Desktop Verification

The purpose of desktop verification is to increase the confidence in statistics coming out of a supply chain maturity assessment. This is done by a verification team reviewing affirmative answers from a supplier, and making a determination if the submitted supporting documents (ex: a text comment alongside the answer, an uploaded PDF document, a publicly accessible URL) match the answer given.

The result of verification is thus an extra piece of information to each affirmative answer in a supplier response (If the supplier didn't answer the question, or the answer was negative, there is nothing to verify, and a verifier will move to the next question.):

Unverifiable: The supplier answered affirmatively, but a third-party wouldn't confidently answer affirmatively based on the available supporting documents. The common reasons for an answer to be unverifiable are:
- No supporting documents were submitted, and a public search did not turn up supporting evidence either.
- Supporting documents are not related to the question.
- Need to confirm because it doesn't look like a proper match. (ex: NAICS code)
Verifiable: The supplier answered affirmatively, and a third-party woul also answer affirmatively based on the available supporting documents.

What is the difference between desktop verifications and audits?

While an audit acknowledges that an organization meets a specific threshold in its governance and actions, desktop verifications check answers from suppliers match the supporting evidence.

Audits typically leads to corrective actions and follow up, while desktop verifications are used as a quality metric when reporting on supply chain maturity with regard to a subject (ex: sustainability practices).

For specific category of questions, the verification team applies a slightly different process to assess if an answer is Verifiable.

Supporting evidence can be summarized to the question title.: For questions with an affirmative answers ("Yes", example: "Does your company have an Employee Code of Conduct in place?"), verifiers expertly assess if the supporting evidence relates to the question. If it is the case, the verifier marks the answer as Verifiable. If the supporting evidence does not relate to the question, or the verifier cannot locate supporting evidence, the answer is marked as Unverifiable.

Number in the response matches number found in supporting evidence.: For questions where suppliers are expected to enter a quantitative number (example: "Total Scope 1 GHG Emissions (in Metric Tons / Period)"), verifiers mark the answer as Verifiable when the number in TSP matches the number found in supporting evidence. If the number on TSP does not match the supporting evidence, or the verifier cannot locate supporting evidence, the answer is marked as Unverifiable.

Supporting evidence shows quantitative data (numbers, dates).: For questions where suppliers are expected to answer "Yes" when they have quantitative data in the supporting evidence (example: "Does the strategy set clear, measurable, and time-bound objectives that track progress effectively?"), verifiers will mark the answer as Verifiable when they can find quantitative data (ex: numbers, dates) in the supporting evidence. If the supporting evidence does not relate to the question, if only vague statements can be found, or if verifiers cannot locate supporting evidence, the answer is marked as Unverifiable.

Supporting evidence names a specific executive.: For questions where suppliers are expected to answer "Yes" when they have assigned specific responsibilities to a person (example: "Has your company assigned formal responsibility for directing and overseeing sustainability performance to top/executive management?"), verifiers will mark the answer as Verifiable when they can find the name or title of a person in the supporting evidence. If the supporting evidence does not relate to the question, if only vague statements can be found, or if verifiers cannot locate supporting evidence, the answer is marked as Unverifiable.

Supporting evidence is accessible publicly.: For questions where suppliers are expected to answer "Yes" when supporting evidence should be available publicly (example: "Does your company report total Scope 1 GHG emissions publicly?"), verifiers will mark the answer as Verifiable when they can access the supporting evidence on the Web without being authenticated to any system. If the supporting evidence does not relate to the question, or if verifiers cannot locate supporting evidence on the Open Web, the answer is marked as Unverifiable.

Supporting evidence shows certificate of evaluation.: For questions where suppliers are expected to answer "Yes" when supporting evidence shows a third-party assurance (example: "Has your organization's GHG Emissions inventory been assured by a third-party within the last two years?"), verifiers expertly assess if the supporting evidence relates to the question. If it is the case, the verifier marks the answer as Verifiable. If the supporting evidence does not relate to the question, or the verifier cannot locate supporting evidence, the answer is marked as Unverifiable.

SBTi website lists company target.: For questions where suppliers are expected to answer "Yes" when SBTi has verified the supplier target (ex: "Has the Scope 1 GHG Emissions target been verified by SBTi?"), verifiers will mark the answer as Verifiable when they can see the supporting evidence on the SBTi website. If the supporting evidence does not relate to the question, or if verifiers cannot locate supporting evidence on the SBTi website, the answer is marked as Unverifiable.

Assumptions

No communication with supplier: The desktop verification team will make no attempt to communicate with suppliers that have provided no, or inacurate, supporting documentation to request that these suppliers provide the required information to verify the supplier response.

Locating missing evidence: If a supplier reports that they have a specific policy or procedure in place, but fails to provide supporting evidence, the desktop verification team will spend 10 minutes searching for the relevant supporting documents/data source on the public Web. The team will prioritize locating data sources for the following areas: Environmental, social and governance core questions, Code of Conduct Policies Employees, Code of Conduct Policy Suppliers, Environmental Management Systems and Social Governance Reporting.

Supporting documents: Suppliers will submit supporting documents in English for each question, although some will cover multiple questions. It is expected that the desktop verification team will review 10 to 25 documents per supplier, with a cap of 30 documents per supplier.

Verifiers check the number reported numerically match the supporting documentation (if present). Verifiers does not check if the GHG Emissions reported make any sense from a GHG accounting perspective.

Need additional help?: Contact us