Credit Language
OP 9: Sustainable Procurement System – version 3.0
Indicators
- 9.1. Supplier code of conduct
- 9.2. Percentage of bid solicitations that identify sustainability considerations
- 9.3. Average weight given to sustainability considerations in bid appraisal
- 9.4. Percentage of contract spend with social impact suppliers
Questions & Answers
How has this credit changed between STARS Version 2 and Version 3?
- More detail and new opportunities to earn partial points have been added under Supplier code of conduct (Indicator 9.1)
- This credit now requires an analysis of bid solicitations (e.g., RFPs) issued during the previous three years and an analysis of the institution’s contract spend in regard to diverse and socially preferable suppliers.
- New indicators incorporate product sustainability specifications and LCCA in a less prescriptive manner than in v2.2. A detailed listing of every specification is no longer required.
- A comprehensive list of differences can be found in the STARS 3.0 Summary of changes.
What types of supplier codes of conduct qualify under Indicator 9.1?
A supplier code of conduct guides suppliers on the institution’s social and environmental expectations for them. To qualify, the code of conduct should include one or more of the following expectations:
- Environmental impact – Criteria on waste, emissions, biodiversity impacts, water use, energy use that are above and beyond existing local or national regulations, etc.
- Treatment of workers – Human rights, anti-discrimination practices, health and safety standards, labor rights, minimum wages that are above and beyond existing local or national regulations, etc.
- Governance and ethical business practices – Anti-corruption measures, fair business practices, sustainability reporting standards that are above and beyond existing local or national regulations, etc.
- Advancement of sustainability in the supply chain – Expectations that suppliers extend the sustainability provisions in the code to their partners and upstream suppliers, etc.
- Monitoring or review – audits or tracking mechanisms to assess supplier sustainability performance and compliance with the code of conduct, etc.
How should bid solicitations assessment be conducted to qualify under Indicator 9.2?
Institutions should report on bid solicitations issued by the institution’s central purchasing unit during the previous three years. Other entities engaged in procurement activities may be excluded at the institution’s discretion to simplify reporting. The analysis may be limited to the most recent year for which data are available or include the entire three-year period. Institutions with a large number of RFPs or RFTs may report on a representative sample that includes at least 20 bid solicitations of diverse types and scopes.
Institutions should report on bid solicitations for the following categories:
- Product sustainability specifications – Category-specific sustainability criteria, standards, certifications, ecolabels, and targets that apply to the proposed goods or services.
- Supplier sustainability considerations – Enterprise-level criteria that apply to prospective suppliers, e.g., international standards, third party certifications and ecolabels, and supplier sustainability ratings.
My institution’s central purchasing unit conducts minimal bid solicitations in a given year. How should we report under this credit?
An institution that has not issued any bid solicitations within the previous three years or for which bid solicitations represent a de minimis portion of its total spend may report on the extent to which it has published sustainability criteria (e.g., documented in a written sustainable purchasing policy) covering the full range of goods and services it procures and the suppliers with which it engages (Indicator 9.2); as well as the weight that published sustainability criteria are assigned in the process of selecting the goods and services (Indicator 9.3).
An institution that has not entered into any contracts or tenders within the previous three years or for which contracts and tenders represent a de minimis portion of its total spend may report on its total uncontracted spend with suppliers during the performance year (Indicator 9.4).
How should we define and measure “contract spend” under Indicator 9.4?
Contract spend refers to the value of an institution’s transactions with suppliers where a formal contract or tender is in place. Institutions should report the most recent annual data available from within the previous three years. Contracts or tenders with an aggregate value of $50,000 USD or less per year or a duration of one month or less may be excluded. Institutions should report the actual value of transactions during the year in question rather than the total aggregate value of the contracts or tenders.
An institution must report on the activities of its central purchasing unit, department, and/or portal, at minimum. Other entities engaged in procurement activities may be excluded at the institution’s discretion to simplify reporting. The analysis may be limited to the institution’s Tier One suppliers (e.g., its directly contracted suppliers) or include multiple tiers in the supply chain (e.g., a Tier One supplier’s subcontractors) as long as double-counting is avoided.
What types of social impact suppliers qualify under Indicator 9.4?
Consistent with the Anchor Learning Network, social impact purchasing is defined as purchasing that is directed toward improving societal health and well-being and catalyzing prosperity for all, particularly those impacted by a legacy of divestment and discrimination. Social impact suppliers therefore include:
- Enterprises owned by people from marginalized groups,
- Employee owned enterprises,
- Social enterprises, and
- Certified B Corporations.
Resources, Templates & Tools
- Guidance for Leadership in Sustainable Purchasing – Sustainable Purchasing Leadership Council
- Greenhealth Cost of Ownership Calculator – Practice Greenhealth
Suggestions for Institutions
- Work with your institution’s central purchasing unit(s) to adjust and/or implement sustainable purchasing assessment tools to facilitate comprehensive reporting under this credit.
Example Responses
Potential Data Quality Issues
- Indicator 9.1. The descriptive responses should include sufficient detail to affirm Yes responses for each of the categories, particularly if full points are earned and all areas have a Yes response.
- Indicator 9.2. If earning any points for this indicator, documentation should be provided on methodology used to assess bid solicitations, as well as either website or uploaded documentation.
- Indicator 9.3. If indicating 10% or more for either category, documentation should be provided to affirm that a relatively high weighting for sustainability considerations is provided in bid solicitation.
- Indicator 9.4. If indicating that 10% or more of total annual contract spend is with social impact suppliers, documentation should be provided to affirm that a relatively high proportion was achieved.