Aller à l’essentiel de l’information
Gratuit · Membres de la Community
＋ Afficher 6 de plus− Afficher moins
＋ Afficher 6 de plus− Afficher moins
Rapports réels publiés
Ouvrir le rapport →
Ouvrir le rapport →
Ouvrir le rapport →
✓ Assistant IA LRA · Supervision humaine
Ouvrir la source officielle →
Explore the ESRS / CSRD course →
ESRS S1: Own Workforce·Disclosure Requirement S1-16
Human Rights Incidents
Guide pratique pour préparer cette information. Utilisez cette fiche pour identifier les données à préparer, vérifier les affirmations et organiser les preuves. Pour les exigences exactes, reportez-vous toujours à la source officielle European Commission.
Passeport publié
Révision en attente
···
En cours de révision
Révision éditoriale en cours
Élaboré à partir des sources officielles et de preuves issues de rapports publiés. Aucun approbateur n’est encore enregistré : cette page ne porte donc pas de signature.
Utilisez-la avec la source officielle European Commission tant que cette révision est en cours.
Norme
ESRS S1: Own Workforce
Disclosure Requirement S1-16 · 2026-5010-final
Dernière révision
—
Support pédagogique LRA · Non publié ni approuvé par European Commission
Pour préparer cette information
Objet de l’information
This disclosure asks an organisation to explain how it identifies, tracks and responds to human rights incidents involving its own workforce. In practice, the report should describe the types of incidents it considers, how it records them, and what it does when issues are found, including any follow-up, remediation or escalation. The emphasis is on giving a clear picture of the organisation’s approach rather than listing isolated events without context.
The practical focus is on coverage across the whole workforce and all relevant operations, not just a few well-controlled sites or headline cases. An organisation should be able to show whether its reporting and response processes apply consistently across locations, business units and worker groups, and whether there are any gaps in coverage. The aim is to help readers understand how complete and reliable the organisation’s incident reporting is in practice.
Ce support pédagogique LRA aide à préparer l’information. Pour les exigences exactes, reportez-vous toujours à la source officielle European Commission.
Avant de commencer
Avant de commencer
Une courte liste de contrôle avant de préparer cette information — cochez chaque point une fois réglé.
Préparation
Informations clés à préparer
| Champ à préparer | Ce qu’il faut recueillir | Indice de preuve | Responsable |
|---|---|---|---|
| Incident count | Record the number of incidents covered by this disclosure for the reporting period, using one consistent counting basis and the same cut-off date across the source records. | Incident log, case register, or incident tracker; reconcile the final count to the period-end extract used for reporting. | Risk / Compliance |
| HR case count | Capture the number of people-related incidents included in the period, keeping the definition of an HR case consistent with the source system and the reporting cut-off. | HR case management system, employee relations log, or grievance/disciplinary tracker; tie the reported figure back to the period extract. | Human Resources |
| Penalty amount | Capture the total monetary penalties linked to the relevant incidents for the period, in euros, using the same scope and period as the incident count. | Finance ledger, legal case file, or compliance penalty schedule; reconcile the amount to the booked or approved penalty records. | Finance / Legal |
| Compensation amount | Capture the total compensation paid or recognised for the relevant incidents in the period, in euros, using the same incident set and reporting cut-off as the other figures. | Claims file, finance ledger, or settlement schedule; check the total against the compensation records used for reporting. | Finance / Legal |
＋ Afficher les sous-éléments de S1-16 (liste de travail LRA)
Record the number of incidents.
Record the number of human-resources incidents.
Record the amount paid in compensation, in euros.
Record the amount paid in fines, in euros.
Comment le préparer
Set the reporting boundary first: decide which workforce-related incidents fall inside the period and organisation scope you are using for this disclosure, so the same boundary is applied to every figure you report.
Agree the counting rules before you start collecting data: define what you will treat as an incident, what you will treat as a human-rights-related incident, and how you will separate those two counts from each other.
Gather the source records that support each number: incident logs, case files, finance records, and any other internal evidence needed to back the incident totals, the human-rights incident total, and the monetary amounts.
Compile the reported outputs in the required form: provide the two incident counts and the two euro amounts for penalties and compensation, using a clear and consistent method so the figures can be traced back to the underlying records.
Explain any exclusions, restatements, or changes in method: if a case is left out, reclassified, or counted differently from a prior period, record the reason and the effect on the reported numbers.
Check the draft against the official source before sign-off: confirm that the scope, definitions, counts, and monetary figures match the underlying evidence and that nothing required by the disclosure has been missed or added.
Demander les données
Request the incident log and case outcomes
Traduisez l’information en une question métier interne, puis adaptez-la au vocabulaire de votre organisation.
What human-rights-related incidents were recorded in the period, and what amounts were paid or imposed as a result?
Use your organisation’s own case, grievance, conduct, complaints, or incident terms first, then map them to the disclosure wording when you prepare the reporting pack. Keep the request in the language the owner already uses internally, and check the source material before sign-off.
Demande faible
Please provide all human rights incidents and related fines and compensation for the period.
Pourquoi elle échoue : It uses framework language that many teams do not use day to day, so the owner may not know which register, case type, or payment fields to pull. It also leaves out the boundary, counting approach, and source system, which makes the extract hard to verify.
Meilleure demande
Please pull the [reporting period] extract from your [case log / grievance register / conduct tracker] for the records you would normally treat as [your internal case categories]. For each record, include the case reference, dates, status, internal label, and any amounts paid or imposed, split between [your terms for sanctions] and [your terms for compensation]. Please also note the source system, the counting rule used, and any exclusions.
Modèle d’e-mail formel
Subject: Request for incident and case data for [reporting period] Dear [name/team], Please could you provide the incident and case data for [reporting period] for the entities in [reporting boundary]. We need the records from your [system/register name] covering the cases you would normally classify as [your internal category terms]. For each record, please include the case reference, date recorded, date closed if applicable, current status, internal category, brief description, and any amounts paid or imposed, split between [your organisation’s terms for fines/sanctions] and [your organisation’s terms for compensation/settlement]. If you use a different counting approach for linked records or multiple affected people, please note that clearly. Please also include the source system name, the person who prepared the extract, and any assumptions or exclusions. Could you send this by [date]? Please adapt this to your organisation’s own terms and check the source material before sign-off. Many thanks, [Name] [Role]
Version courte pour Teams / Slack
Hi [name/team] — could you send the [reporting period] extract from your [system/register] for the cases you’d normally tag as [internal category terms]? Please include case ref, dates, status, category, and any amounts paid or imposed, split between [your terms for fines/sanctions] and [your terms for compensation/settlement]. Also note the counting approach, source system, and any exclusions. Thanks — [name]
Exemples sectoriels
Retail and consumer services
Contexte. The business tracks customer-facing and worker complaints in a central case tool, with separate fields for conduct issues and settlement payments.
Demande adaptée. Please send the [reporting period] extract from the case tool for records tagged as [conduct issue / grievance / rights complaint]. Include case ref, date opened, date closed, status, internal label, and any amounts paid or imposed, split between [penalties] and [settlements].
Exemple de réponse. Prepared by: Case Management Lead; Source system: Central case tool; Period: 1 Jan 2025 to 31 Dec 2025; Boundary: Group entities A, B and C; Records: 14 cases; Amount imposed as fine or sanction: €12,000; Amount paid as compensation or settlement: €48,500; Notes: 3 linked records counted as 1 matter under the team’s normal practice.
Manufacturing
Contexte. The business logs site-level complaints and legal matters separately, with payments tracked by Finance but linked back to the case register.
Demande adaptée. Please provide the [reporting period] list from the site complaint register and legal matter log for cases you would classify as [worker complaint / site grievance / rights allegation]. Include the case ID, site, status, internal category, and any fine, settlement, or compensation amounts linked to the matter.
Exemple de réponse. Prepared by: Legal Operations; Source system: Site grievance log and legal matter register; Period: FY2025; Boundary: All owned sites in scope; Records: 9 matters; Amount imposed as fine or sanction: €0; Amount paid as compensation or settlement: €31,200; Notes: One matter had two payments, both linked to the same case ID.
Rédigez votre information
Des notes qui transforment les données en information publiée
Modèles pédagogiques LRA — adaptez-les à votre organisation et vérifiez la source officielle avant validation.
Note méthodologique
State how the organisation defined each incident measure, how it identified the work-related subset, and the basis used to total any penalties and compensation amounts.
Note de contexte
Explain what the counts and amounts indicate about the scale of incidents and their financial consequences during the reporting period.
Déclaration sur les variations
If any figure moved materially, note the main operational, legal, or reporting reasons that drove the change and whether it reflects a one-off event or a broader shift.
Entrée de l’index de contenu
S1-16 Human Rights Incidents — [location / page] / [notes]Centre de téléchargement
Outils et formulaires de préparation
Outils de préparation professionnels pour S1-16 — gratuits avec l’adhésion à LRA Community. Inscrivez-vous une fois (c’est gratuit) et tous les téléchargements se débloquent, avec la Bibliothèque des informations, les modèles et l’assistant IA LRA.
01XLSClasseur préparation et assurancePoints de données, risques, preuves à vérifier, responsable et dossier de preuves.Obtenir gratuitement ↧
02XLSPack de demande de donnéesE-mail de demande, modèle de message, champs de réponse et structure de validation.Obtenir gratuitement ↧
03PDFFiche de bibliothèqueRésumé imprimable d’une page de cette fiche d’information.Obtenir gratuitement ↧
Préparation à l’assurance
Pour chaque affirmation, vérifiez les preuves
| Affirmation | Risque | Preuves à vérifier |
|---|---|---|
| I have linked the incident figures to the related follow-up actions or remedies, so a reviewer can trace each case from the disclosed numbers to the response recorded elsewhere in the report. | An assurer will check that the cross-reference is real, complete and points to the right follow-up information. They may test whether the incidents counted here are the same ones discussed in the separate actions/remedies section, and whether anything material has been left out or linked to the wrong place. | Cross-reference map or disclosure index; incident log with case IDs; the separate actions/remedies disclosure; internal review notes showing how the link was made; sign-off pack confirming the referenced information matches the incident set. |
| I have pointed readers from the incident discussion to the section on concern-raising routes, so the report shows where people could raise issues connected with those cases. | An assurer will probe whether the link to the concern-raising information is accurate and whether the report actually connects the relevant incidents to the right channel information. They may also check that the route described is the one used for the disclosed cases, not a generic or outdated process. | Published report cross-reference; whistleblowing/grievance or speak-up channel description; case files showing how concerns were raised; internal mapping note linking the incidents to the channel information; approval evidence for the final wording. |
| I have included the monetary amounts recognised in the accounts for penalties, fines and compensation tied to those incidents during the period, using the figures that were booked in the financial records. | An assurer will test whether the amounts are actually recognised in the financial statements, whether they relate to the right incident set, and whether the totals are complete and correctly classified. They may also check that the period cut-off and currency treatment are consistent with the accounts. | General ledger extracts; journal entries; supporting legal/accounting papers; financial statement note or trial balance tie-out; reconciliation showing the disclosed amount agrees to the recognised accounting figure; evidence of review by finance and legal teams. |
| I have set out the method used to build the incident dataset, including how cases were gathered, screened and counted before publication. | An assurer will look for a clear, repeatable method and may challenge whether the approach was applied consistently across the full population. They will test whether the method explains the source systems, inclusion/exclusion choices, verification steps and any judgement used in compiling the figures. | Written methodology or reporting protocol; data flow diagram; source-system extracts; counting rules; exception log; version-controlled working papers; evidence of management review and approval of the method used. |
| I have reported the number of confirmed discrimination cases at work that were identified in the period, based on the cases that met our verification threshold. | An assurer will check whether the count is complete, whether only confirmed cases were included, and whether the verification threshold was applied consistently. They may also test whether the period boundary, duplicate handling and classification of cases were correct. | Case register; investigation outcomes; verification criteria; count reconciliation to source records; duplicate check; period-end cut-off review; evidence that the final number was reviewed and approved. |
| I have reported the number of confirmed human-rights-related cases involving our own workforce, excluding the discrimination cases already counted separately, using the same reporting period and validation process. | An assurer will test whether the non-discrimination cases are genuinely separate from the discrimination count, whether the workforce link is correct, and whether the count is complete and verified. They may also check for double counting, misclassification or overlap between categories. | Incident log with category tags; workforce linkage evidence; exclusion list showing discrimination cases removed from this count; investigation files; reconciliation between category totals; review notes confirming no overlap and consistent validation. |
Dossier de preuves à préparer
Lacunes fréquentes dans les rapports
The information is presented without a date or as-at point.
The scope or boundary of the statement is left undefined.
Key terms are used inconsistently across the report.
Material changes since the previous period are not disclosed.
Assertions are made without supporting detail or a source record.
Boilerplate is used that does not actually answer what is asked.
Lacunes fréquentes
Erreurs à éviter lors de la collecte des données
Wrong ownerAsking the policy team or legal team for the figures, instead of the case-handling owner who tracks incidents in day-to-day operations, leads to incomplete or delayed data.
Framework language onlyRequesting the numbers using disclosure labels rather than the organisation’s own case, complaint, or incident terms means the right records may never be pulled together.
No clear scopeFailing to state which parts of the business, sites, or worker groups are in scope causes teams to mix in records that should have been left out.
Wrong time basisPulling cases by report date, close date, or payment date without fixing one consistent period can shift incidents into the wrong reporting year.
Mixed counting methodCombining raw incident counts with separate human-rights case counts, or mixing case totals with euro amounts, produces figures that cannot be reconciled.
Source labels lostCopying data into a summary sheet without keeping the original case reference, category, or outcome label makes later checks against the source file difficult.
Separate groups mergedPutting employee cases, contractor cases, and other affected groups into one undivided total hides which population each number came from.
Missing evidence trailCollecting the totals without the underlying file name, date extracted, and preparer note leaves no audit trail for review and sign-off.
No sign-off recordSending the draft numbers forward without a named reviewer and approval date means nobody can show who checked the figures before they were used.
Là où un jugement professionnel est souvent nécessaire
Set the cut-off for counting events that span a reporting dateChoose one clear rule for whether an incident is counted when it starts, when it is confirmed, or when it is closed, then use that same timing consistently and explain it in your note.
Decide how to treat a business bought or sold during the yearState whether you include events and amounts from the acquired or disposed operation for the part of the year it was under your control, and describe any boundary change so readers can see why the year-on-year figure moved.
Handle local legal labels and internal case types with one mapping ruleIf different countries or sites use different labels for the same kind of event, map them to one internal category set, explain the mapping, and note any cases that could not be aligned cleanly.
Define the edge of the workforce and other people linked to your operationsMake a documented call on whether to include people just outside your direct payroll but still tied to your activities, then disclose the scope rule and any exclusions that materially affect the count.
Separate confirmed cases from allegations or open investigationsUse one basis for the count and say whether it covers only substantiated cases or also unclosed matters, then explain how you avoid double counting when a case moves from allegation to confirmed outcome.
Choose between exact records and reasoned estimates for money amountsWhere case-level amounts are incomplete, use a consistent estimation method, label the figure as estimated, and explain the source data and assumptions behind the amount reported.
Decide whether to report gross amounts or netted figuresPick one approach for fines and compensation, state whether offsets, recoveries, or reversals are included or excluded, and keep the same basis across the period unless you explain a change.
Set a rounding rule that does not distort small totalsApply one rounding convention to counts and euro amounts, and if rounding changes a small total in a noticeable way, say so and show the unrounded basis in working papers.
Protect personal data by grouping low-volume cases before disclosureIf naming or splitting cases would expose individuals, combine the data into a broader group, explain the aggregation rule, and make clear that the published total still covers the full set of relevant incidents.
Exemples
Exemples illustratifs
Synthétiques, rédigés par LRA — ils ne proviennent ni d’un rapport d’entreprise ni du texte d’une norme.
Illustrative (synthetic) example — Food processing
: we report four workplace incidents in the year, of which two involved our own staff. We also show the related financial outcomes: €18,000 paid in penalties and €42,000 paid in compensation.
Illustrative only; figures are invented for training purposes and are internally consistent.
Synthetic illustration of workplace incidents and related amounts (count / €)
| Category | Count |
|---|---|
| All recorded incidents | 4 |
| Incidents involving our own workers | 2 |
| Penalties paid (€) | 18000 |
| Compensation paid (€) | 42000 |
Illustrative (synthetic) example — Logistics
: during the reporting period we recorded six workplace incidents, including three affecting our employees. The associated financial impact was €9,500 in penalties and €27,500 in compensation.
Illustrative only; figures are invented for training purposes and are internally consistent.
Synthetic illustration of workplace incidents and related amounts (count / €)
| Category | Count |
|---|---|
| All recorded incidents | 6 |
| Incidents involving our own workers | 3 |
| Penalties paid (€) | 9500 |
| Compensation paid (€) | 27500 |
Rapports d’entreprises
Comment les entreprises publient S1-16 en pratique
Exemples de pratiques de publication complètes et partielles. Ce sont des analyses fondées sur des preuves, non des modèles à recopier.
Indra Sistemas, S.A.
Software and Services · Spain · 2025
Indra Sistemas, S.A.'s Sustainability Report 2025 includes some data on incidents of corruption and bribery, noting the total number of confirmed incidents, though specific figures are not provided (p.159). The report also details accident metrics, including fatalities and accident frequency rates among its workforce over multiple years (p.125). However, there is no clear or quotable narrative evidence found in the report regarding the company’s human rights policies or due diligence strategies, despite brief mentions of rights identification and due diligence strategy for customers (p.98, p.235).
Continental AG
Tires · Germany · 2025
Continental AG's 2025 Annual Report provides data on fines, penalties, and compensation related to human rights incidents, indicating zero amounts paid and zero known incidents on page 182. The report also mentions figures related to human rights matters excluding discrimination, with values of 56 and 139, though the context is unclear (p.182). Additionally, the report states that fines, penalties, and compensation paid during the reporting year are included and related expenses as defined by ESRS are reported (p.197). However, no further narrative or detailed explanation on these disclosures is found in the report.
Prysmian S.p.A.
Electrical Equipment and Machinery · Italy · 2025
Prysmian S.p.A.'s 2025 Integrated Annual Report provides data on human rights incidents, reporting no severe cases in FY24 and detailing 104 incidents overall, with no fines, penalties, or compensation paid related to these incidents (p.202). The report partially addresses diversity, equity, inclusion, and wellbeing through a mention of the HR and Group DE&I and Wellbeing VP, but lacks headline values or comprehensive metrics in this area (p.267). There is no clear evidence on other specific human rights disclosures or detailed complaint investigations beyond internal handling, leaving some aspects of the disclosure unclear or not found in the report.
Interrogez l’assistant IA de Study Studio sur cette information
Obtenez des réponses concrètes pour votre contexte de reporting. Les deux premières réponses sont gratuites — rejoignez gratuitement LRA Community pour continuer sans limite.
Essayez
Comment préparer S1-16 ?
Quelles données dois-je collecter ?
Où voir un exemple issu d’un rapport réel ?
Quelles erreurs éviter ?
2 réponses gratuites
Vérifiez votre compréhension
Scénarios à travailler
During the year, the group logged 7 incidents in its grievance and case-tracking system. After review, 3 of those were confirmed as human-rights related, and the rest were health-and-safety, conduct, or payroll matters.
QHow should the preparer separate the incident totals for the disclosure, and what should be kept distinct from the human-rights subset?
Afficher la réponse type →Masquer la réponse ↑
The preparer should report the full incident count as 7, then show the human-rights-related subset as 3. Any amounts linked to penalties or compensation should be tracked separately from the counts, because the disclosure asks for both the number of events and the financial consequences, not one blended figure.
Pourquoi c’est important · Keep the overall case count separate from the human-rights subset, and do not mix those counts with money amounts.
A supplier complaint led to a settlement payment of €120,000 and a regulator later imposed a €30,000 penalty. Internal records show both amounts relate to the same human-rights matter.
QShould the preparer combine the two amounts into one figure, or present them separately for the disclosure?
Afficher la réponse type →Masquer la réponse ↑
They should be shown separately: €30,000 for the penalty and €120,000 for compensation. Even when both arise from the same matter, the disclosure needs the two financial effects distinguished so users can see what was paid as a sanction and what was paid to remedy harm.
Pourquoi c’est important · Separate sanctions from compensation, even when they come from the same case.
The legal team says one case involved a labour-rights breach, but the operations team argues it was only a contract dispute because the worker was later rehired. The incident file contains witness notes, a settlement agreement, and an internal investigation summary.
QWhat should the preparer do before deciding whether this case belongs in the human-rights count?
Afficher la réponse type →Masquer la réponse ↑
The preparer should review the available facts and use the organisation’s own assessment to decide whether the matter belongs in the human-rights subset. A label from one team is not enough on its own; the classification should follow the substance of the incident and be applied consistently across the reporting period.
Pourquoi c’est important · Classify cases by their substance, not by a single department’s label.
At year-end, the company has 5 open cases and 2 closed cases that were confirmed as human-rights related. Finance has already booked €18,000 of compensation for one closed case, while a regulator has not yet decided whether any penalty will be issued.
QWhat should the preparer include in the disclosure when some matters are still unresolved?
Afficher la réponse type →Masquer la réponse ↑
The preparer should include the confirmed human-rights incident count for the period, including closed and open matters if they fall within the reporting boundary used for the disclosure, and should report only amounts that are known at the reporting date. If no penalty has been decided yet, it should not be included as a final amount; the compensation already booked can be reported if it is attributable to the relevant incident.
Pourquoi c’est important · Use the reporting-date facts for money amounts, and do not treat an undecided penalty as a completed figure.
Références au référentiel
Exigences ESRS applicables et informations connexes
Références disponibles du référentiel et informations voisines utiles à la préparation de cette exigence.
ESRS
S1-16
au sein de ESRS S1 : Own Workforce
Connexes et exploration
Policies (Own Workforce) → FicheSocial Protection → FicheDisabilities → FicheTraining → FicheHealth & Safety → Fiche
Parcourir toutes les informations →
Plus dans ESRS S1 → Parcourir le catalogue complet → Accueil de la Bibliothèque des informations → Rechercher dans toutes les informations →
FAQ
Questions auxquelles cette page répond
For S1-16, what data points do I need to collect before I start drafting the disclosure?+−
The page says to prepare four datapoints: incident count, HR case count, penalty amount and compensation amount. Use those as the starting checklist before you draft anything.
How do I use the step-by-step 'how to prepare' section for S1-16 in practice?+−
Use it as a working sequence for getting the disclosure ready, rather than as a final answer. It is there to help you organise scope, data collection, evidence and drafting in a practical order.
What should I include in the evidence pack for S1-16 assurance readiness?+−
The page includes an evidence pack with five items to support assurance readiness. Use it alongside the assurance claims so you can show where the numbers came from and how they were checked.
What are the six assurance claims on the S1-16 page and how should I use them?+−
The page provides six claims with related risks and evidence prompts. Treat them as a checklist for testing whether the disclosure is supported, rather than as a substitute for your own controls and records.
What are the common reporting gaps or mistakes for S1-16 that I should avoid?+−
The page lists common gaps and mistakes to help you spot weak points before submission. Use that section to check whether your scope, data and evidence are consistent and complete.
How can I turn the S1-16 data into a draft disclosure?+−
The page has a draft-output section with visualisation ideas, narrative starters and a content-index line. Use those to turn the prepared data into a first draft that is easier to review and assurance-test.
How should I use the synthetic illustrative example disclosure for S1-16?+−
The example is there to show what a worked-up disclosure can look like, including a quantitative table. It is synthetic, so use it for structure and presentation only, not as a real reporting benchmark.
What is in the S1-16 Prep & Assurance workbook and when should I use it?+−
The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format. Use it to organise the preparation work, track the assurance checks and keep the disclosure build in one place.
What is the printable Library Card for S1-16 and how is it different from the workbook?+−
The Download Centre also includes a printable Library Card in .pdf format. The page presents it as a companion resource, so it is useful for quick reference while the workbook is better for active preparation.
Does the S1-16 page show real company report examples I can use as references?+−
Yes. The page includes a 'From company reports' table that links to real published reports at the pages where the topic is disclosed, which can help you see how others present similar information.
Can I use the S1-16 page to check whether my disclosure is ready for assurance?+−
Yes. The page is built around assurance readiness, with claims to verify, evidence-pack items and common mistakes to check. It is designed to help you spot gaps before a reviewer does.
Autres questions auxquelles cette page peut aider
S1-16 own workforce disclosure: what should an HR data owner gather first?S1-16 incident count and HR case count: how do I prepare the numbers for drafting?S1-16 penalty amount and compensation amount: what evidence should support the figures?How do I use the S1-16 step-by-step preparation section with the workbook?What does the S1-16 evidence pack contain for assurance review?What are the S1-16 common reporting gaps before finalising the draft?How do I turn the S1-16 illustrative example into my own disclosure draft?Where can I find real published reports linked from the S1-16 page?What should a sustainability manager check before sending S1-16 for assurance?How do I use the S1-16 content-index line in a draft report?What is the S1-16 plain-language explainer meant to help me do?Can the S1-16 page help me build an evidence pack and draft narrative at the same time?
Aller plus loin · S1-16
Apprenez à préparer cette information de bout en bout
This guide covers one Disclosure Requirement. The ESRS / CSRD Reporting course walks the full European workflow — double materiality, datapoints, evidence and assurance — with exercises on your own data.
Available as Guided Flex, Live Cohort, 1:1 Expert Mentorship or Corporate Programme.
Comment cette bibliothèque est construite
312 rapports publiés indexés
63 171 pages avec citations au niveau de la page
272 fiches disclosure conçues par des praticiens
/fr/knowledge-hub/disclosure-cards/esrs-s1-16/
Gratuit · LRA Community
Obtenez vos outils S1-16 — gratuitement
Vos outils de préparation sont gratuits pour les membres de LRA Community et les étudiants. Inscrivez-vous une fois (c’est gratuit) et votre téléchargement démarre aussitôt — avec la Bibliothèque des informations, les modèles et l’assistant IA LRA.
✓
C’est fait — votre téléchargement démarre
Votre fichier est en cours de téléchargement. Votre Cabinet Community — avec la Bibliothèque des informations, les modèles et l’assistant IA LRA — est prêt lui aussi.
Ouvrir votre Cabinet →