28
BERKELEY SUSTAINABILITY PERFORMANCE REPORT 2010 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION COMPLIANCE WITH GRI GUIDELINES We have assessed our sustainability reporting against the updated Global Reporting Initiative sustainability reporting guidelines (GRI: G3) and consider this report to be compliant with Level B of the GRI reporting framework. An index of conformance with the G3 guidelines and the process to apply these is provided on pages 18–27-.

2010 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION - Berkeley Group · berkeley sustainability performance report 2010 supplemental information compliance with gri guidelines ... to a friend: 2006/7;

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

BERKELEY SUSTAINABILITY PERFORMANCE REPORT 2010 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

COMPLIANCE WITH GRI GUIDELINES

We have assessed our sustainability reporting against the updated Global Reporting Initiative sustainability reporting guidelines (GRI: G3) and consider this report to be compliant with Level B of the GRI reporting framework. An index of conformance with the G3 guidelines and the process to apply these is provided on pages 18–27-.

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Key performance indicators – The Customer Experience

KEY PERFORMANCE INdICATOR 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

Average customer satisfaction (GRI PR5) 90% 90% 89% 91% 93%

Comments

Percentage of customers who would recommend Berkeley to a friend

% of customers that would recommend us to a friend

2006/7

2007/8

2008/9

2009/10

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Key performance indicators – Building Greener Homes

KEY PERFORMANCE INdICATOR 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

ENvIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

Percentage of completed dwellings certified using the EcoHomes methodology (GRI EN6) 38.0% 43.2% 48.4% 37.4% 45.7%

Percentage of completed dwellings certified using the Code for Sustainable Homes methodology – – – – 18.0%

Percentage of completed dwellings certified using an environmental performance methodology 38.0% 43.2% 48.4% 37.4% 63.6%

Comments

This covers all completed units

Proportion of units built to environmental standards in 2009/10

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

% of units certified

Ecohomes very good Code Level 3

Ecohomes excellent No certification

2

2

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Key performance indicators – Building Greener Homes

KEY PERFORMANCE INdICATOR 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

ENERGy PERFORMANCE OF HOMES

Average SAP rating for homes built to pre-2002 Building Regulations Nd Nd 80.251 77.732 72.673

Average SAP rating for homes built to 2002 Building Regulations Nd Nd 88.614 83.465 81.796

Average SAP rating for homes built to 2006 Building Regulations Nd Nd 76.267 76.498 80.279

Comments

(1) This figure covers 11% of all units completed in the year

(2) This figure covers 4% of all units completed in the year

(3) This figure covers 1% of all units completed in the year

(4) This figure covers 75% of all units completed in the year

(5) This figure covers 55% of all units completed in the year

(6) This figure covers 22% of all units completed in the year

(7) This figure covers 14% of all units completed in the year

(8) This figure covers 43% of all units completed in the year

(9) This figure covers 77% of all units completed in the year

TRANSPORT

Percentage of sites where 80% of the development is located within 500m of a transport node Nd 91.8% 94.3% 94.8% 90.7%

Comments This covers all sites under construction

% of developments within 500m of a transport node

2009/10

2008/9

2007/8

2006/7

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

3

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Key performance indicators – Building Greener Homes

KEY PERFORMANCE INdICATOR 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

LAND USE

Percentage of completed dwellings on brownfield land 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Comments This covers all completed units

% of development on brownfield land

Berkeley brownfield development 2005/6 to 2009/10

New build housing on brownfield

Govt. brownfield development target

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

4

4

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

5

Key performance indicators – Delivering Sustainable Communities

KEY PERFORMANCE INdICATOR 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

CONSIDERATE CONSTRUCTION

Percentage of sites registered under the Considerate Constructors Scheme (CCS) 95% 98% 100% 100% 99%

Comments This covers all sites

Average score in the Considerate Constructors Scheme Nd Nd 34.11 34.52 35.33

Comments

This covers all sites, and is out of a maximum of 40 points.

(1) The UK average CCS score across registered sites in 2007/08 was 30 (May 2008)

(2) The UK average CCS score across registered sites in 2008/09 was 31.5 (May 2009)

(3) The UK average CCS score across registered sites in 2009/10 was 32.2 (May 2010)

Average score in the Considerate Constructors Scheme

2009/10

2008/09

2007/08

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

5

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Key performance indicators – Running a Sustainable Business

KEY PERFORMANCE INdICATOR 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE

Revenue (£ million) 917.9 918.4 991.5 702.2 615.3

Revenue from residential sales (£ million) 890.5 867.9 960.1 671.7 595.7

Revenue from commercial sales (£ million) 27.4 50.5 31.4 30.5 19.6

Capital employed (£ million) 616.6 700.6 685.9 516.5 545.4

Total net (debt) or cash (£ million) 220.6 81.0 4.5 284.8 316.9

Shareholders Equity / Net Assets (£ millions) 837.2 781.8 681.4 801.3 862.3

Cost of redeeming B-shares (£ million) - 241.7 241.7 - -

£ / share redeemed - 2.0 2.0 - -

Units sold 3,001 2,852 3,167 1,501 2,201

Number of sites on which commercial space sold 9.0 14.0 11.0 6.0 19.0

Charitable Giving (£000’s) 191.0 172.0 268.0 128.0 239.0

Comments All results are published in accordance with IFRS

Employees

Number of employees (GRI LA1) 766 865 996 836 748

Comments This covers all activities, and is presented as an average figure for the year

Percentage of direct employees that are female (GRI LAI3) 32% 36% 36% 34% 32%

Comments This covers all activities, and is presented as an average figure for the year

Number of training days per direct employee (GRI LAI0) 0.84 0.96 0.46 1.7 0.3

Comments This covers all activities

Directly employedNumber of people employedn Full time directly employed

Indirectly employed n Part time directly employedn Contractors and sub-contractors

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500

6

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Key performance indicators – Running a Sustainable Business

KEY PERFORMANCE INdICATOR 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

HEALTH & SAFETy

RIddOR Rate per 1000 employees (Client and principle contractor sites) (GRI LA7) 4.5 7.2 3.8 3.9 3.8

Comments This covers all activities and covers sub-contractors on site.

Percentage of site managers that have completed or are due to complete the five day CITB SMTSTS course 91% 97% 96% 97% 97%

Comments This covers all activities

Number of planned health and safety site visits by directors achieved Nd 87.4% 91.0% 91.0% 93.0%

Comments This covers all activities

2009/10 3.8

2008/9 3.9

2007/8 3.8

2006/7 7.2

2005/6 4.5

Injury Incident Rate (RIddOR) per 1,000 employees and sub contractors

7

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Key performance indicators – Running a Sustainable Business

KEY PERFORMANCE INdICATOR 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

CLIMATE CHANGE

Total direct and indirect Greenhouse Gas emissions by weight (tCO2e) (GRI EN16, EN17) Nd 10,870 8,927 8,165 6,329

Comments

This figure is used in our submission to the Carbon disclosure Project (Total Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions). All past figures have been restated following the release of the revised carbon emission conversion factors from dEFRA, 2009.

The majority of sites and offices use grid electricity. The majority of offices also use natural gas and a significant proportion of sites use diesel. A small number of sites use LPG or petrol. This is included in reporting from 2009 onwards, but data collection methodologies did not allow this information to be recorded in earlier years.

detail on data coverage and assumptions is provided against the key performance indicators for direct and indirect energy consumption below.

The inclusion of CO2 equivalents, in addition to CO2, covers the impact (global warming potential) from methane and nitrous oxides only. Remaining gases (HFC-134a, HFC-143a and Sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) are believed to be relatively insignificant for reporting on emissions arising from our activities.

The following conversion factors have been used (kWh to kg CO2 or CO2e-):

GHG emissions from Natural gas

0.20374 - CO2 0.00031 - Methane 0.00012 - Nitrous Oxide

GHG emissions from Diesel

0.26328 - CO2 0.00019 - Methane 0.00283 - Nitrous Oxide

GHG emissions from Petrol

0.25238 - CO2 0.000352- Methane 0.00247 - Nitrous Oxide

GHG from LPG

0.22546 - CO2 0.00009 - Methane 0.00017 - Nitrous Oxide

GHG from Purchased Grid Electricity

0.54055 - CO2 0.00023 - Methane 0.0034 - Nitrous Oxide

All conversion factors taken from: dEFRA, 2009, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/business/reporting/pdf/20090928-guidelines-ghg-conversion-factors.xls

n Electricity usage (sites and offices)2009/10n Gas usage (sites and offices)

2008/9 n diesel usage (sites and offices and business travel)n Petrol usage (sites and offices and business travel)2007/8n Fuel usage (air travel)

2006/7 n Fuel usage (business travel)

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000

Tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2)

8

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Key performance indicators – Running a Sustainable Business

KEY PERFORMANCE INdICATOR 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

CLIMATE CHANGE

Total direct and indirect Greenhouse Gas emissions by weight broken down by source (kg CO2e) Nd 10,870,081 8,927,221 8,165,469 6,328,807

Broken down by source:

Electricity usage (site and offices) - 7,619,955 5,757,522 4,712,797 3,385,201

Gas usage (sites and offices) - 65,955 60,035 168,399 209,613

diesel usage (sites and offices and business travel) - - - 510,189 2,203,087

Petrol usage (sites and offices and business travel) - - - 349 414,315

LPG usage (sites and offices) - - - - 1,385

Fuel usage (business travel) - 3,133,000 3,071,000 2,742,086 -

Fuel usage (air travel) - - - - 92,474

Comments

Figures for methodolo

fuel and electricity gies.

usage have been drawn from data gathered for submissions against GRI KPIs EN3 and EN4. Please refer to the comments under these indicators for collection

Emissions arising from business travel have been calculated for all fleet cars owned by the Berkeley Group, and privately owned vehicles owned by recipients of a car allowance. In 2010, the emissions data also includes emissions arising from business air travel. This has been calculated using the dEFRA 2009 guidelines to GHG conversion factors. The distance travelled on each flight is multiplied by the appropriate emissions factor (domestic = 0.1753 kgCO2 per km; Short-haul = 0.0983; Long-Haul = 0.1106) and an uplift factor of 1.09. Methane and nitrous oxide CO2 equivalent factors were also included in the calculation. A total of 103 short and long-haul flights were taken during 2010.

2006/7 Car Data

250 - Fleet Cars 300 Car Allowance Recipients 177g/km average CO2 emissions

2007/8 Car Data

250 - Fleet Cars 300 Car Allowance Recipients 170g/km average CO2 emissions

2008/9 Car Data

205 - Fleet Cars 280 Car Allowance Recipients 167g/km average CO2 emissions

2009/10 Car Data

200 - Fleet Cars 329 Car Allowance Recipients 154g/km average CO2 emissions - diesel

180g/km average CO2 emissions - Petrol

9

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Key performance indicators – Running a Sustainable Business

KEY PERFORMANCE INdICATOR 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

OPERATIONAL ENERGy USE

Total direct energy consumption (GJ) (GRI EN3) Nd 1,163 1,059 9,871 39,342

Broken down by primary energy source:

- Natural gas (GJ) - 1,163 1,059 2,969 3,696

- diesel (GJ) - Nd Nd 6,897 29,783

- Petrol (GJ) - Nd Nd Nd 5,841

- Other fuel (GJ) - Nd Nd 5 22

Comments

data has been gathered from meter readings where available, and billing information.

Gas data has been collated from total gas usage where in use across offices and sites. Gas was used on sites which accounted for 297 completed units in 2007 and 95 units in 2008. In 2008 gas was used on three sites accounting for 446 completed units. data accuracy was much improved in 2009 and 2010 which explains the increase in gas use.

due to improved data collection methodologies in 2009, we have been able to measure other fuel use on site. diesel was used on 18 sites in 2009 and petrol was used on one site. In 2010, diesel was used on 39 sites and LPG was used on one site. This information is not available prior to 2009.

data was collected in kWh and converted to GJ using the GRI conversion factor 0.0036.

In 2010 petrol and diesel used for business travel was incorporated into this calculation. We acknowledge that the figures for 2007 to 2009 represent an underestimation of our total direct energy consumption as they do not include petrol and diesel usage from business travel.

Total indirect energy consumption - purchased electricity (GJ) (GRI EN4) Nd 50,7481 38,3442 31,3873 22,5454

Broken down by source:5

Non renewable energy type

- Combustible fuels - 41,966 31,709 24,482 17,585

- Nuclear - 6,635 5,013 5,022 3,607

Renewable energy type

- Hydro - 1,304 986 628 451

- Energy from waste/biomass - - - 942 676

- Geo/wind/solar/thermal - 843 637 314 225

10

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Key performance indicators – Running a Sustainable Business

KEY PERFORMANCE INdICATOR 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Comments

1 The data for 2007 has been calculated using actual energy data from 100% of the offices owned and/or occupied by The Berkeley Group and its divisions, and 73% of the construction output (as measured by completed units) of the operations of the Group. Where data was not available, an average energy consumption/unit completed has been used to calculate a total energy consumption for all construction output.

2 The data for 2008 has been calculated using actual energy data of 100% of the offices owned and/or occupied by The Berkeley Group and its divisions, and 94% of the construction output (as measured by completed units) of the operations of the Group. Where data was not available, an average energy consumption/unit completed has been used to calculate a total energy consumption for all construction output.

3 The data for 2009 has been calculated using energy data for 100% of offices owned and/or occupied by The Berkeley Group and its divisions and 98% of construction sites (in previous years, this was measured as a % of construction output). Where data was not available, the average monthly energy consumption for the site was calculated to provide the missing data. We felt this to be a more accurate portrayal of our impacts, and which we are now able to provide due to improved data availability.

4 The data for 2010 has been calculated using energy data for 100% of offices owned and/or occupied by The Berkeley Group and its divisions and 100% of construction sites. data includes all corporate offices, 9 sales and marketing suites (eighteen offices in total) and 59 sites which were in operation in 2010. Where data was not available, the average monthly energy consumption for the site was calculated to provide the missing data.

5 data was collected through a combination of meter readings, utility bills and accounting downloads.

In 2009 and 2010, the break down of purchased electricity by source was calculated using figures from the International Energy Agency UK Electricity Statistics (2007). This assumes a mix of:

Combustible fuel – 78% Nuclear – 16% Hydro – 2% Geo/wind/solar/thermal – 1% Energy from Waste/Biomass – 3% Source: http://www.iea.org/stats/electricitydata.asp?COUNTRY_COdE=GB

Possible energy losses through grid and efficiency losses, and variations in source due to tariff structure were not taken in to account.

Energy saved due to conservation and efficiency improvements (GJ) (GRI EN5)

Energy saved across all operational offices Nd Nd Nd Nd 303

Comments

This indicator refers to the savings made across the 9 corporate offices in the Berkeley Group. We have changed the way this data was reported from previous years to representation of a key operational area of the business, our offices. The figures represent a complete data set of electricity and gas consumption in the offices.

give a more accurate

data has been collected in kWh and converted to GJ using the GRI conversion factor of 0.0036. Please refer to the body of the Sustainability Report for information on initiatives across our offices this year. In future years we will look to undertake this assessment across all of our sites and Sales and Marketing suites as well as our offices.

the energy efficiency

POLLUTION

Number of health and safety and environmental prosecutions 0 0 0 0 0

Comments

This covers all activities

11

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Key performance indicators – Running a Sustainable Business

KEY PERFORMANCE INdICATOR 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

CONSTRUCTION WASTE

Total waste produced (tonnes) (GRI EN22) Nd Nd 34,4861 41,5742 40,2413

Broken down by disposal method

- Composting; - - - - 110

- Reuse;4 - - - - 145

- Recycling; - - 5,879 3,806 4,762

- Recovery;4 - - - - -

- Incineration (or use as fuel); - - - - -

- Landfill (non hazardous or inert) - - 1,692 341 405

- deep well injection; - - - - -

- On-site storage; - - - - -

- Hazardous waste treatment facility - - 182 102 3,698

- Sent to Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) - - 26,733 37,326 31,120

Comments

(1) This has been calculated of the Group. Where data was

using actual waste, as captured by the Group Waste data Tools, with a coverage of 72% of the construction output (as measured by completed units) of the operations not available, average waste per unit completed has been used to calculate total waste produced for all construction output.

(2) This has been calculated using actual waste, as captured by the Group Waste data Tools, with a coverage of 95% of the construction output (as measured by completed units) of the operations of the Group.

(3) This has been calculated using actual waste, as captured by the Group Waste data Tools. Construction waste data was received from all construction sites in operation across the Group.

(4) Prior to 2010, waste directly reused or recovered has been reported in recycling figures. In 2010, waste directly recovered has been reported in the recycling figures but that which was reused on site was reported separately.

All data was gathered in cubic metres and converted to tonnes using the UK HMRC conversion factor for construction waste (1:0.6). We will continue to seek to take into account differing waste streams in future reporting.

2009/10

2008/9

2007/8

0 10,000Tonnes of waste generated

20,000 30,000 50,000

n n n n n

Recycled (following on-site segregation)Material Recovery Facility (then sent to be recycled)Landfill (Non-hazardous)Material Recovery Facility (then sent to landfill)Hazardous waste treatment facility

12

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Key performance indicators – Running a Sustainable Business

KEY PERFORMANCE INdICATOR 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

OPERATIONAL WATER USE

Total water withdrawal by source m3/year (GRI EN8) Nd 95,2001 87,3912 67,8883 74,4814

Municipal supplies - 95,200 87,391 67,888 74,481

Other Sources - 0 0 0 0

Comments

(1) The data for 2007 has been calculated using actual water data from 100% of the offices owned and/or occupied by The Berkeley Group and its divisions, and 47% of the construction output (as measured by completed units) of the operations of the Group. Where data was not available, an average water consumption/unit completed has been used to calculate a total water consumption for all construction output.

(2) The data for 2008 has been calculated using actual water data from 100% of the offices owned and/or occupied by The Berkeley Group and its divisions, and 71% of the construction output (as measured by completed units) of the operations of the Group. Where data was not available, an average water consumption/unit completed has been used to calculate a total water consumption for all construction output.

(3) The data for 2009 represents water data from 100% of the offices owned and/or occupied by The Berkeley Group and its divisions, and 77% of the construction output (as measured by completed units) of the operations of the Group. All Sales and Marketing suites have been excluded as these are often run off a landlord supply. Where data was not available for certain months, an average water consumption for each individual site has been used. We believe that this treatment of missing data has been made possible by improved data collection methodologies and offers a more accurate portrayal of our water usage.

(4) The data for 2010 has been calculated using water data for 100% of offices owned and/or occupied by The Berkeley Group and its divisions, 100% of construction sites in operation (in previous years, this was measured as a % of construction output) and from 6 Sales and Marketing suites within the Group. Where data was not available for certain months, an average water consumption for each individual site or office has been used.

100% of water each year was drawn from municipal supplies. data was collected through a combination of meter readings and utility bills.

Total water withdrawl by source (m3/year)

2009/10

2008/09

2007/08

2006/07

0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000

13

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Our Performance Against 2009/10 Targets

The table below provides a detailed summary of performance against targets in 2009/10.

TARGET PERFORMANCE COMMENTS

Maintain listing in FTSE4Good 100% The Berkeley Group maintained his listing in the September 2009 and March 2010 reviews.

Maintain a leading position in the NextGenerationbenchmarking initiative

100% The Berkeley Group achieved first place in the 2009 NextGeneration benchmark of the UK’s top 25 housebuilders sustainability performance.

Ensure that all sites seeking planning permission continue to commit 98% Since implementing this target, we have committed over 17,465 units to Code to certifying all new homes to Code Level 3 (excluding refurbishments) Level 3. In the past year, all but 293 units were committed to certification to

Code Level 3. These 293 units were located on five sites and the reasons for not seeking Code Level 3 were as follows: • One 6 unit site was brought with planning permission in place, therefore falls

outside of the commitment.• On one site where a reserved matters application was made, we are providing

the 25% reduction in CO2 in accordance with Code Level 3, however due to site constraints and viability we are not providing full certification to Code Level 3.

• On one site we applied for a change in the design of 68 units on a scheme. As the whole scheme was not being redesigned (and received planning permission prior to our commitment) Code Level 3 is not viable.

• Similarly on another site a small amend was made to the existing planning permission and it was not viable to increase the performance of the homes to Code Level 3.

• On one site 140 units have been committed to EcoHomes Very Good rather than Code Level 3 as this is the standard being used by the Local Planning Authority.

Ensure that all sites seeking planning permission continue to commit to certifying all commercial space to BREEAM Very Good, specifically seeking a 25% improvement above Building Regulations for energy performance (excluding refurbishments)

100% Since implementing this target we have committed 98,472m2 of commercial space to BREEAM Very Good. All planning applications made this year have been in compliance with this commitment

Ensure that 95% of completed Berkeleydevelopment is on brownfield land

100% In 2009/10 100% of completed development was on brownfield land

14

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Our Performance Against 2009/10 Targets

TARGET PERFORMANCE COMMENTS

Reduce our direct water consumption (associated with our offices and sites) by 5% annually until 2012, from May 2008 baseline figure

0% In 2009/10 our absolute water consumption increased by 9%. This was due to: • Higher water consuming activities taking place on sites (demolition and

groundworks which require water to reduce dust and air pollution)• Better water data collection across sites increasing the amount of water

data reported.

While we are disappointed with our absolute increase, some offices made significant decreases – for example, at our Head Office, water use dropped by nearly 50% following our refurbishment which incorporated a number of measures including installation of low flush toilets and low flow taps.

Achieve a 5% year-on-year reduction in CO2 emissions until 2012 (associated with our offices and sites) from May 2008 baseline figure

100% In 2009/10 we reduced our carbon footprint from our sites, offices and business travel by 22%. This was achieved for a number of reasons: • Significant reduction in CO2 emissions associated with our car fleet due to more

robust data collection techniques. • Reduction in energy intensive activities on sites• More effective data collection and management of performance at a site and

office level• Continued implementation of awareness raising with staff• Increased efficiency through a range of initiatives in our offices

Reduce by 50% construction waste sent directly to landfill by 2010 based on a 2007/08 baseline

100% Between 2007/08 and 2009/10 we have reduced waste sent directly to landfill by 76%. The total amount of waste sent to landfill (direct and indirect) reduced by 19%. However, we believe that our data is now significantly more robust that in our baseline year, and as such, the increase in recycling and reduction in waste to landfill could be more than this.

Undertake a detailed review of the sustainability section of the website to understand how this can be updated to reflect good and best practice

100% Our new website will be launched following the publication of the 2010 Sustainability Report.

Undertake an assessment of the local and regional socio-economic benefits of one project, with a view to developing a methodology which could be ap-plied to other projects in the future

100% We have undertaken an assessment on Chelsea Bridge Wharf and developed a basic methodology for undertaking similar assessments on future projects.

develop a more accurate and consistent methodology to capture the number of training days per employee with a view to developing a benchmark and set-ting a performance target for next year

75% We have developed a more robust system to centrally capture Health & Safety training days and have reported data on the total number of Health & Safety training days completed this year.

15

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Our Performance Against 2009/10 Targets

TARGET PERFORMANCE COMMENTS

Continue to work with our managing agents to raise their awareness of sus-tainability issues, and to understand how our own approach mayfacilitate sustainable estate management

25% We have undertaken a number of initiatives to raise awareness of sustainability with managing agents. These included an audit of managing agent’s performance, covering sustainability issues. This audit has proved to be a useful exercise but has not yet been repeated across all managing agents to highlight issues that may facilitate sustainable estate management.

Implement the actions identified in the recently published Sustainable Supply Chain Action Plan across the Group

75% We have implemented the majority of actions in the Supply Chain Action plan and the remaining actions will be implemented later this year. More details of our work with our supply chain can be found within the supply chain section on our website.

Trial Material Logistic Plans on one site and share lessons learnt across the Group

100% We trialled a Material Logistic Plan at Holborough, to reduce construction waste. Measures that proved particularly effective were:• Agreeing a waste forecast with plasterboard suppliers, and awarding a bonus

if performance was better• Ensuring a stack of reusable pallets were on site• Reusing brick and block waste in preparing the ground in future phases• Controlling deliveries to reduce the amount of stock held on siteThis resulted in a reduction in waste being generated compared to the industry standard BRE benchmark.

Produce a quarterly sustainability newsletter, to provide all staff with updates on internal and external sustainability issues

100% We have issued a quarterly newsletter to staff highlighting key sustainability initiatives taking place in our sites and offices and measures they can take to get involved.

Undertake a six month programme of post occupancy monitoring of energy on one site

100% We have been undertaking post-occupancy monitoring on two sites to help us understand actual energy use in the homes we build.

Undertake work to identify the key risks and opportunities posed to The Berkeley Group by climate change and other sustainability impacts, including their likelihood and their potential financial and non-financial significance

100% A risk assessment was undertaken to identify the key risks facing our business.

Use The Berkeley Group’s leadership position in its approach to sustainability to work with national and regional government to help influence the direction of future policy within the sector

100% We have been actively involved in a number of consultations and industry steering groups to help influence policy. We will continue to do this with the advent of the new Government in power.

Maintain average score in the Considerate Constructors Scheme above 32 for all participating sites

100% Our average score in the CCS was 35.3

Maintain reportable accident rate at or below the All Builder Average 100% Our accident rate for 2009/10 is 3.8 which is below the All Builder Average

Roll out the enhanced ‘Good Order’ initiative and new ‘Good Work’ campaign 100% Both initiatives were successfully rolled out during the year and full details of this is provided in the 2010 Sustainability Report, page 56.

16

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Our Performance Against 2009/10 Targets

TARGET PERFORMANCE COMMENTS

Maintain an average site Good Order score at 80 or above 100% The average Good Order score was 96

Maintain an average site overall score (Good Order, Good Work and General Items) at 80 or above

100% The average overall site score was 94

Maintain an average site Good Work score at 80 or above N/A When setting this target, the Health & Safety Team were intending to score performance against Good Work as a separate measure. However, it was decided subsequent to this target being set that it was better to measure performance against Good Work as part of the overall site score. As a result of this, it is not possible to provide a separate score for Good Work, and reference should be made to the average site score above.

Ensure 90% of Site Managers have completed the SMSTS within 3 months 100% 97% of site managers completed the SMSTS within 3 months

17

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Our Performance - Compliance with the GRI guidelines

We have benchmarked our CR reporting against the updated Global Reporting Initiative sustainability reporting guidelines (GRI: G3). We assess our application of the GRI reporting framework to be at level B. An index of conformance with the G3 guidelines is provided on the following pages.

APPLICATION OF THE GRI ‘GUIDANCE ON DEFINING REPORT CONTENT’ AND ‘DEFINING REPORT QUALITy’ AND THE ASSOCIATED PRINCIPLES

Materiality stakeholder organisations with a personal letter from the The data in this report covers all of Berkeley’s operations, The content of the 2010 Sustainability Report and this Managing director, inviting feedback and dialogue on the unless indicated in the data qualification notes. All data performance report has been determined through our issues presented here. refers to the financial year between May 2009 - April 2010 materiality review undertaken in 2009, as described in our unless otherwise indicated. In respect of data quality and

Sustainability context and comparability2009 Sustainability Report as well as through the work reliability, actual measurements are used wherever possible

The broader context for addressing sustainability and our undertaken to develop our Vision 2020 which included (gathered through the use of bespoke KPI, waste and

key impacts is provided throughout the report. We have also a review of peer and sustainability leaders reporting, an utility tools), and we indicate throughout the report where

reflected on what we perceive to be the most significant analysis of the legislative context as well as engagement with estimation has been necessary. data is checked by external

future challenges, including risks and opportunities. We have key stakeholders on the commitments and ambitions that consultants on a quarterly basis and obvious anomalies have

provided industry benchmarks where these are available, and help to deliver the vision. been removed from the dataset presented here, and reflected

we would refer readers to the section on our performance in in the reduced comprehensiveness of coverage (as indicated

Stakeholder inclusiveness and clarity the NextGeneration benchmark if they wish to make a direct in data qualifying notes). Where historical data is available

The stakeholders to whom we view ourselves as accountable comparison against our peers. Performance data is provided this has been provided. In a number of cases data collection

to are detailed throughout our report and on our website. Our for a number of years, which also allows a comparison in our parameters have changed, and where this is the case this is

stakeholders have been identified based upon our experience performance over time, and use of GRI indicators allows for indicated in the data qualification notes.

of the groups most affected by our developments. We have further comparisons to be made against other organisations engaged with representatives from all these groups over the who report using the GRI framework. Balancepast year and feedback received has shaped the content of Within our reporting, we aim to disclose both the favourable

Completeness, accuracy and reliabilitythis report, as described above. and less-favourable aspects of our performance, presenting

This report provides information on our performance against this in the form of lessons learned throughout the year.

While our 2010 Sustainability Report (and this Performance the most material environmental, social and economic We present and comment on our performance data in a

Report) should be accessible to all interested stakeholders, impacts relating to the Berkeley Group. The Berkeley Group way that enables the reader to easily interpret trends and

our printed report is particularly targeted at investors, refers to our business as defined in the ‘Berkeley – who to understand the factors that may have influenced this

employees, and National, Regional and Local Government. we are’ section, page 4. Further information regarding the performance.

complete range of our environmental and social impacts Our report is provided in hard copy, and on-line, in order to

may be found on our website (www.berkeleygroup.co.uk/ Timelinessreach a broader audience. We will continue to communicate

environment). Additional information on our business and The information and data presented in this report relates with our stakeholders and develop specific media to

financial performance, corporate governance, regulatory to the financial year period May 2009 – April 2010. provide more targeted and relevant information to them, as

issues and directors’ remuneration is provided in our The collection and publication of sustainability-related appropriate. Further information on how we engage with

Annual Report and Accounts. information is aligned with our financial reporting.stakeholder groups may be found on our website. This report will be sent to senior representatives from key

18

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Our Performance - Compliance with the GRI guidelines

CONTENTS CHECkLIST LOCATION OR DESCRIPTION

1 Strategy & Analysis

1.1 Statement from the most senior decision-maker of the organisation about the relevance of sustainability to the organization and its strategy.

Sustainability Report 2010, p7, Managing director’s Statement

1.2 description of key impacts, risks and opportunitiesThis section should include:• A description of the significant impacts the organization has on sustainability and

associated challenges and opportunities. This includes the effect on stakeholders’ rights as defined by national laws and the expectations in internationally-agreed standards and norms;

• An explanation of the approach to prioritising these challenges and opportunities;

Sustainability Report 2010, p13, The Customer Experience: Opportunities and Risks for our business

Sustainability Report 2010, p25, Building Greener Homes: Opportunities and Risks for our business

Sustainability Report 2010, p39, delivering Sustainable Communities: Opportunities and Risks for our business

• Key conclusions about progress in addressing these topics and related performance in the reporting period. This includes an assessment of reasons for underperformance or overperformance; and

• A description of the main processes in place to address performance and/or relevant changes.

Sustainability Report 2010, p51, Running a Sustainable Business: Opportunities and Risks for our business

Annual Report and Accounts

Website

2 Organizational Profile

2.1 Name of the organization The Berkeley Group

2.2 Primary brands, products, and/or services. Sustainability Report 2010, p4, Berkeley: Who We Are

2.3 Operational structure of the organization, countries, subsidiaries, and joint ventures.

including main divisions, operating Sustainability Report 2010, p4, Berkeley: Who We AreAnnual Report and Accounts

2.4 Location of organization's headquarters. The Berkeley Group Holdings plcBerkeley House19 Portsmouth RoadCobhamSurreyKT11 1JG

2.5 Number of countries where the organization operates, and names of countries with either major operations or that are specifically relevant to the sustainability issues covered in the report.

The Berkeley Group operates only in England

2.6 Nature of ownership and legal form Annual Report and Accounts

2.7 Markets served (including customers/beneficiaries).

geographic breakdown, sectors served, and types of Sustainability Report 2010, p4, Berkeley: Who We AreAnnual Report and Accounts

19

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Our Performance - Compliance with the GRI guidelines

CONTENTS CHECkLIST LOCATION OR DESCRIPTION

2 Organizational Profile

2.8 Scale of the reporting organization, including:• Number of employees• Net sales • Total capitalization broken down in terms of debt and equity• Quantity of products or services provided

Summary of 2009/10 Performance – p64Annual Report and Accounts

2.9 Significant changes during the reporting period regarding size, structure, or ownership including:• The location of, or changes in operations, including facility openings, closings, and

expansions; and• Changes in the share capital structure and other capital formation, maintenance, and

alteration operations

Annual Report and Accounts

2.10 Awards received in the reporting period Sustainability Report 2010, p6, Our achievements in 2009/2010 and throughout the report Website

3 Report Parameters

3.1 Reporting period for information provided This report covers the financial year ending April 2010, unless otherwise stated

3.2 date of most recent previous report The previous Sustainability Report was published in July 2009 (covering the period May 2008 – April 2009)

3.3 Reporting cycle Annually in July, to cover the financial year May – April

3.4 Contact point for questions regarding the report or its contents Sustainability Report 2010, p2, About this [email protected]

3.5 Process for defining report content, including;• determining materiality;• Prioritising topics within the report, and • Identifying stakeholders the organization expects to use the report.

Sustainability Report 2010, p8, Our Vision for 2020Sustainability Report 2010, p2, About this Report Website

3.6 Boundary of the report (e.g, countries, divisions, subsidiaries, leased facilities, joint ventures, suppliers).

Performance Report 2009/10, p18, Compliance with GRI Guidelines

3.7 State any specific limitations on the scope or boundary of the report. Performance Report 2009/10, p18, Compliance with GRI Guidelines

3.8 Basis for reporting on joint ventures, subsidiaries, leased facilities, outsourced operations, and other entities that can significantly affect comparability from period to period and/or between organizations.

Performance Report 2009/10, p18, Compliance with GRI Guidelines

20

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Our Performance - Compliance with the GRI guidelines

CONTENTS CHECkLIST LOCATION OR DESCRIPTION

3 Report Parameters

3.9 data measurement techniques and the bases of calculations, including assumptions and techniques underlying estimations applied to the compilation of the Indicators and other information in the report.

Performance Report 2009/10, p18, Compliance with GRI Guidelines Performance Report 2009/10, p2–13, Key Performance Indicators

3.10 Explanation of the effect of any re-statements of reports, and the reasons for such re-statement.

information provided in earlier Performance Report 2009/10, p18, Compliance with GRI Guidelines Performance Report 2009/10, p2–13, Key Performance Indicators

3.11 Significant changes from previous reporting periods in the scope, boundary, or measurement methods applied in the report.

Performance Report 2009/10, p18, Compliance with GRI Guidelines Performance Report 2009/10, p2–13, Key Performance Indicators

3.12 Table identifying the location of the Standard disclosures in the report. Performance Report 2009/10, p18, Compliance with GRI Guidelines

3.13 Policy and current practice with regard to seeking external assurance for the report. We do not currently have full external assurance for our sustainability reporting but our Advisors Statement can be found on p67 of our 2010 Sustainability Report.

4 Governance, Commitments, and Engagement

4.1 Governance structure of the organization, including committees under the highest governance body responsible for specific tasks, such as setting strategy or organizational oversight.

Sustainability Report 2010, p63, Governance of our vision Annual Report and Accounts

4.2 Indicate whether the Chair of the highest governance body is also an executive officer (and, if so, their function within the organization's management and the reasons for this arrangement).

Annual Report and Accounts

4.3 For organizations that have a unitary board structure, state the number of members of the highest governance body that are independent and/or non-executive members.

Annual Report and Accounts

4.4 Mechanisms for shareholders and employees to provide recommendations or direction to the highest governance body.

Annual Report and Accounts

4.5 Linkage between compensation for members of the highest governance body, senior managers, and executives (including departure arrangements), and the organization's performance (including social and environmental performance)

Annual Report and Accounts describes the relationship between compensation for the Board and organisational performance.There is currently no formal process to remunerate the Board or Senior management on the basis of social and environmental performance alone.

4.6 Processes in place for the highest governance body to ensure conflicts of avoided.

interest are Annual Report and Accounts

4.7 Process for determining the qualifications and expertise of the members of the highest governance body for guiding the organization's strategy on economic, environmental, and social topics.

When Board Members are appointed their expertise is taken into account on a case by case basis.

21

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Our Performance - Compliance with the GRI guidelines

CONTENTS CHECkLIST LOCATION OR DESCRIPTION

4 Governance, Commitments, and Engagement

4.8 Internally developed statements of mission or values, codes of conduct, and principles relevant to economic, environmental, and social performance and the status of their implementation.

Website – Our Policies Vision for 2020

4.9 Procedures of the highest governance body for overseeing the organization's identification and management of economic, environmental, and social performance, including relevant risks and opportunities, and adherence or compliance with internationally agreed standards, code of conduct, and principles.

Sustainability Report 2010, p63, Governance of our vision

4.10. Processes for evaluating the highest governance body's own performance, particularly with respect to economic, environmental, and social performance.

Judged by achievement of external awards and performance against publicly stated commitments (including Vision 2020)

4.11 Explanation of whether and how the precautionary approach or principles is addressed by the organization.

The precautionary approach has informed and is reflected in our objective setting (including Vision 2020)

4.12 Externally developed economic, environmental, and social charters, other initiatives to which the organization subscribes or endorses.

principles, or Sustainability Report 2010, p53, Communicating our performance to Investors

4.13 Membership in associations (such as industry associations) international advocacy organizations in which the organization:- has positions in governance bodies;- participates in projects or committees;- provides substantive funding beyond routine membership dues; or- Views membership as strategic.

and/or national/ Website

4.14 List of stakeholder groups engaged by the organization Website

4.15 Basis for identification and selection of stakeholders with whom to engage Website

4.16 Approaches to stakeholder engagement, including frequency of and by stakeholder group

engagement by type Website

4.17 Key topics and concerns that have been raised through stakeholder engagement, and how the organization has responded to those key topics and concerns, including through its reporting.

Website

22

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Our Performance - Compliance with the GRI guidelines

EC ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

Provide a concise disclosure on the Management Approach items outlined below with reference to the following economic aspects; economic performance, market presence and indirect economic impacts

Annual Report & Accounts, Managing directors Statement2010 Sustainability Report, p52, Financial 2010 Sustainability Report, p37-47, delivering Sustainable Communities

Performance

EC1 direct economic value generated and distributed, including revenues, operating costs, employee compensation, donations and other community investments, retained earnings, and payments to capital providers and to governments.

Partial Annual Report & Accounts Performance Report 2009/10, P6, Key Performance Indicators

EC2 Financial implications and other risks and opportunities for the organization's activities due to climate change.

Full 2010 Sustainability Report, p23-35, Building Greener Homes 2010 Sustainability Report, p49-61, Running a Sustainable BusinessPerformance Report 2009/10, P3–5, 8–13, Key Performance IndicatorsCarbon disclosure Project 2010 Submission

EC6 Policy, practices and proportion of locations of operation.

spending on locally based suppliers at significant Partial Website – Supply chain

EC8 development and impact of infrastructure investments and services provided primarily for public benefit through commercial, in-kind or pro-bono engagement

Partial Website – Well designed homes and communities

EC9 Understanding and describing significant indirect economic impacts, including the extent of impacts

Full 2010 Sustainability Report, p37-47, delivering Sustainable Communities

EN ENvIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

Provide a concise disclosure on the management approach items outlined below with reference to the following environmental aspects: materials, energy, water, biodiversity, emissions, effluents and waste, products and services, compliance, transport and overall

Website: Our Environmental Policy2010 Sustainability Report, p49-61, Running a Sustainable Business2010 Sustainability Report, p23-35, Building Greener Homes

EN3 direct energy consumption by primary energy source. Full Performance Report 2009/10, p10, Key Performance Indicators

EN4 Indirect energy consumption broken down by primary source. Full Performance Report 2009/10, p10–11, Key Performance Indicators

EN5 Energy saved due to conservation and efficiency improvements. Full Sustainability Report, p49-61, Running a Sustainable BusinessPerformance Report 2009/10, p11, Key Performance Indicators

23

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Our Performance - Compliance with the GRI guidelines

EN ENvIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

EN6 Initiatives to provide energy efficient or renewable energy based products and services, and reductions in energy requirements as a result of these initiatives.

Full 2010 Sustainability Report, p23-35, Building Greener Homes

EN7 Initiatives to reduce indirect energy consumption and reductions achieved. Full Sustainability Report, p49-61, Running a Sustainable BusinessPerformance Report 2009/10, p10–11, Key Performance Indicators

EN8 Total water withdrawal by source. Full Performance Report 2009/10, p13, Key Performance Indicators

EN14 Strategies, current actions, and future plans for managing impacts on biodiversity. Partial 2010 Sustainability Report, p23-35, Building Greener HomesWebsite

EN16 Total direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions by weight. Full Performance Report 2009/10, p8, Key Performance Indicators

EN17 Other relevant indirect greenhouse gas emissions by weight. Full Performance Report 2009/10, p8, Key Performance Indicators

EN18 Initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reductions achieved. Full Sustainability Report, p49-61, Running a Sustainable Business

EN22 Total weight of waste by type and disposal method. Full Sustainability Report, p49-61, Running a Sustainable BusinessPerformance Report 2009/10, p12, Key Performance Indicators

EN26 Initiatives to mitigate environmental impacts of impact mitigation.

products and services, and extent of Full 2010 Sustainability Report, p23-35, Building Greener Homes

EN28 Monetary value of significant fines and total number of noncompliance with environmental laws and regulations.

nonmonetary sanctions for Full None

EN29 Significant environmental impacts of transporting products and other goods and materials used for the organisation’s operations, and transporting members of the workforce.

Partial Sustainability Report, p49-61, Running a Sustainable Business

24

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Our Performance - Compliance with the GRI guidelines

LA SOCIAL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS: DECENT WORk PERFORMANCE

LABOUR PRACTICES AND

Provide a concise disclosure on the management approach items outlined below with reference to the following labour aspects; employment, labour/management relations, occupational health and safety, training and education and diversity and equal opportunity.

Sustainability Report, p49-61, Running a Sustainable Business2010 Sustainability Report, p37-47, delivering Sustainable CommunitiesWebsite: Employee Policy

LA1 Total workforce by employment type, employment contract, and region. Full Performance Report 2009/10, p6, Key Performance Indicators

LA7 Rates of injury, occupational diseases, lost days and absenteeism and number of

work-related fatalities by region. Full Performance Report 2009/10, p6-7,

Key Performance Indicators

LA10 Average hours of training per year per employee by employee category. Partial

LA13 Composition of governance bodies and breakdown of employees per category according to gender, age group, minority group membership, and other indicators of diversity.

Partial Performance Report 2009/10, p6, Key Performance IndicatorsAnnual Report & Accounts

25

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Our Performance - Compliance with the GRI guidelines

HR SOCIAL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS: HUMAN RIGHTS

Provide a concise disclosure on the management approach items outlined below with reference to the following human rights; The majority of the issues are not relevant to ourselves investment and procurement practices, non-discrimination, freedom of association and collective bargaining, abolition of child directly as we operate solely in the United Kingdom. labour, prevention of forced and compulsory labour, complaints and grievance practices, security practices and indigenous rights. We do recognise these issues are pertinent our supply

chain and details of our requirements can be found within our Sustainable Procurement Policy.

Website: Employee Policy HR2 Percentage of significant suppliers

human rights and actions taken.and contractors that have undergone screening on Full All our suppliers and contractors are required to

comply with our Sustainable Procurement Policy. This states that we give a preference to procuring materials and services which are ethically sourced, where these are proved to be of equal quality and value for money as traditional alternatives. For those goods and services being sourced from developing countries, we expect suppliers to demonstrate that minimum supply chain labour standards have been met. We use the Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI) Base Code and the standards adopted by the UN through the Universal declaration of Human Rights, and the ILO Conventions as the basis for this policy. Based on our total spend on suppliers and contractors, materials that are associated with a human rights risk would be insignificant as a proportion of this spend, but we recognise the importance of this issue and have monitored compliance on a case by case basis. We have prioritised those materials which have human rights risks associated with them and the country of origin. Where we feel specific materials could have human rights issues associated with them, we have sought more detailed information from suppliers on the management of human rights issues.

26

Berkeley Sustainability Performance Report 2010

Our Performance - Compliance with the GRI guidelines

SO SOCIAL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS: SOCIETy PERFORMANCE

Provide a concise disclosure on the management approach items outlined below with reference to the following society aspects; community, corruption, public policy, anti-competitive behaviour and compliance

Annual Report & Accounts2010 Sustainability Report, p37-47, delivering Sustainable CommunitiesWebsiteWebsite: Business Ethics Policy

SO1 Nature, scope, and effectiveness of any programs and practices that assess and manage the impacts of operations on communities, including entering, operating, and exiting.

Full 2010 Sustainability Report, p37-47, delivering Sustainable Communities

SO2 Percentage and total number of business units analysed for risks related to corruption. Full All – see Annual Report & AccountsWebsite: Whistle blowing PolicyWebsite: Business Ethics Policy

SO7 Total number of legal actions for anticompetitive behaviour, antitrust, and monopoly practices and their outcomes.

Full None

SO8 Monetary value of significant fines and total number of noncompliance with laws and regulations.

nonmonetary sanctions for Full None

PR SOCIAL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS: PRODUCT RESPONSIBILITy PERFORMANCE

Provide a concise disclosure on the management approach items outlined below with reference to the following society aspects; 2010 Sustainability Report, p11-21, customer health and safety, product and service labelling, marketing communications, customer privacy and compliance The Customer Experience

2010 Sustainability Report, p23-35, Building Greener HomesWebsite: Customer CharterWebsite: Business Ethics Policy

PR1 Life cycle stages in which health and safety impacts of products and services are assessed for improvement, and percentage of significant products and services categories subject to such procedures.

Full All stages of the product lifecycle are analysed for Health & Safety through CdM practices. Sustainability Report, p49-61, Running a Sustainable Business

PR5 Practices related to customer satisfaction, including results of customer satisfaction.

surveys measuring Full 2010 Sustainability Report, p11-21, Contented Customers Performance Report 2009/10, p2, Key Performance Indicators

27