Assessment Structure & Scope

The Infrastructure Fund Assessment consists of only one Management Component, which includes 23 indicators across six aspects:

• Leadership

• Policies

• Targets

• Reporting

• Risk Management

• Stakeholder Engagement

Funds' underlying assets (portfolio companies) complete the Performance and/or Development Component(s) as part of the Infrastructure Asset or Development Asset Assessments.

The results of the underlying assets may contribute to the fund's overall GRESB Score.

Performance Component

Funds do not complete a Performance Component. Instead, the underlying assets of the fund complete it.

To earn a Fund Performance Score, at least 25% of the fund's underlying assets (based on equity invested) must participate in a GRESB Infrastructure Assessment. Within the 25%, at least one asset must complete the Asset Assessment and be connected to the fund on the GRESB Portal.

The fund's management and performance scores join together to create the premier measurement of sustainability performance: the GRESB Score — Infrastructure Fund.

Development Component

Funds do not complete a Development Component. Instead, the underlying development assets of the fund complete it.

To earn a Fund Development Score, at least 25% of the fund's underlying assets (based on equity invested) must participate in a GRESB Infrastructure Assessment. Within the 25%, at least one asset must complete the Development Asset Assessment and be connected to the fund on the GRESB Portal.

The fund's management and performance scores join together to create the premier measurement of sustainability performance: the GRESB Score — Infrastructure Fund.

Infrastructure funds, portfolios, and companies can participate in the Fund Assessment. Common examples of infrastructure funds include:

• A sector-focused fund with investments in renewable energy

• A geographic-focused fund with investments in a specific region, such as North America or Oceania

• A segregated account that is globally diversified, offering exposure to several sectors

Each indicator is allocated to one of the three sustainability dimensions (E‑ environmental; S‑ social; G‑ governance):

• E – indicators related to actions and efficiency measures undertaken to monitor and decrease the environmental footprint of the asset;

• S – indicators related to the entity’s relationship with and impact on its stakeholders and the direct social impact of its activities

• G – indicators related to the governance of sustainability, policies and procedures, and approach to sustainability at the entity or organization level.

The Asset Assessment is made up of two components:

Participants may choose to complete one or both Components. However, only entities that submit both Components will receive a GRESB Score and GRESB Rating.

GRESB Score = Management Score + Performance Score

Precisely what constitutes an infrastructure asset is typically defined by investors at the level of the investable entity.

These assets (investable entities) may comprise single or multiple facilities. Either type of asset may participate in the Asset Assessment; however, reporting as a single facility provides the best basis for benchmark comparisons and is, therefore, recommended.

Different approaches to participation are explained in the following sections. Note that these are only illustrative, and other scenarios are possible.

Single-Facility Assets

Single-facility assets undertake their activities at a single facility or across a single facility network. These entities may be large and complex or small and narrowly focused. The full description of the facility and business activities should be expressed in the Entity & Reporting Characteristics section of the asset assessment.

Examples of single‑facility assets include:

• A provider of water and wastewater services in a single network

• An airport

• A telecommunications company with a single telecommunications network (e.g., in a single country)

Multi-Facility Assets

In some cases, the asset’s activities may be spread across several facilities—GRESB considers this to be a multi‑facility asset. A multi‑facility asset has the option to report:

1. Separately for each facility using multiple asset assessments

2. As a group using a single asset assessment

Completing multiple assessments allows comparisons between assets and is strongly encouraged, whilst a single assessment may take less time if the relevant data is more readily available at the aggregated asset level.

Examples of multi‑facility assets include:

• An entity that operates several toll roads as one asset

• An entity that owns a portfolio of small wind farms

• An entity that operates a collection of distributed‑scale solar projects

If a participant elects to report on multiple facilities within a single asset assessment, GRESB strongly recommends aggregating facilities to a single sector and country combination; otherwise, peer group comparisons are likely to be less granular and less relevant.

Multi‑facility assets that participate as a single entity should have centralized management and aggregated performance data. See “Sector and Geography” (RC3) in the Entity and Reporting Characteristics Aspect for more details.

Each indicator in the assessment is allocated to one of the three sustainability dimensions (E‑ environmental; S‑ social; G‑ governance):

• E - indicators related to actions and efficiency measures undertaken to monitor and decrease the environmental footprint of the asset

• S - indicators related to the entity’s relationship with and impact on its stakeholders and the direct social impact of its activities

• G - indicators related to the governance of sustainability, policies and procedures, and approach to sustainability at the entity or organization level

Participants may use the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool to identify the weight of E, S, and G issues based on their specific asset characteristics and learn more about the role of materiality in the assessment.

The Net Zero Investment Framework (NZIF) Alignment Module is an optional supplement to the Infrastructure Asset Assessment, consisting of six indicators:

• NZ1: Emission Scopes

• NZ2: Budget Pathway/Approach

• NZ3: Governance/Management Responsibility for Targets & Decarbonization

• NZ4: Decarbonization Plan

• NZ5: Emissions Performance

• NZ6: 2050 Target Achievement

The additional indicators are not formally part of the GRESB Standards. Participants are not required to complete them; they are only used to assess NZIF alignment and will not impact the Asset Assessment scoring or benchmarking.

GRESB will provide the complete guidance for this module in the first half of 2026 within the Completing GRESB Assessments page.

GRESB encourages any participant with an interest (or that is connected to a fund or investor with an interest) in assessing their NZIF alignment to complete it.

The Infrastructure Development Asset Assessment consists of an ‘Entity and Reporting Characteristics’ section and a Development Component that assesses management as well as performance information.

The Development Component consists of 40 indicators across 12 aspects (i.e., topics):

• Leadership

• Policies

• Reporting

• Risk Management

• Stakeholder Engagement

• Greenhouse Gas Emissions

• Materials

• Site Selection

• Employees

• Contractors

• Certifications

Precisely what constitutes an infrastructure asset is typically defined by investors at the level of the investable entity.

These assets (investable entities) may comprise single or multiple facilities. Either type of asset may participate in the Development Asset Assessment; however, reporting as a single facility provides the best basis for benchmark comparisons and is, therefore, recommended.

Different approaches to participation are explained in the following sections. Please note that these are only illustrative examples, and other scenarios are also possible.

Single-Facility Assets

Single-facility assets undertake their activities at a single facility or across a single facility network. These entities may be large and complex or small and narrowly focused. The full description of the facility and business activities should be expressed in the Entity & Reporting Characteristics section of the asset assessment.

Examples of single‑facility assets include:

• A provider of water and wastewater services in a single network is under development

• An airport under development

• An offshore wind farm under development

Multi-Facility Assets

In some cases, the asset’s activities may be spread across several facilities—GRESB considers this to be a multi‑facility asset. A multi‑facility asset has the option to report:

1. Separately for each facility using multiple development asset assessments

2. As a group using a single development asset assessment

Completing multiple assessments allows comparisons between assets and is strongly encouraged, whilst a single assessment may take less time if the relevant data is more readily available at the aggregated asset level.

Examples of multi‑facility assets include:

• An entity that operates several toll roads under development simultaneously

• An entity that owns a portfolio of small wind farms under development

• An entity that is developing a collection of distributed-scale solar projects

If a participant elects to report on multiple facilities in a single development asset assessment, then it is strongly recommended that this aggregation be kept at a single sector and country combination; otherwise, peer group comparisons are likely to be far less specific and useful.

For example, a multi-facility asset that consists of on-shore wind farms under development in the UK can be compared to other UK wind farms under development. In contrast, an asset with wind and solar farms in various European countries will likely fall into a peer group of renewable energy in Europe, which is far less useful for comparisons. Multi-facility assets that operate as a single entity should have centralized management and aggregated performance data. See “Sector and Geography” (RC3) in the Entity and Reporting Characteristics Aspect for more details.

Each indicator is allocated to one of the three sustainability dimensions (E‑ environmental; S‑ social; G‑ governance):

• E – indicators related to actions and efficiency measures undertaken to monitor and decrease the environmental footprint of the asset;

• S – indicators related to the entity’s relationship with and impact on its stakeholders and the direct social impact of its activities

• G – indicators related to the governance of sustainability, policies and procedures, and approach to sustainability at the entity or organization level.

Participants may use the GRESB Materiality and Scoring Tool to identify the weight of E, S, and G issues based on their specific asset characteristics. See the ‘Materiality in the Asset Assessment’ section of the introduction for more information about materiality.

The EU’s Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) is a transparency requirement for financial market participants related to key environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria. The purpose is to increase market transparency and direct capital towards more sustainable activities.

SFDR imposes different disclosure obligations on financial market participants, depending on their size and the nature of their products. All financial market participants in the EU need to make general disclosures about sustainability practices at both the entity and product level.

They also need to report on their Principal Adverse Impacts (PAIs), which are a series of indicators covering a range of ESG issues, such as greenhouse gas emissions and waste management.

The SFDR Infrastructure Asset and Fund Assessments are GRESB’s Infrastructure solution for the SFDR and its required PAI Reporting.

The assessment is based on the 6.4.2022 version of SFDR and provides financial market participants with a means to collect infrastructure asset data so that it can then be aggregated for funds or financial market participants ahead of their expected disclosure requirements in 2026.

The methodology is consistent across different regions, investment vehicles and infrastructure sectors and aligns with the principal adverse sustainability impacts statement template from Annex 1 of the Regulation.

The Infrastructure SFDR Assessment was adapted to provide a standardized and user-friendly way for infrastructure participants to report their sustainability data in a secure platform and help them meet their disclosure requirements. Assessment participants get a head start on disclosure requirements by receiving:

• SFDR Data and Report that can be used to help meet their disclosure requirement under Article 7 of SFDR. .

• Access to GRESB’s data exports tool so fund managers can conduct their own aggregation.

The assessment consists of 60 sustainability metrics, addressing the three tables related to PAIs in the Annex 1, which help to cover the Article 7 disclosure requirements for Article 8 and 9 products.

Fund

The SFDR Infrastructure Asset Assessment consists of only the Entity & Reporting Characteristics sections.

Funds must participate with at least one of their underlying assets that also participates in the SFDR Infrastructure Asset Assessment, where Principal Adverse Impacts are reported.

The aggregation of asset data follows the calculation methods provided in Annex 1 of the Regulatory Technical Standards about the PAIs.

Aggregation is completed by an automatic system.

GRESB’s aggregation methodology will only be applicable at a fund level report, although fund of funds and financial market participants (FMPs) could theoretically connect to any of their underlying asset investments reporting on our platform. Like any methodology, where data gaps exist or coverage is limited, data download should help participants who wish to undertake the aggregation themselves.

Aggregation at the fund level is dependent on the following:

• That any underlying asset accepts a connection request from a fund

• That the underlying asset completes the assessment and submits their data

Asset-level information is aggregated only for those assets that were submitted before the connected fund.

Once all assets of the fund have been connected and submitted, the fund is in turn encouraged to submit.

Asset

The SFDR Infrastructure Asset Assessment consists of several aspects that a participant is required to report on, including:

• Entity and Reporting Characteristics;

• Climate and other environment-related indicators;

• Social and employee, respect for human rights, anti-corruption, and anti-bribery matters.

*Note that the term table is used as a reference point to the mandatory and optional indicators as per the template provided by the EU but that the SFDR assessment portal itself is not composed of ’’tables’’. The SFDR report will however be in table format.

The SFDR Assessment is broken into three parts to reflect the different tables of PAIs as outlined by the EU documentation. These three tables are detailed as follows.

Table 1: Mandatory climate and other environment-related indicators, Social and employee, respect for human rights, anti-corruption and anti-bribery matters.

Table 1 focuses on environmental and social indicators applicable to investments in investee companies that have to be disclosed by financial market participants, these are considered as part of the mandatory indicators that have to be reported on.

Table 1 consists of 14 indicators across 5 aspects:

• Greenhouse Gas Emissions

• Biodiversity;

• Water;

• Waste;

• Social and Employee matters.

Table 2: Additional climate and other environment-related indicators.

These are considered to be optional although participants are encouraged to report on at least one of those indicators so financial market participants can abide by regulatory requirements.

Table 2 consists of 16 indicators across 4 aspects:

• Emissions;

• Energy Performance;

• Water, waste and material emissions;

• Green Securities.

Table 3: Additional indicators for social and employee, respect for human rights, anti-corruption and anti-bribery matters.

These are considered to be optional although participants are encouraged to report on at least one of those indicators so financial market participants can abide by regulatory requirements.

Table 3 consists of 17 indicators across 3 aspects:

• Social and employee matters;

• Human rights;

• Anti-corruption and anti-bribery.