From Data to Disclosure 

Every quarter you’re asked the same thing in different words: will the numbers stand up – internally, in the board pack, and in public? The safest path is not a line; it’s a loop. Collect, validate, review, and repeat. 

Our experts in data, reporting and analytics, and advisory services shares how that journey actually works when you’re collecting data for standards and frameworks like GRESB, INREV, EPRA, GRI, CSRD, and TCFD.  

Ground Truth: Getting the Data into One Place 

Your data lives in a dozen places – utility portals, national hubs, site spreadsheets, invoices, tenant statements. The first job is to format and structure the data, so it lands cleanly in your data management system. That starts with securing the meter IDs (MPAN/MPRN or EAN). Those IDs are often unknown by the asset owner – especially for tenant meters – so we track them down to enable hub or supplier feeds. When we have a list of meters, we can confirm what they cover and pair them to assets, we investigate where tenant permission blocks access, which sources can be automated, and which will need a one-off upload. 

Initially, we always look at coverage, completeness, and data provenance, the rest depends on purpose. For a carbon footprint, a portfolio roll-up might be enough. For GRESB, you need granularity down to a unit level. For net zero planning, you’re down at meter-by-meter intervals. At EVORA, we focus on what outcome you want to achieve, and that the data is of sufficient quality for the purposes you need it for.  

“Our clients need to produce reports that are correct, complete, and defensible. Our job is to go and get all the data you could possibly need so your report is as complete as it can be. Underneath it all is risk: putting out a report that isn’t right, is incomplete, or doesn’t hold up. We’re here to mitigate that risk, by ensuring the data is good enough that nobody can pull it apart.” – Ben Rouncefield-Swales, Managing Director – Managed Service. 

Lifting Coverage: From Email Chases to Reliable Feeds 

When the goal is a clean, defensible disclosure, the fastest way to cut risk is by moving through the hierarchy of collection methodologies. 

Every portfolio starts from a different place, but the aim is simple: get reliable data in, make sure the trail back to source is clear, and continue improving.  

At the riskiest end is manual collection. People send files, update spreadsheets, or download bills on request. It works, but it takes more time, and it often requires more resources and quality assurance. We treat this as a starting point, not a destination. 

Between that starting point and the ideal state are several good, common routes. Some teams use saved logins to pull bills or readings from portals. Others ask suppliers or brokers to send structured files on a regular cadence. Many connect to utilities or data hubs where access allows. When tenant permissions limit meter-level access, aggregated whole-building feeds protect privacy while still giving the consumption picture you need. Each route has trade-offs – speed, upkeep, and formatting – so most portfolios use a mix. Our job is to optimise the mix based on what’s suitable for your portfolio, and keep our methods well-documented. 

We don’t label any client’s setup “bad.” We start where you are, make the current methods dependable, and, when access and permissions open up, move you toward more durable connections. The benefit is practical: fewer gaps to explain, less scramble at deadline, and disclosures that hold up when investors and auditors lean in. 

“Data coverage is naturally low when you rely on manual collection because you’re relying on people who might not feel obliged to share the data. As we shift to stronger collection routes, quality, coverage and completeness improve. That’s why our focus is on continually moving your portfolio up that hierarchy.” – Nick Hill, Head of Reporting & Analytics  

Making the Data Reliable: The Validation Loop 

Think of reporting as a loop, not a line: collect and validate, collect and validate… and clean up as you go. Run that loop every month or quarter and you turn scrambles into clean sign-offs. 

This way, you get fewer surprises at year-end. Issues like ID mismatches, missing periods, odd consumption spikes surface while they’re still small – so fixes can happen in-period, not days before deadline. That cuts rework, shortens reviews, and keeps submissions on time. 

You also get a clean audit trail. Each change is traceable back to source, so when someone asks “where did this value come from?” there’s a simple answer. That reduces follow-up from auditors and investors and lowers the chance you’ll need to restate.  When the numbers line up with the story – and the evidence is tidy – you’re less exposed to public challenges. The report becomes proof, not just paperwork. 

At EVORA, we combine technology with human expertise to achieve this. By building in a human element in our validation loops, we can use our specific knowledge about your portfolio to catch inconsistencies that might not be flagged by software alone.   

“We don’t treat validation as a pure data exercise – it’s a ‘does that seem right?’ exercise. If we know a client has just installed solar panels but we’re still seeing a high amount of non-renewable consumption, we ask why. That’s the sort of sense-check we run on your data. With us, you have eyes on it that understand your buildings and your business.” – Nick Hill, Head of Reporting & Analytics 

From Data to Disclosure: Reports that Move the Needle 

Once collection is in place and the validation loop is running, the data starts driving decisions that cut risk and protect value – and the payoff goes well beyond a single report. 

For TCFD, better coverage means fewer estimates in scenario work. You can test exposures and back up management actions with measured numbers rather than assumptions. That makes the TCFD section credible under scrutiny. 

For capital planning, strong coverage gives you baselines and before/after proof. You can prioritise upgrades where the payback is clearest, then show the result in the next cycle. That helps move money to the right projects. 

For GRESB, better coverage reduces gap-filling and unlocks points. More importantly, it turns the “easy points” conversation into a real plan that also improves performance, so the score reflects your progress. 

A quarterly rhythm clears gaps in-period, so by spring you’re not scrambling – you’re choosing.  

“The reporting cycle doesn’t start with the report – that’s the final output of your annual programme. The way it works best is a quarterly data collection cycle: you work through it, close out every quarter, and by the time you get to GRESB you should have 100% of everything, or pretty much close to. It’s a data collection and reporting cycle with a feedback loop that enables those reporting outputs.” – Elliott Barnes, Managing Consultant 

End to End, Then Back Through Again 

A steady loop makes reporting boring – in a good way. When you run a steady cycle (collect, validate, correct, repeat), the report falls out as a by-product that’s calm, defensible, and useful. What if that was your reality? 

Tell us your target reporting outputs and we’ll walk you from first meter to final disclosure – end to end, then back through again.