truMRK Transparency Report (Example)

Organisation: Your Company*
Content Reviewed: 2024 Sustainability & Impact Report
Date of Review: 7 June 2025
Transparency Score: (4/5) → What does this mean?

SUMMARY:

This report has been reviewed using truMRK’s independent methodology, grounded in recognised guidance such as the CMA Green Claims Code, CAP/ASA advertising standards, and ISO 14021 principles.

A 4/5 score means that — as a stakeholder — you can engage with the reviewed report with confidence in its transparency and credibility.

About this Report

This transparency review has been independently conducted by truMRK to assess the credibility, clarity, and evidential strength of the environmental and ESG-related claims made in this report. The purpose is to support readers — including investors, partners, customers, and regulators — in understanding how responsibly these claims are communicated.

Learn more about our assessment methodology here.

Assessment Area

Score

Summary Statement

Claim Verification

(4/5)

Most material claims are substantiated with timely, credible evidence.

The report makes 16 distinct environmental or ESG claims, of which 11 are supported with current and verifiable evidence.

  • Strong areas: Emissions data, waste diversion rates, and supply chain assessments are backed by third-party certifications (e.g., ISO 14001, BREEAM) or externally audited results.

  • Caution points: A small number of claims — particularly those positioning the organisation as a sector “leader” — are not benchmarked against peers or independently ranked. These should be interpreted as aspirational unless supported elsewhere.

Language Check

 (5/5)

Language is clear and proportionate, with minimal exaggeration.

The report’s tone is measured and avoids sweeping or exaggerated statements. Most claims include timeframes, baselines, or clarifying detail.

  • Strong areas: Climate targets and procurement commitments are phrased clearly and proportionately.

  • Caution points: Phrases such as “100% ethical sourcing” may be overly definitive without qualification. Stakeholders should look for context to understand scope and verification.

Context & Credibility

(4/5)

Sector expectations are understood and reflected in the report.

The report demonstrates an awareness of its audience and aligns with prevailing industry expectations for transparency.

  • Strong areas: Limitations are acknowledged (e.g., incomplete Scope 3 data), and there is reference to broader sector challenges.

  • Caution points: Where progress is ongoing, some claims could benefit from clearer interim updates or methodological transparency.

Help Us Build a Better truMRK

If you have concerns about the claims assessed in this report, or believe that additional context or evidence should be considered, please email info@truMRK.com.