or counting rule to apply, so the result may not be usable.
Better request
Please send the supplier onboarding extract for [period] showing all new suppliers added in scope, which of them had an environmental check recorded, and the source system used. Please include your team’s own terms for onboarding and screening, plus any exclusions or duplicates.
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
State how you define a new supplier, what environmental checks count as screening, and whether the figure covers all new suppliers or only those in scope for the reporting period.
Context note
Explain what the percentage says about how consistently environmental checks are built into supplier onboarding, and whether the result suggests broad coverage or only partial application.
Fluctuation statement
If the figure moved materially, note whether the change came from a wider onboarding pool, a revised screening process, better data capture, or a shift in which suppliers were brought into scope.
Content index entry
GRI 308-1 New suppliers that were screened using environmental criteria — [location / page] / [notes]
Download Centre
Preparation tools & forms
Professional preparation tools for GRI 308-1 — 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
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.
Common gaps
Mistakes to avoid when collecting the data
Wrong owner
The request goes to a team that does not hold the supplier onboarding or screening records, so the answer is built from guesswork instead of the source system.
Framework language first
People ask for the figure using reporting jargon rather than the business terms used in procurement or supplier setup, and the data owner cannot map the request cleanly.
Scope left vague
No one agrees which supplier population is in scope, so the team mixes different onboarding groups and cannot tell what should be counted.
Wrong time basis
The team pulls names from the wrong period, such as approvals outside the reporting window, so the count does not match the intended year.
Mixed counting method
One source counts supplier records while another counts supplier relationships or onboarding events, and the two bases are combined as if they were the same.
Source labels lost
The original tags from the procurement or screening file are stripped out during export, so the team cannot trace which entries were marked as environmentally checked.
Populations merged
New suppliers that were checked and those that were not are rolled into one list before analysis, which hides the split needed for the calculation.
No evidence trail
The team keeps the final number but not the supporting file names, dates, or approver notes, so the figure cannot be traced back for review.
Where judgement is often needed
Defining which supplier starts the clock
Set a clear rule for when a supplier first counts as new in your buying cycle, apply it consistently across the year, and explain that rule if your onboarding process or contract setup creates borderline cases.
Handling business changes that shift the supplier base
If an acquisition, disposal, or reorganisation changes who sits in scope, state the cut-off you used for the reporting period and note any restatement or exclusion approach so the percentage is not read as a like-for-like trend.
Using one screening rule across different countries
Where local teams use different environmental checks, choose a single group-wide basis for counting screened suppliers or explain the country-by-country differences and how you combined them into one figure.
Deciding whether a partial check counts as screened
If a supplier only went through a light-touch review, a risk-based filter, or a document check rather than the full process, spell out the threshold you used to include or exclude that supplier from the count.
Choosing the timing point for inclusion
Be explicit about whether you count suppliers at onboarding, at first order, or after the environmental review is completed, and use the same timing rule for both the numerator and the supplier population you compare it with.
Estimating when records are incomplete
If some supplier files are missing or systems do not capture the review status cleanly, use a documented estimate method, label it as such, and explain the basis so readers can judge the reliability of the percentage.
Rounding and small-number effects
State your rounding approach and, where the supplier count is small, check that rounding does not materially distort the percentage or hide a change in the underlying number of suppliers.
Protecting supplier confidentiality in the presentation
If the supplier list is small enough that individual firms could be identified, aggregate the data further or suppress detail as needed, and say how you balanced privacy with a clear explanation of the result.
Examples
Illustrative examples
Synthetic, written by LRA — not from a company report, not text from any standard.
Illustrative (synthetic) example — Food manufacturing
*Synthetic illustration only.* During the year, we brought in 50 new suppliers and checked 40 of them against our environmental screening criteria, so **80%** of new suppliers were reviewed before onboarding. - This example shows a simple supplier intake process where environmental checks are applied to most new relationships. - The figures are internally consistent: 40 screened out of 50 total new suppliers.
This example demonstrates how to report the share of newly added suppliers that were assessed against environmental criteria, using a clear numerator, denominator and calculated percentage.
Illustrative (synthetic) example — Construction materials
*Synthetic illustration only.* In the reporting period, our group added 24 suppliers and applied environmental checks to 18 of them, which means **75%** of new suppliers went through that review step. - The example is intentionally simple and uses round numbers to show the calculation. - The subset does not exceed the total: 18 reviewed from 24 new suppliers.
This example shows the same disclosure for a different sector, with the proportion of newly engaged suppliers that were screened using environmental criteria expressed as a percentage.
Company reports
How companies report GRI 308-1
Real reports where this topic is disclosed. These are report practice, not exact disclosure templates to copy.
CAE Inc.
Aerospace and Defense · Canada · 2024
CAE Inc.’s FY24 Global Annual Activity and Sustainability Report shows that by FY26, the company aims to complete the second wave of its GHG reduction program with suppliers, with progress described as "On track" (p.60). The report also indicates that in FY24, 73% of CAE’s strategic suppliers, representing about 92% of direct spend, were scored, reflecting active supply chain engagement (p.145). However, specific percentage values for overall supply chain emissions or detailed Scope 3 targets are not clearly provided, and the extent of governance details beyond general management approaches is not fully detailed (pp.57, 147).
Cogna Educação S.A.
Education Services · Brazil · 2024
Cogna Educação S.A.'s 2024 Relato Integrado report includes a covered datapoint on the percentage of new suppliers screened using environmental criteria, as indicated on page 139. The report explicitly mentions that all new suppliers were screened under GRI 308-1 environmental criteria (p.139). However, the report does not provide further details or additional metrics related to supplier environmental screening, leaving other aspects of this disclosure unclear.
Godrej Properties Limited
Real Estate · India · 2025
Godrej Properties Limited's Integrated Report 2024-25 shows that 100% of new suppliers were screened using environmental and social criteria, as reported on page 252. This is the strongest covered datapoint related to supplier screening. However, the report does not provide further details on the screening process, criteria specifics, or outcomes, leaving other aspects of the disclosure unclear.
✓ 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.
TryHow do I prepare GRI 308-1?What data do I need to collect?Where can I see a real-report example?What mistakes should I avoid?
1 free answer
Check your understanding
Scenarios to work through
A procurement team onboarded 40 new suppliers this year. Before contracts were signed, 30 were checked against the organisation’s environmental screening process, while 10 were not because the team considered them low risk.
QShould the reported percentage include all 40 new suppliers, or only the 30 that went through the environmental check?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑Use the full set of new suppliers brought in during the period as the base, then calculate the share that went through the environmental review. In this case, 30 out of 40 were screened, so the figure is 75%. The judgement point is that the measure is about the proportion of new suppliers that were actually assessed, not just the number reviewed.
Why this matters · The percentage should be based on all new suppliers added in the period, with the numerator being those that were checked for environmental factors.
A business added 12 new suppliers in the year. Five were direct manufacturers, four were logistics providers, and three were office service firms. The procurement lead screened the manufacturers and logistics providers, but not the office service firms, because they were thought to have little environmental impact.
QCan the organisation leave out the office service firms from the calculation because they were not screened, or must they still be counted as new suppliers?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑They still belong in the total count of new suppliers for the period. If they were not screened, they remain part of the denominator and reduce the percentage. Here, 9 of 12 were screened, so the result is 75%. The key is to report the share of all new suppliers that received the environmental check, regardless of why some were not reviewed.
Why this matters · Do not shrink the base by excluding unscreened new suppliers; they remain part of the period total.
A group signed framework agreements with 20 suppliers during the year, but only 8 actually started delivering goods or services before year-end. The sustainability team screened all 8 active suppliers, while the other 12 had not yet begun trading.
QFor the percentage, should the organisation count only the 8 suppliers that started trading, or all 20 signed suppliers?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑Count the suppliers that were newly brought into the supplier base during the reporting period, not just those that had already started deliveries. If all 20 were added as new suppliers in the year and 8 were screened, the percentage is 40%. If only 8 were truly new in the period, then the base would be 8. The decision depends on your organisation’s definition of a new supplier, but the calculation must follow that same population consistently.
Why this matters · Be consistent about which supplier population is treated as ‘new’ and use that same population for the percentage.
A company used two different onboarding routes. One route screened suppliers for environmental issues before approval; the other route only checked them after they had already been appointed. During the year, 50 suppliers were newly added and 35 were screened at some point, but 10 of those checks happened after appointment.
QShould the reported figure include suppliers screened only after they were already appointed, or only those checked during onboarding?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑The safer reading is to count suppliers that were screened as part of the new-supplier process, not checks done later for other reasons. If 25 were screened before approval and 10 were checked only after appointment, the reported percentage should be based on the 25 that were screened in the onboarding flow, giving 50% of the 50 new suppliers. The point is to reflect how many new suppliers were assessed when they were being brought in.
Why this matters · Only include screening that forms part of the new-supplier onboarding process, not later reviews done after appointment.
Framework references
Related framework references
How this disclosure maps across the major reporting frameworks.
Primary
Related & explore
FAQ
Questions this page answers
For GRI 308-1 Supplier Environmental Assessment, what data do I actually need to prepare before drafting the disclosure?+−
The page says the key datapoint to prepare is the supplier screening rate. Use the plain-language explainer and the step-by-step preparation section to turn that into a clear scope, method and draft narrative.
How do I work out the supplier screening rate for GRI 308-1 in a way that is usable for reporting?+−
The page points you to the supplier screening rate as the main datapoint and includes a quantitative illustrative example. Use that example as a model for how to present the calculation, but keep your own figures and scope consistent.
What should I include in the scope and methodology notes for GRI 308-1 Supplier Environmental Assessment?+−
The page’s step-by-step preparation section is there to help you set scope and methodology before drafting. It is also useful to check the common reporting gaps so you do not leave the method too vague for review.
Who should own the GRI 308-1 data collection and sign-off process in practice?+−
The page is designed for sustainability/ESG managers, HR or data owners, and assurance reviewers, so ownership should sit with the person who can evidence the supplier screening data and explain the method. Use the workbook to assign tasks and track review points.
What evidence do I need to keep for GRI 308-1 if I want the disclosure to be assurance-ready?+−
The page includes an evidence pack with five items and five assurance claims to verify, each tied to a claim, risk and evidence check. Use those sections to build a file that shows how the screening rate was calculated and supported.
What are the most common mistakes people make when reporting GRI 308-1 Supplier Environmental Assessment?+−
The page lists common reporting gaps and mistakes to help you avoid weak or incomplete disclosures. It is especially useful for checking whether the scope, method and evidence are aligned before you finalise the draft.
How do I use the Prep & Assurance workbook for GRI 308-1 Supplier Environmental Assessment?+−
The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format to help you organise the disclosure, evidence and assurance checks. Use it alongside the step-by-step preparation section and the evidence pack to turn raw data into a draft.
What can I take from the synthetic example disclosure for GRI 308-1 without copying it into my report?+−
The synthetic example shows how a disclosure can be structured, including a quantitative table where relevant. Treat it as a formatting and logic guide only, and make sure your own numbers, scope and narrative are internally consistent.
How do I turn the GRI 308-1 page into a draft disclosure and content-index line?+−
The page has a draft-output section with visualisation ideas, narrative starters and a GRI content-index line. Use those prompts to build a first draft, then check it against the evidence pack and common gaps before sign-off.
Where can I find real company report examples for GRI 308-1 Supplier Environmental Assessment?+−
The page includes a 'From company reports' table that links to real published reports at the pages where the topic is disclosed. Use it to see how others present the topic, but keep your own reporting based on your own data and method.
More questions this page can help with
GRI 308-1 Supplier Environmental Assessment checklist for data owners and assurance reviewersHow to evidence supplier screening rate for GRI 308-1GRI 308-1 common reporting mistakes and how to avoid themHow to use the GRI 308-1 workbook downloadGRI 308-1 draft disclosure example and narrative startersWhat goes in the evidence pack for GRI 308-1 Supplier Environmental AssessmentGRI 308-1 scope and methodology guidance for practitionersWho should own GRI 308-1 supplier environmental assessment dataHow to prepare GRI 308-1 for assurance readinessGRI 308-1 supplier screening rate reporting templateHow to turn GRI 308-1 notes into a draft report lineWhere to find real company report examples for GRI 308-1
Free · LRA Community
Get your GRI 308-1 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 →