How we assess ESG supply chain compliance
SolvingESG maps your business against nine internationally recognised ESG frameworks and regulatory obligations. This page explains exactly how assessments work, how scores are calculated, what each band means, and our pathway to independent accreditation.
Methodology version 1.1 · Last updated February 2026 · Version history
Overview
The SolvingESG assessment is a pass-through evaluation: your business provides information about its operations, supply chain, and existing compliance activities. The platform applies the relevant regulatory requirements and framework criteria to your inputs and returns a compliance score, a gap analysis, and a prioritised action plan. The underlying framework logic and regulatory mapping are maintained by the SolvingESG team and updated when regulations change.
Assessments are designed for small and medium-sized enterprises that are subject to ESG disclosure obligations — either directly (because they meet regulatory thresholds) or indirectly (because their customers, banks, or investors require supply chain ESG data). The platform does not require a dedicated sustainability team or prior ESG knowledge to complete an assessment.
Each assessment produces a compliance certificate carrying a unique reference number, an expiry date (12 months from issue), and a publicly verifiable band designation. Third parties — buyers, banks, procurement teams — can verify any certificate at solvingesg.com/verify/[reference] without creating an account.
Framework alignment
The assessment covers nine frameworks and regulatory obligations. Each framework is mapped to its primary regulatory basis and the jurisdictions in which it is mandatory or commonly required by buyers.
| Framework | Regulatory basis | Jurisdiction | Mandatory for | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GHG Protocol (Scope 1 & 2) | UK SECR (Streamlined Energy & Carbon Reporting), TCFD | UK, EU, Global | UK companies >250 employees or £36m turnover | High |
| GHG Protocol (Scope 3 Supply Chain) | CSRD (ESRS E1), SEC Climate Disclosure Rule | EU, USA, Global | EU large companies from 2025; US public companies | High |
| CSRD / ESRS Supply Chain Disclosure | EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive 2022/2464 | EU (affects UK/global suppliers) | EU large companies from FY2024; SME suppliers by 2026 | High |
| Modern Slavery Act | Modern Slavery Act 2015 (UK), Australian Modern Slavery Act 2018 | UK, Australia | UK/AU companies >£36m/AUD$100m turnover | Medium |
| ISO 14001 Environmental Management | ISO 14001:2015 (international standard) | Global | Voluntary; required by many procurement frameworks | Medium |
| SA8000 Social Accountability | SA8000:2014 (Social Accountability International) | Global | Voluntary; required by fashion, food, and manufacturing buyers | Medium |
| EcoVadis Readiness | EcoVadis assessment methodology (Environment, Labour, Ethics, Procurement) | Global | Required by 100,000+ companies including Nestlé, Renault, L'Oréal | High |
| UK Sustainability Disclosure Standards (UK SDS) | UK SDS (FCA PS24/3, effective 2025) | UK | UK-listed companies from 2025; supply chain impact from 2026 | Medium |
| TCFD (Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures) | FCA LR 9.8.6R, Companies Act 2006 (Strategic Report) | UK, Global | UK premium-listed companies; recommended globally | Medium |
Framework weightings reflect the regulatory enforcement risk and buyer adoption rate as of the current methodology version. High-weight frameworks carry greater impact on the overall compliance score.
Scoring logic
The overall compliance score is a weighted aggregate across the frameworks included in the assessment. Each framework contributes a sub-score based on the proportion of its requirements that the organisation has demonstrated compliance with, multiplied by the framework's weight.
How sub-scores are calculated
For each framework, the assessment presents a series of questions about the organisation's activities, documentation, and processes. Each question maps to one or more specific requirements within the framework. Answers are evaluated against the requirement criteria and assigned a compliance status: Met, Partially Met, Not Met, or Not Applicable.
- Met: full credit for the requirement
- Partially Met: 50% credit, with a gap noted in the action plan
- Not Met: no credit, with a remediation action added to the plan
- Not Applicable: excluded from the denominator (does not penalise the score)
The sub-score for each framework is the sum of credits earned divided by the maximum possible credits (excluding Not Applicable requirements), expressed as a percentage.
How the overall score is calculated
The overall score is the weighted average of all framework sub-scores, where the weight of each framework reflects its regulatory enforcement risk and buyer adoption rate (see Framework Alignment table above). High-weight frameworks contribute more to the overall score than Medium-weight frameworks.
If a framework is not included in the assessment (because it is not applicable to the organisation's jurisdiction or activities), it is excluded from the weighting calculation entirely. The overall score always reflects only the frameworks that were assessed.
The numerical score is private to the subscriber. The public verification page shows only the band designation, the frameworks assessed, and the certificate status. This protects commercially sensitive compliance information while still providing third parties with the assurance they need.
Band definitions
Compliance certificates are issued at Developing band (score 40+) and above. The Foundation band indicates an assessment is in progress but the score has not yet reached the certificate threshold.
Foundation
Score 0–39No certificateThe organisation has completed an initial ESG supply chain assessment. One or more frameworks have been assessed and compliance gaps have been identified. An action plan is in place but material obligations remain unaddressed.
Procurement note
Assessment in progress. Not yet threshold-compliant for most formal supplier approval processes. Suitable for early-stage supplier development programmes.
Developing
Score 40–59Certificate issuedThe organisation has demonstrated active compliance progress across assessed frameworks. Key obligations are being addressed and documented. Material gaps remain but a credible remediation plan is in place.
Procurement note
Meets basic supplier approval thresholds for most SME procurement processes. Suitable for Tier 2 and Tier 3 supplier relationships where buyers are beginning to enforce ESG requirements.
Established
Score 60–79Certificate issuedThe organisation meets the core requirements of all assessed frameworks. Material compliance gaps have been identified and remediated. Documentation and evidence are maintained and current.
Procurement note
Meets most large enterprise procurement requirements. Suitable for Tier 1 supplier relationships with major buyers enforcing CSRD, GHG Protocol, or Modern Slavery Act obligations.
Leading
Score 80–100Certificate issuedThe organisation demonstrates comprehensive ESG supply chain compliance across all assessed frameworks, with documented evidence, continuous monitoring, and proactive management of emerging obligations.
Procurement note
Meets premium and preferred supplier requirements. Suitable for strategic supplier relationships, public sector contracts, and supply chains where ESG performance is a competitive differentiator.
Independence and accreditation
SolvingESG is an independent platform. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or financially connected to any of the regulatory bodies, standards organisations, or framework owners referenced in our assessment methodology. All framework mappings are based on publicly available regulatory text and published standards documentation.
We are actively pursuing methodology accreditation from the following bodies. This process involves independent review of our framework mappings, scoring logic, and update procedures by qualified assessors.
BSI (British Standards Institution)
Technical methodology alignment with ISO standards and UK regulatory frameworks
IEMA (Institute of Environmental Management & Assessment)
Sustainability practitioner endorsement and environmental management alignment
Until accreditation is confirmed, SolvingESG certificates are self-certified against the published methodology on this page. All framework mappings reference the specific regulatory article, section, or requirement they are derived from. We publish this methodology document publicly so that subscribers, buyers, and accrediting bodies can review and challenge our approach.
Version history
The methodology is updated when regulations change, new frameworks are added, or scoring logic is revised. All active subscribers are notified when a methodology update affects their compliance score.
January 2026
Initial methodology release. Nine frameworks: GHG Protocol (Scope 1–3), CSRD, Modern Slavery Act, ISO 14001, SA8000, EcoVadis Readiness, UK SDS, TCFD.
February 2026
Added local-first jurisdiction guides for Singapore (SGX, MAS ESG reporting), Australia (ASRS, Modern Slavery Act AU), New Zealand (XRB climate standards), Japan (TCFD mandatory, GX strategy), and India (BRSR, EU/UK supply chain obligations).
Questions about the methodology?
If you are a procurement professional, accrediting body, or researcher with questions about our framework mappings or scoring logic, we welcome the conversation.