Read the assessment closely
Review the proposed responses against the relevant GRESB guidance and the client’s instructions.
ESG SOLUTIONS · GRESB TECHNICAL REVIEW
Senior GRESB judgement: finding errors, testing evidence and identifying scoring opportunities
ESG Solutions needed a senior eye on a complex GRESB submission for a real estate investment client. As a former Reporting Service Line Lead at EVORA, I brought a deep understanding of reporting frameworks, the context behind the responses and the wider implications of the claims being made. My technical audit identified input errors and inconsistencies, alongside opportunities to strengthen the evidence and optimise scoring where it was justified.
Consultancy support · Evidence review
THE STARTING POINT
A senior review of the judgement behind the submission.
The team was working to a compressed timetable after changes to the scope and submission schedule. Much of the assessment had already been prepared, and further client updates were still coming through. I completed the technical audit and returned the findings within a week.
The complexity sat in how the evidence fitted together. Some responses relied on group-level material, some needed regional evidence, and some documents came from a previous organisational structure. A document could be relevant to the topic without necessarily supporting the exact response or entity being assessed.
My brief focused on the Management component, with selected non-data questions elsewhere in the submission. It did not include validation of the asset-level performance data.
THE APPROACH
Check the response, the evidence and the connection between them.
Test whether the evidence applies
Look at the entity, geography and reporting period, including the relevance of documents from the previous organisational structure.
Make the next decision clear
Separate points needing clarification from opportunities to strengthen the submission, and discuss them with the delivery team.
The audit brought together input checks, consistency checks and a detailed assessment of the supporting evidence. I distinguished corrections from opportunities to strengthen the submission, then set out prioritised actions explaining what needed attention and why it mattered.
EXAMPLES FROM THE AUDIT
Specific findings, with a clear reason to act.
Evidence was referenced but missing from the upload
I identified strong supporting disclosures referenced in a response that had not been uploaded. The recommendation was to include the evidence, reducing the risk of a reviewer being unable to substantiate the claim.
Performance-linked pay did not establish the sustainability link
The handbook evidenced performance-linked remuneration, but did not explicitly establish sustainability-linked performance targets. I flagged the distinction and recommended clearer supporting evidence and commentary.
The climate-risk narrative needed to explain the process
The evidence was stronger than the written response. I recommended explaining how the impact assessment had been carried out, so the response answered the question rather than simply describing the documents available.
Relevant financial and physical risk findings needed signposting
I recommended clearer references to the financial implications of transition risk and to physical-risk findings, including operational losses. This would make relevant evidence easier for the reviewer to find and assess.
WORKING WITH THE TEAM
Technical challenge that fits into an existing delivery process.
Antonio and the ESG Solutions team retained the client relationship and overall submission responsibility. I worked alongside them as a senior technical reviewer, using their draft submission, evidence files and internal comments to test the quality and consistency of the responses.
The recommendations gave the team specific actions to work through: what to correct, what to clarify, which evidence to upload and where the explanation needed to be stronger. Understanding the substance of the evidence was central to identifying both weaknesses and defensible scoring opportunities.
THE RESULT
Delivered within a week. Findings incorporated into the submission.
I returned a prioritised set of findings within a week. Antonio incorporated the recommendations into the submission and valued the audit process: it gave the team a senior technical view of the errors, inconsistencies and opportunities that needed attention.
The collaboration is continuing. I will support Antonio and ESG Solutions in the next GRESB cycle, building on the value of this review.