Sustainability reporting can help organizations to measure, understand and communicate their economic, environmental, social and governance performance.
Report scope and boundary
3.1 Ecology’s second GRI report covers fiscal year 2014 (July 1, 2013 thru June 30, 2014. Due to record-keeping practices, some data is for calendar year (CY) 2013 (January 1, 2013 – December 31, 2013).
3.2 Ecology’s first report covered our 2012 fiscal year (July 1, 2011 thru June 30, 2012. Due to record-keeping practices, some data was for calendar year 2011. That report is available on our 2012 report website or in the Adobe PDF version.
3.3 This report period represents half of the biennial fiscal period. We plan to produce updated GRI reports biennially.
3.4 We welcome all questions, comments, and feedback regarding this report. A copy of the report in ADOBE Portable Document Format (PDF) is available here. Please email the GRI Report Team at email@example.com . Don't forget to include your contact information if you request a reply.
Eighteen key staff representing all of Ecology’s programs helped complete the process during three design workshops held on Feb. 13, Mar. 12, and May 1, 2014. They participated in exercises designed to identify the most material (significant) aspects of Ecology’s work as it affects sustainability. The exercises identified and scored major aspects and their related indicators from both the stakeholders and the program’s perspectives. Ecology program representatives communicate regularly with stakeholders about multiple issues and priority concerns.
Ecology staff identified their respective program's key stakeholders and those stakeholder’s critical sustainability issues. Representatives of each of the programs brought the “voice” of their stakeholders to the table through their interests and potential use of the report. Results of these exercises yielded a frequency chart for the identified stakeholders.
Stakeholder influence and impact significance for the fourteen 2011 report aspects and indicators resulted in the materiality prioritization chart below. Workshop discussions concluded in consensus to keep reporting on all of these indicators in our second report for 2013.
Ecology management decided to increase the number of performance indicators to about twenty. New indicators were prioritized separately during a selection process based on workshop nominations, materiality discussions, and a final voting process. Out of 18 new aspects/indicators nominated for addition to the second report, seven were selected.
3.6 Boundary of the Report
The report is geographically limited to the state of Washington and covers operations originating from Ecology's headquarters, regional, and field offices. It does not currently include activities of other entities funded with Ecology’s Capital Budget pass through funds, such as grants and loans, though this may be a new focus of the next report. This report also does not include vendors or suppliers, although Ecology has policies in place and is working to improve in this area.
3.7 Boundary Limitations
The report boundary generally does not encompass activities of other entities funded with pass through funds (grants and loans) from Ecology’s Capital Budget.
3.8 Outsourced Operations
This report does not cover outsourced operations. Ecology outsourced some support services and consulting work under two categories in CY 2013: personal and purchased services contracts. These represent approximately 20% (six and fourteen percent respectively) of the total agency expenditures excluding grants.
3.10 Information Restatements
There was a restatement of Water Use (EN8) data in the 2011 report due to an error in the measurement method. That has been corrected for the 2013 report.
3.11 Scope & Boundary Changes
In designing this 2013 report, Ecology followed GRI's new G4 guidance including the "Process for Defining Report Content". An overview of how we followed this process and the outcomes are described above in disclosures 3.5 - 3.7. One result of following this design process was an increase in the scope and boundary of the report: the range of aspects and corresponding performance indicators increased from 14 to 21 and the aspect boundaries for some of the indicators extends outside our own organization.
Copyright © Washington State Department of Ecology|
Privacy Notice | Site Info | Accessibility | Contact the web team |