Review and revision

Desired outcome: The scheme owner has defined the role it intends the scheme to play in corporate due diligence. 

The scheme owner decides how its scheme is intended to support corporate sustainability due diligence and publicly documents the specific supporting roles it intends to play. 

Guidance: By publicly documenting how the scheme can be used by companies to support their due diligence responsibilities, the scheme owner is providing clarity on the extent and limitations of its role. The scheme can choose to play no role in due diligence but should still define and document this decision.

Guidance: The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct and UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights set out internationally agreed standards on responsible business conduct and the key principles, steps and practical actions for companies.

Desired outcome: The scheme owner has defined the role it intends the scheme to play in corporate due diligence. 

The scheme owner decides how its scheme is intended to support corporate sustainability due diligence and publicly documents the specific supporting roles it intends to play.  

As part of this decision, the scheme owner determines what role it intends to play, if any, in the remediation of adverse impacts on human rights or environmental issues identified through implementation of its scheme, e.g., through auditing or monitoring

Guidance: By publicly documenting how the scheme can be used by companies to support their due diligence responsibilities, the scheme owner is providing clarity on the extent and limitations of its role. The scheme can choose to play no role in due diligence but should still define and document this decision. 

Desired outcome: The scheme owner has good governance practices in place. 

The scheme owner has the following policies in place that apply to its governing and decision-making bodies, staff, and consultants:  

1. impartiality policy (which should address conflicts of interest) 
2. diversity, equity, and inclusion policy 
3. safeguarding policy 
4. whistleblower protection policy  
5. complaints policy
    

Guidance: A complaints policy is intended to govern complaints raised by staff, consultants, and those serving on its governing and decision-making bodies. The handling of complaints raised by clients and implementing partners such as assurance providers is governed by the dispute resolution system (3.5).]

Desired outcome: The scheme owner has good governance practices in place. 

The scheme owner has the following policies in place that apply to its governing and decision-making bodies, staff, and consultants:  

1. impartiality policy (which should address conflicts of interest)  
2. diversity, equity, and inclusion policy  
3. safeguarding policy  
4. whistleblower protection policy  
5. grievance policy
    

Guidance: A grievance policy is intended to govern grievances raised by staff, consultants, and those serving on its governing and decision-making bodies. The handling of grievances raised by clients and implementing partners such as assurance providers is governed by the dispute resolution system (3.5).

Desired outcome: The scheme owner has impartial and accessible mechanisms in place for resolving complaints and grievances. 

The scheme owner has a documented dispute resolution system that is open and accessible to all stakeholders and that facilitates and supports the impartial handling and remediation of complaints and grievances about clients, members, implementing partners, and the scheme itself. The procedure governing the dispute resolution system includes timelines by which complaints and grievances are to be assessed. 

At a minimum, the system accepts complaints and grievances related to standards development and maintenance, assurance processes and decisions, codes of conduct or policies of association for clients or members, and claims processes and controlled claims. 

The scheme owner ensures that the confidentiality of a complainant is protected when requested by the complainant or when it is otherwise prudent. 

The scheme owner retains overall responsibility for management of the dispute resolution system and ensures that implementing partners have their own dispute resolution systems that feed into the overall approach, so that complaints and grievances are submitted and managed at the appropriate level. 
 

Guidance: The conditions under which it would be prudent to protect the confidentiality of complainants or aggrieved parties even when not specifically requested to do so could be defined by the dispute resolution system or by other organisational policies, e.g., safeguarding policy.

Guidance: When considering human rights violations in particular, the scheme is encouraged in design and review of the dispute resolution system to consider the eight effectiveness principles set out in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), guidance from the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Accountability and Remedy Project.

Desired outcome: The scheme owner has impartial and accessible mechanisms in place for resolving complaints and grievances. 

The scheme owner has a documented dispute resolution system that is open and accessible to all stakeholders and that facilitates and supports the impartial handling and remediation of complaints and grievances about clients, members, implementing partners, and the scheme itself. The procedure governing the dispute resolution system includes timelines by which complaints and grievances are to be assessed. 

At a minimum, the system accepts complaints and grievances related to standards development and maintenance, assurance processes and decisions, codes of conduct or policies of association for clients or members, and claims processes and controlled claims. 

The scheme owner ensures that the confidentiality of a complainant is protected when requested by the complainant or when it is otherwise prudent. 

The scheme owner retains overall responsibility for management of the dispute resolution system and ensures that implementing partners have their own dispute resolution systems that feed into the overall approach, so that complaints and grievances are submitted and managed at the appropriate level. 
 

Guidance: The conditions under which it would be prudent to protect the confidentiality of complainants or aggrieved parties even when not specifically requested to do so could be defined by the dispute resolution system or by other organisational policies, e.g., safeguarding policy.

Desired outcome: The scheme owner has defined the role(s) it intends to play in addressing remediation. 

The scheme owner determines what role it intends to play, if any, in the remediation of adverse impacts on human rights or environmental issues identified through implementation of its scheme, e.g., through auditing or monitoring.  
 

Guidance: An effective dispute resolution system in which grievances can be raised (3.5) is the minimum role a scheme must play in remediation. This clause requires scheme owners to consider the additional roles it could play in remediation, such as acting as a remedy enabler (e.g., mechanisms to refer certain types of grievances to judicial authorities) or a remedy provider (e.g., working with state and regulatory agencies to provide remedy). ISEAL’s learning report on remedying human rights abuses in supply chains is a useful resource for how schemes can play a role in remediation.

Desired outcome: The scheme owner has defined the role it intends the scheme to play in corporate due diligence. 

The scheme owner decides how its scheme is intended to support corporate sustainability due diligence and publicly documents the specific supporting roles it intends to play.  

As part of this decision, the scheme owner determines what role it intends to play, if any, in the remediation of adverse impacts on human rights or environmental issues identified through implementation of its scheme, e.g., through auditing or monitoring
 

Guidance: By publicly documenting how the scheme can be used by companies to support their due diligence responsibilities, the scheme owner is providing clarity on the extent and limitations of its role. The scheme can choose to play no role in due diligence but should still define and document this decision. 

Desired outcome: Governance and use rights of data are clear. 

The scheme owner defines who has rights to different types of data within the scheme scope, including what data is available to whom and under what conditions. For data that is available externally, the scheme owner makes this information publicly available. 

Desired outcome: Ownership and governance of data is clear. 

The scheme owner defines who owns different types of data within the scheme scope and what data is available to whom and under what conditions. For data that is available externally, the scheme owner makes this information publicly available. 

Desired outcome: The scheme owner has access to the data it needs to support effective implementation of its scheme. 

The scheme owner takes steps to address any barriers preventing its access to, or use of data required for implementation of its scheme, e.g., through contracts with implementing partners. This includes having the necessary permissions for access and use of relevant data. 

Desired outcome: The scheme owner has access to the data it needs to support effective implementation of its scheme. 

The scheme owner takes steps to address any barriers preventing its access to, or use of data required for implementation of its scheme, e.g., through contracts with implementing partners. This includes having the necessary permissions from data owners for the use of their data. 

Desired outcome: Procedures support consistent and competent implementation of each type of assessment 

The scheme owner defines requirements and procedures for each type of assessment implemented within the assurance system, addressing at least the following: 

1. frequency and intensity of assessment 
2. knowledge, skills, and experience required in an assessor or assessment team   
3. minimum set of criteria or requirements that need to be checked in every assessment 
4. the role of remote auditing techniques within the assessment 
5. a means or parameters for calculating the time needed for an assessment 
6. sources of data and information that feed into the assessment; this includes specification of how stakeholders are to be consulted, as one source of information 
7. how data sources are to be combined to provide an understanding of sustainability performance and risk, and how this informs the assessment process 
8. minimum content of assessment reports including, at least, a list of non-conformities 
9. timelines for submission of completed reports, following assessments 
10. how to consider exceptions to the standard or assessment process 

Guidance: The scheme owner can also choose to define the minimum evidence needed to assess criteria or requirements.

Guidance: It is recommended the methodology also addresses how an assessor or assessment team should respond if adverse impacts on human rights or environmental issues outside the scope of standards compliance are identified, including the role of the dispute resolution system (3.5) in handling complaints and grievances.

Desired outcome: Procedures support consistent and competent implementation of each type of assessment 

The scheme owner defines requirements and procedures for each type of assessment implemented within the assurance system, addressing at least the following: 

1. frequency and intensity of assessment 
2. knowledge, skills, and experience required in an assessor or assessment team   
3. minimum set of criteria or requirements that need to be checked in every assessment 
4. the role of remote auditing techniques within the assessment 
5. a means or parameters for calculating the time needed for an assessment 
6. sources of data and information that feed into the assessment; this includes specification of how stakeholders are to be consulted, as one source of information 
7. how data sources are to be combined to provide an understanding of sustainability performance and risk, and how this informs the assessment process 
8. minimum content of assessment reports including, at least, a list of non-conformities 
9. timelines for submission of completed reports, following assessments 
10. how to consider exceptions to the standard or assessment process 

Guidance: The scheme owner can also choose to define the minimum evidence needed to assess criteria or requirements.

Similar terms:  

conformity assessment (system/scheme), certification (system/scheme) 

Note: In the context of this Code, ‘assurance system’ in assessment methodology requirements (7.3) applies to the assessment of clients. Oversight requirements for assessing the performance of assurance providers are included in the oversight mechanism (7.18) 

Similar terms: data ownership 

• 
  The ability to trace something as it moves through a process. The completeness of the information about every step in a process chain allows for verification of information related to the origin of the material.