Background
The changes in content, scoring and structure found in Version 3 of the Sustainability Tracking, Assessment & Rating System (STARS) will impact how top-performing institutions in AASHE’s Sustainable Campus Index (SCI) are determined. Most notable for the SCI, STARS 3.0 consolidated seven impact areas in the Operations category into three:
- Energy & Climate (V3) combines Air & Climate and Energy (V2)
- Buildings & Grounds (V3) combines Buildings, Grounds, and Water (V2)
- Procurement & Waste (V3) combines Purchasing and Waste (V2)
Upcoming SCI Changes
In light of this new version release, here are the planned changes for the upcoming 2025 Sustainable Campus Index (SCI), which will be released this September.
Consolidated Impact Areas
The 2025 SCI Top Performer lists will be organized around the consolidated impact areas used in Version 3.0, as this is the latest version of STARS. This means that scores from multiple impact areas in Version 2 will be combined to determine the scores for the consolidated impact areas. For example, if an institution reporting under Version 2.2 scored 7.84 out of 11 in Air & Climate and 4.84 out of 10 in Energy, its combined score in Energy & Climate would be 12.68 out of 21 or 60.3 percent.
Separate Top Performer Lists
Since there are often significant methodological differences in how scores are calculated between STARS versions, there is limited utility in comparing scores between them, and doing so would raise concerns about fairness. Instead, under each impact area, we will have two separate top performer lists, one for institutions using STARS 2.2, and another for institutions using STARS 3.0.
With the aim of continuing to recognize 10 institutions under each impact area, we will list the top three performers using STARS 3.0 and the top seven performers using STARS 2.2, as shown in the example below. We are recommending a three-seven split because 3.0 reports comprised about one-quarter of the total number of reports considered in the SCI. As in past years, we anticipate that some impact areas (in Version 2 in particular) will have multi-way ties that result in lists with more than 7 (or 3) recognized institutions. For example, if 13 V2 reports are tied with 100% of points earned for Coordination & Planning, we will list them all.
Example: Energy & Climate Impact Area
Version 3 Top Performers:
| Rank | Institution Name | Score | Type | Location |
| 1 | College A | 92% | Doctoral | Frostburg, MD |
| 2 | College B | 88% | Baccalaureate | Paris, France |
| 3 | College C | 87% | Master’s | Ottawa, Canada |
Version 2 Top Performers:
| Rank | Institution Name | Score | Type | Location |
| 1(t) | Institution A | 100% | Doctoral | Roanoke, VA |
| 1(t) | Institution B | 100% | Baccalaureate | Paris, France |
| 1(t) | Institution C | 100% | Master’s | Ottawa, Canada |
| 4 | Institution D | 98% | Doctoral | San Francisco, CA |
| 5(t) | Institution E | 96% | Baccalaureate | Lisbon, Portugal |
| 5(t) | Institution F | 96% | Doctoral | Pittsburgh, PA |
| 7 | Institution G | 92% | Baccalaureate | Atlanta, GA |
There are likely to be situations in which average scores in some impact areas are notably higher (or lower) in STARS 3.0 (e.g., if the impact area got significantly harder in 3.0). We will include graphical analysis to provide clarity around potential scoring differences.
Beyond the 2025 SCI
We intend for the SCI top performer lists to remain aligned with the latest version of STARS, and will continue to use the Version 3 impact areas as long as they remain valid. In 2026 and beyond, the split of Version 2.2 and Version 3.0 reports in top performer lists may change (e.g., five-five). In a few years when only a small number of 2.2 reports remain valid for recognition, the lists may be co-mingled. These plans may adjust based on feedback after the 2025 SCI release.