GRESB 2020 Scoring – Headline Changes

Along with the announcement that the deadline for GRESB submissions this year has been shifted back until the 1^st August, GRESB have also released the scoring methodology for this year’s submission. The headline changes are outlined below:

Total Score

The scoring has reduced from 130 credits available down to 100, meaning that each credit is worth more in 2020 relative to 2019. The reduction to 100 credits overall makes it easier to evaluate and review impacts of certain questions. It is important to understand that although a lot of questions have seen a reduction in number of points available, the percentage contribution to the overall survey has in most instances remained the same. Key changes to scoring contribution from individual questions are summarised below.

Data Assurance

Points awarded for the assurance of energy, GHG, water and waste data has increased from 2% in 2019 up to 6% for the 2020 submission. This is a big shift in emphasis on the quality of utility data reported, and presumably in support of GRESB and the wider industry’s increasing focus on ‘investment grade’ ESG data.

Disclosure

The relative importance of disclosure,  for example via an entity level sustainability report,  has increased 22% compared to 2019.

Energy & GHG data

Points have increased regarding energy and associated greenhouse gas emission data from 15% up to 21%. This means successful efforts to collect energy data, preferably sourced via renewable contracts, across the whole portfolio will return a higher reward. It’s important to note that the amount assigned to energy has actually decreased but GHG has increased by a greater amount.

Water & Waste data

The contribution of water and waste was previously 3% and 2%, respectively. These have increased to 7% & 4%. This mirrors the importance being placed on data coverage and compliments the increase in Energy and GHG points.

Environmental/social risk assessments

This question has decreased from contributing 3% to 1% in 2020 which is likely the result of high marks being achieved in previous years and therefore the relevance of this question to ESG benchmarking reducing.

If you would like to understand more regarding the scoring methodology and key implications for your upcoming submissions, please get in touch.

---