Aller à l’essentiel de l’information
Gratuit · Membres de la Community
＋ Afficher 6 de plus− Afficher moins
＋ Afficher 5 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 California course →
California SB 261: Climate-Related Financial Risk Act·Disclosure SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT
TCFD or equivalent framework alignment
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 CARB.
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 CARB tant que cette révision est en cours.
Norme
California SB 261: Climate-Related Financial Risk Act
Disclosure SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT · 2026-initial-regulation-as-amended-sb219
Dernière révision
—
Support pédagogique LRA · Non publié ni approuvé par CARB
Pour préparer cette information
Objet de l’information
This disclosure asks an organisation to explain which recognised climate-risk framework it uses, or how its own approach lines up with one, when reporting on climate-related financial risk. In practice, the focus is on showing that the organisation has a structured way to identify, assess, manage and disclose climate risks and opportunities, rather than giving a general sustainability narrative.
The practical emphasis is usually on the whole organisation, not just a few flagship locations or isolated projects. A useful response should make clear whether the framework covers the full business, including relevant operations and decision-making processes, and whether any parts are excluded or only partially covered.
Ce support pédagogique LRA aide à préparer l’information. Pour les exigences exactes, reportez-vous toujours à la source officielle CARB.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Equivalent basis used | Record which other reporting basis the company is relying on for this filing, and enough detail to show it is the basis actually used for the disclosure. | Cross-check the selected basis against the published report or framework statement used for the filing. | Sustainability reporting / Legal |
| Reporting framework chosen | Capture the named reporting framework the company says it has followed for this disclosure, with the exact framework title used in the report. | Tie the entry back to the framework named in the report cover, methodology note, or disclosure index. | Sustainability reporting |
| Governance disclosure flag | Confirm whether the report includes the governance-related climate disclosure set out under the referenced framework, and capture the yes/no status used for filing. | Check the governance section of the report and the disclosure checklist or index. | Sustainability reporting / Governance |
| Targets and metrics flag | Confirm whether the report includes the climate metrics-and-targets disclosure set under the referenced framework, and capture the yes/no status used for filing. | Review the metrics, targets and KPI sections together with the disclosure index. | Sustainability reporting / Finance |
| Risk process flag | Confirm whether the report includes the climate risk-management disclosure set under the referenced framework, and capture the yes/no status used for filing. | Check the risk management narrative in the report and the disclosure checklist or index. | Risk management / Sustainability reporting |
| Strategy disclosure flag | Confirm whether the report includes the climate strategy disclosure set under the referenced framework, and capture the yes/no status used for filing. | Review the strategy section of the report and the disclosure index or checklist. | Strategy / Sustainability reporting |
＋ Afficher les sous-éléments de SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT (liste de travail LRA)
State which reporting framework you used.
Identify any equivalent reporting rule you relied on.
Confirm whether you provided the governance-related TCFD disclosure.
Confirm whether you provided the TCFD disclosure on metrics and targets.
Confirm whether you provided the TCFD disclosure on risk management.
Confirm whether you provided the TCFD disclosure on strategy.
Comment le préparer
Choose the reporting basis first. Identify the climate-reporting framework you are relying on, and record the equivalent reporting basis used for this filing.
Map your content to the four required topic areas. Check that your disclosure covers governance, strategy, risk handling, and metrics plus targets, using the framework you selected.
Gather the supporting records before drafting. Pull together board or committee papers, management materials, internal reports, and any other source documents that show the information you will report.
Prepare the final disclosure in a clear, complete form. State the framework used and provide the required yes/no confirmation for each of the four topic areas, or the narrative and figures that support them.
Note any gaps, exclusions, or changes in approach. If you have left anything out or changed how information is presented, explain that clearly so the reader can see what was not included and why.
Check the draft against the official source before release. Confirm that the framework choice, the equivalent basis, and each topic-area disclosure match the source material and are internally consistent.
Demander les données
Request the climate reporting evidence pack
Traduisez l’information en une question métier interne, puis adaptez-la au vocabulaire de votre organisation.
Which reporting framework did we use, and can we show that our public climate report covers governance, strategy, risk handling, and metrics/targets for the period in scope?
Use your organisation’s own labels first, then map them to the climate reporting framework terms only when you prepare the disclosure. For example, ask for the board paper, risk register, climate plan, or KPI pack if those are the names your teams use. This is a possible LRA training template; adapt it to your organisation and check the source material before sign-off.
Demande faible
Please confirm whether we are TCFD aligned and provide the governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics/targets disclosures.
Pourquoi elle échoue : This uses framework language only, so the owner may not know which internal documents to pull. It also does not specify the period, boundary, source system, or which approved materials should be returned.
Meilleure demande
Please send the latest approved climate reporting pack for [reporting period] for [entity/boundary], including the framework or approach used and the board, risk, climate plan, and KPI materials that support the sections on governance, strategy, risk handling, and metrics/targets. Include document title, version, date, approval status, source location, and any gaps. I will map your team’s labels to the disclosure wording.
Modèle d’e-mail formel
Subject: Request for climate reporting evidence pack for [reporting period] Hello [name/team], I am preparing the climate disclosure pack for [reporting period] and need the supporting material for the public report or filing. Please send the following for [entity/boundary]: - the framework or approach we used for the climate report; - the source material that shows how the report covers governance, strategy, risk handling, and metrics/targets; - the latest approved version, plus any draft or redline if the published version is not yet available; - the document name, version, date, and where it is stored; - any note on gaps, exceptions, or sections handled by another team. Please use your team’s own document names and system labels. I will map them to the disclosure wording during preparation. This is a possible LRA training template; please adapt it to your organisation and check the source material before sign-off. Many thanks, [preparer name]
Version courte pour Teams / Slack
Hi [name/team] — I’m pulling together the climate disclosure pack for [reporting period]. Could you share the latest board/risk/climate materials that show the framework used and the sections covering governance, strategy, risk handling, and metrics/targets for [entity/boundary]? Please include version/date, source location, and any gaps. I’ll map your team’s labels to the disclosure wording. This is a possible LRA training template; adapt it to your organisation and check the source material before sign-off.
Exemples sectoriels
Financial services
Contexte. The climate disclosure is assembled from board papers, enterprise risk reporting, and the annual report drafting pack.
Demande adaptée. Please share the approved board paper, risk committee pack, climate strategy note, and KPI dashboard for [reporting period] that show the framework used and the materials behind the governance, strategy, risk handling, and metrics/targets sections for [entity/boundary]. Include version, date, and file location.
Exemple de réponse. Board paper v4 dated 18 Mar 2025; risk committee pack v2 dated 20 Mar 2025; climate strategy note v3 dated 15 Mar 2025; KPI dashboard FY2024; framework used: TCFD; gaps: none; source: board portal and shared drive folder [link].
Manufacturing
Contexte. The climate disclosure is built from operations, HSE, and finance inputs, with final sign-off in the annual report process.
Demande adaptée. Please send the latest approved climate report inputs from operations, HSE, and finance for [reporting period], including the framework or approach used and the documents showing how the report covers governance, strategy, risk handling, and metrics/targets for [plant/site/group boundary]. Include the file name, version, date, and any missing sections.
Exemple de réponse. Operations climate pack v2 dated 02 Apr 2025; HSE risk register extract v5 dated 28 Mar 2025; finance KPI workbook FY2024; framework used: TCFD; gaps: strategy section pending final board wording; source: shared drive folder [link].
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
This disclosure is based on the reporting basis identified by the company and the framework it says it used, with each TCFD topic area marked according to whether the relevant information was provided.
Note de contexte
Taken together, the data show which framework underpinned the disclosure and whether the report includes the main topic areas expected for a climate-related narrative.
Déclaration sur les variations
If the pattern changes from one period to the next, the reporter can explain that the shift reflects changes in the reporting basis, the scope of the framework used, or the extent to which each topic area was completed.
Entrée de l’index de contenu
SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT TCFD or equivalent framework alignment — [location / page] / [notes]Centre de téléchargement
Outils et formulaires de préparation
Outils de préparation professionnels pour SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT — 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 |
|---|---|---|
| We relied on a different reporting basis that we believe is acceptable for this filing, and we can show why it was chosen. | The assurer checks whether the basis was actually eligible, consistently applied, and not selected simply because it was convenient or incomplete. | Board or management approval of the chosen basis; a short rationale memo; mapping from the chosen basis to the disclosed content; any legal or technical review confirming eligibility. |
| We named the reporting basis we used in the published material, so readers can see what framework or rule set underpinned the disclosure. | The assurer probes whether the named basis matches the content, whether it was identified clearly, and whether the wording could mislead about what was actually used. | Final report wording; cross-check against the internal disclosure checklist; version history showing the named basis was retained through sign-off; reviewer comments on clarity. |
| We prepared the governance section using the same reporting approach throughout, and the underlying source material was aligned before publication. | The assurer looks for inconsistency between the stated approach and the actual governance content, or for missing support for parts of the section. | Draft-to-final comparison; source documents for governance statements; internal review notes; sign-off from the owner of the governance content. |
| Where our governance information was not complete, we explained the gap and set out what remains to be done. | The assurer checks whether the gap explanation is specific, whether the missing items are clearly identified, and whether the follow-up plan is realistic. | Gap log; action tracker; draft explanations for each omission; evidence of management review of the completion plan. |
| We prepared the metrics-and-targets section from the best information available at the time, and we kept a record of any limitations in the data. | The assurer probes whether the data were current, whether estimates or proxies were used appropriately, and whether limitations were disclosed rather than hidden. | Data source list; calculation files; notes on estimates, assumptions, or proxies; data quality review records; evidence of sign-off on the final figures. |
| We used the same reporting basis for the risk-management section as for the rest of the disclosure, so the narrative is internally consistent. | The assurer checks for mismatches between sections, unsupported claims about processes, or a risk story that does not fit the rest of the filing. | Cross-reference matrix between sections; process maps or policy extracts; internal consistency review; reviewer comments and resolution log. |
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 ownerThe request goes to a team that does not hold the source records, so the answer is built from second-hand knowledge instead of the people who can trace it back.
Framework words too earlyThe team asks for the information in framework language rather than the organisation’s own terms, and the source owner cannot map the request to their records.
Scope left vagueNo one states which business units, entities, or activities are in scope, so different teams collect different slices of data that cannot be compared.
Wrong time basisThe data is pulled for the wrong reporting period or cut-off point, which makes the evidence line up with a different time than the disclosure.
Mixed counting basisOne source uses one counting method and another uses a different one, but the figures are merged anyway, so the final set is not internally consistent.
Source labels lostOriginal file names, system tags, or record labels are stripped away during collection, so the team cannot show where each figure came from.
Populations mergedGroups that should stay separate are combined too soon, which hides differences and makes later checks against the source records difficult.
Evidence details missingThe team keeps the numbers but not the supporting metadata, so the date, owner, version, or origin of the source cannot be verified later.
No approval trailThe collected pack moves forward without a clear sign-off record, so nobody can show who checked the data and when.
Là où un jugement professionnel est souvent nécessaire
Choosing the reporting basis after a buy-in or sale-outSet the reporting boundary from the same cut-off date and group structure used in your wider reporting pack, then explain any additions or removals from acquisitions, disposals or reorganisations so readers can see why the comparison changed.
Reconciling different country-level definitionsWhere local teams use different labels or thresholds for the same topic, map them to one organisation-wide approach, state the mapping rule, and note any country exceptions that were kept for legal or operational reasons.
Deciding who sits just inside or just outside scopeFor entities, sites, funds or activities near the edge of your boundary, apply one documented inclusion rule consistently and disclose the main exclusions so users understand the line you drew.
Picking the timing point for the information setUse one clear reporting date or period-end across the disclosure, and if some inputs come from earlier or later internal closes, say so and explain the timing difference.
Using estimates where direct measurement is not availableWhen actual figures are missing, use a stated estimation method, identify the main assumptions, and flag which parts are measured and which are modelled or approximated.
Rounding and presentation of small differencesRound figures in a consistent way across the disclosure, keep the underlying calculation trail available, and note when totals may not exactly match because of rounding.
Protecting personal or sensitive data through groupingIf detailed location, workforce or customer information cannot be shown safely, aggregate it to a level that protects privacy while still explaining the basis for grouping and any material gaps it creates.
Handling mixed internal and external sourcesIf the disclosure combines company records with third-party or public data, identify which parts came from each source and explain any quality checks or limitations that affected the final wording.
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 — manufacturing
We rely on a climate-reporting framework that is accepted as equivalent for this filing, and we use that framework to organise the disclosure. - Governance: yes; strategy: yes; risk handling: yes; measures and targets: yes. - In practice, that means our board and committee oversight, our climate-related business planning, our risk process, and our emissions/target reporting are all covered in the package we publish.
This example shows a company in manufacturing saying it used an accepted equivalent climate framework for the filing and that all four TCFD-style content areas are covered.
Illustrative (synthetic) example — financial services
Our group uses a recognised climate disclosure route that we treat as equivalent for this report, and we present the information through that framework. - Oversight by directors and committees: yes; climate-related business planning: yes; risk identification and response: yes; performance measures and targets: no. - So, the report covers leadership, planning, and risk handling, but it does not include a full set of metrics and targets in this cycle.
This example shows a financial-services reporter using an equivalent route and disclosing three of the four content areas, while leaving out the measures-and-targets element.
Rapports d’entreprises
Comment les entreprises publient SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT en pratique
Exemples de pratiques de publication complètes et partielles. Ce sont des analyses fondées sur des preuves, non des modèles à recopier.
Sands China Ltd.
Hotels, Restaurants, Leisure, Tourism Services · Macao · 2025
Sands China Ltd.’s 2025 ESG Report provides covered disclosures on TCFD governance, noting that the board of directors has delegated authority on ESG-related issues (p.29), and on TCFD metrics and targets, including a 2025 target of a 17.5% decrease in Scope 1 and 2 absolute emissions (p.30-31). The report partially addresses TCFD strategy and framework use, mentioning a materiality assessment process and referencing frameworks like TCFD and SASB without headline values (p.27, 29). However, the disclosure on TCFD risk management is unclear, with risk assessments limited to present day and sea level rise only assessed for 2100, lacking a clear comprehensive risk management statement (p.32).
Owens Corning
Building Products · United States · 2024
Owens Corning’s 2024 Sustainability Report provides some related context on TCFD climate risks and opportunities, including references to governance (p.352) and risk management (p.361), but does not clearly disclose these elements. There is no clear evidence of disclosures on TCFD strategy or metrics and targets within the report. The report also lacks explicit mention of alignment with the SB261 framework or equivalent reporting requirements.
Cargill
Food Production — Agricultural · United States · 2025
Cargill's 2025 Impact Report provides some related context to the SB 261 disclosure requirements, including references to governance and climate-related risks and opportunities on pages 2 and 111, though these do not constitute clear or explicit disclosures of board oversight, strategy, or risk management as per the framework (pp. 2, 111). The report mentions a TCFD index on page 111 and discusses climate strategy and risk management in general terms but lacks specific, detailed disclosures on metrics, targets, or a formal framework alignment. Notably, there is no quotable evidence found regarding the use of a reporting framework or equivalent reporting requirements, and the clarity of governance and risk management disclosures remains uncertain.
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 SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT ?
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
A reporting team has prepared a climate section using a different recognised framework, but the draft only covers the organisation’s oversight arrangements and leaves out how climate issues affect the business model, how climate risks are handled, and any measures or targets.
QShould the team treat this as enough alignment for this disclosure, or do they need to check that the chosen framework covers the full set of climate topics they are relying on?
Afficher la réponse type →Masquer la réponse ↑
They need to check the framework they are using against the full set of climate topics they plan to disclose. If they rely on a framework other than TCFD, it should still cover governance, strategy, risk handling, and measures and targets in a way that supports the disclosure; otherwise the alignment claim is too thin.
Pourquoi c’est important · A substitute framework should support the whole climate story, not just one part of it.
A preparer has copied climate content from a group report that uses a recognised framework, but the local filing only includes the framework name and a short note saying the company follows it. The underlying sections are not clearly mapped to the four topic areas.
QIs naming the framework enough, or should the preparer make sure the disclosure shows where each climate topic is covered?
Afficher la réponse type →Masquer la réponse ↑
Naming the framework alone is not enough if the filing does not show that the climate topics are actually covered. The preparer should make sure the disclosure clearly links the content to the relevant areas so a reader can see how the organisation’s governance, strategy, risk handling, and measures and targets are addressed.
Pourquoi c’est important · Framework alignment should be visible in the content, not just stated as a label.
A sustainability lead is reviewing a draft that includes a detailed risk process and a set of emissions targets, but the board oversight section is still being finalised. The team wants to publish now and fill in the governance wording later.
QCan they treat the disclosure as complete if one of the framework areas is still missing?
Afficher la réponse type →Masquer la réponse ↑
No. If they are relying on a framework-based alignment statement, the disclosure should be complete across the areas they are using. Leaving out the governance part means the reader cannot see the full basis for the alignment claim, so the team should finish that section before sign-off.
Pourquoi c’est important · Do not present framework alignment as complete when a core topic area is still absent.
A company uses a climate framework that is not TCFD, but its draft report only says the framework was used and then gives a narrative on climate strategy. It does not explain how the chosen framework supports the disclosure or whether the same framework is used consistently across the climate section.
QWhat should the preparer check before relying on that framework in the filing?
Afficher la réponse type →Masquer la réponse ↑
The preparer should check that the framework named in the filing is the one actually used to structure the climate disclosure and that it supports the topics being reported. If the organisation is using an equivalent approach rather than TCFD itself, the report should still make the basis for that choice clear and show the relevant climate content in a coherent way.
Pourquoi c’est important · Be clear about which framework underpins the disclosure and use it consistently.
Références au référentiel
Exigences California applicables et informations connexes
Références disponibles du référentiel et informations voisines utiles à la préparation de cette exigence.
California
SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT
au sein de California SB 261 : Climate-Related Financial Risk Act
Connexes et exploration
Covered entity applicability → FicheClimate-related financial risk disclosure → FicheImplementation fee and administration →Reporting gaps and completion plan →Biennial reporting timeline and enforcement status → Fiche
Parcourir toutes les informations →
Plus dans California SB 261 → Parcourir le catalogue complet → Accueil de la Bibliothèque des informations → Rechercher dans toutes les informations →
FAQ
Questions auxquelles cette page répond
For SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT, what do I need to have ready before I start drafting the disclosure?+−
The page gives a plain-language explainer and a step-by-step ‘how to prepare’ section, plus a short list of datapoints to prepare. Use those as the starting point so you can gather the right inputs before writing the draft.
What does the SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT page say I should decide first about scope and basis?+−
It points you to the ‘Equivalent basis used’ and ‘Reporting framework chosen’ datapoints, so you can be clear on the basis and framework before drafting. That helps keep the disclosure consistent from the start.
Which SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT datapoints should I collect from governance, targets, risk and strategy owners?+−
The page lists four flags to prepare: governance disclosure, targets and metrics, risk process, and strategy disclosure. Those are the main inputs to request from the relevant owners before you build the disclosure.
How do I use the SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT workbook to prepare the disclosure?+−
The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format. Use it to organise the preparation work and the assurance checks before turning the inputs into a draft.
What should go into the evidence pack for SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT assurance readiness?+−
The page includes an evidence pack with five items for assurance readiness. Use that pack to assemble the supporting material you will need to back up the disclosure and the claims you make.
What are the six assurance claims I need to verify on the SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT page?+−
The page says there are six assurance claims to verify, each with a claim, risk and evidence angle. Use those checks to test whether the draft is supportable before it goes any further.
What are the common reporting gaps or mistakes for SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT?+−
The page lists common reporting gaps and mistakes so you can spot weak points early. Use that section as a pre-submission check to avoid missing key inputs or leaving the draft too vague.
How do I turn the SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT data into a draft disclosure?+−
The page has a draft-output section with visualisation ideas, narrative starters and a content-index line. Those are there to help you turn the prepared data into a usable first draft.
Can I use the SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT example disclosures as a template for my own report?+−
The page includes synthetic illustrative examples, including a quantitative table, to show how the disclosure can look in practice. Treat them as examples only and adapt them to your own data so the numbers and narrative stay internally consistent.
How does the SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT page relate to ESRS E1, and can I reuse data across both?+−
The page says the closest ESRS correspondence is ESRS E1 (Climate Change). That means some data may be reusable across frameworks, but the page does not say the requirements are identical.
Where can I find real company report examples for SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT?+−
The page has 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 similar material in practice.
Autres questions auxquelles cette page peut aider
SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT checklist: what should I gather before drafting the disclosure?SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT workbook download: how do I use the .xlsx file for prep and assurance?What evidence do I need for SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT assurance readiness?How do I assign ownership for SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT data collection across governance, targets, risk and strategy?What are the common mistakes to avoid when preparing SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT?How do I use the SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT narrative starters and content-index line?Can I reuse climate data from ESRS E1 for SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT?What does the SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT plain-language explainer help me do?How should I set the equivalent basis used for SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT?What should I ask the data owner for the governance disclosure flag in SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT?What should I ask the data owner for the targets and metrics flag in SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT?Where can I find synthetic example disclosures for SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT?
Aller plus loin · SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT
Apprenez à préparer cette information de bout en bout
This guide covers one statutory requirement. The California Climate Regulation course walks SB 253 and SB 261 end to end — applicability, GHG inventories, climate-risk reporting 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/sb261-framework-alignment/
Gratuit · LRA Community
Obtenez vos outils SB261-FRAMEWORK-ALIGNMENT — 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 →