♻️ Trash-to-Cashback · Institution ESG layer

Concentrix Eco-Warriors
Recycling & Circular-Impact Report

2021 – 2026 · 18 NCR sites

DRAFT · external assurance sign-off pending

⚠️ Internal use only — not for external reporting without written permission (BEST · bXTRA PH · Concentrix) + accuracy sign-off.

A board-ready disclosure of measured waste diverted from disposal across Concentrix's Philippine sites, with a strictly-separated carbon view. Built to under-claim: we report the hard diverted mass first, an inventory line second, and any avoided-emissions figure as a clearly-labelled estimate — never as a tradable credit.

~149 t

recovered & recycled · measured (GRI 306-4)

Concentrix NCR sites · 8 cities

361,963

Environmental Points issued

💡 Who this is for & how to read it. Written for Concentrix HR, ESG and leadership — no sustainability-jargon required. Each technical section has a green 💡 In plain terms note that explains it in one line; the formal framework wording sits right next to it so auditors get the rigor and everyone else gets the plain version. The one number to trust most is the measured tonnes recycled; the carbon figures are reported as three separate numbers we never add together — that's deliberate, and explained in §3. A Glossary / acronyms sits at the end.

“Saving the Environment While Helping the Community, One Recyclable at a Time!” · Powered by PASUYO for Business of bXTRA PH · More redemption outlets → bxtra.ph
Data of record: BEST Trash-to-Cashback ledger (measured deposits, 2021–2026).
Frameworks: GRI 306-4 (Waste 2020) · GHG Protocol Scope 3 Cat. 5 · EPA WARM v15/16 · EPA GHG Emission Factors Hub 2024 · UK DEFRA 2024 (v1.1) · PH SEC MC4 s.2019 / MC16 s.2025 (PFRS S1–S2).
Reporting period 2021–Jun 2026. 2022 export = January-only (partial — not annualized). Status: DRAFT pending limited assurance.

1. Executive summary

The headline is a measured mass, not a model. Across 18 Concentrix NCR sites over 2021–2026, the BEST Trash-to-Cashback ledger records ~149 tonnes of office paper, corrugated carton, metal and PET diverted from disposal through recycling — a directly-measured figure (GRI 306-4), not an estimate.

SOURCE-SEGREGATED CONTAMINATION-FREE RECYCLING-READY

The number is credible because of how it is captured. Materials are segregated at the source by eco-warriors — clean, dry, sorted by type before they ever mix with general waste. They skip the 16–50% contamination loss typical of commingled recycling (UF / FL DEP MRF Contamination Report 2020; NWRA via FiveThirtyEight 2019), so they arrive recycling-ready and are genuinely remanufactured into new products. We therefore count avoided emissions only on verified-recycled tonnage. Segregation-at-source is also Philippine law (RA 9003, Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000, §21), so the program is compliance-aligned by construction.

Integrity posture — we under-claim. This report keeps three carbon numbers strictly separate and never sums them: ① the diverted mass (measured), ② a small recycling-process emissions line that belongs in the inventory (≈13 t CO₂e), and ③ a separately-reported avoided-emissions estimate shown as a range with its conservative floor first. The avoided figure is an estimate, not a tradable, owned or sellable carbon credit, and is never deducted from any Scope total.

💡 In plain terms We show three separate climate numbers on purpose and never add them together — that's the honest way to report what recycling does for the planet. One is a hard measured weight, one is the tiny CO₂ the recycling itself causes, and the big one is an estimate of CO₂ the world avoided — and that estimate is never a "carbon credit" we can sell.

What the program demonstrates	Figure	Basis
Waste diverted from disposal (recycling, offsite, non-haz)	~149 t	GRI 306-4 · measured · BEST ledger
Sites engaged across Metro Manila & Laguna	18	BEST per-branch attribution
Environmental Points issued to warriors	361,963	BEST ledger (measured)
Recycling-process emissions (inventory line)	≈ 13 t CO₂e	GHG Scope 3 Cat. 5 · EPA Hub 2024 Table 9
Estimated avoided emissions (reported separately)	≈ 68 – 455 t CO₂e	EPA WARM v15/16 (A) · DEFRA 2024 floor (B) — estimate, not a credit

All measured figures lineage to the BEST Trash-to-Cashback ledger (per-deposit weights stamped to the org tree at verification). Modeled figures (CO₂e) are derived at read-time from measured material grams × cited factors. Measured ≠ modeled — treated differently throughout.

2. GRI 306-4 — Waste diverted from disposal

GRI 306-4 reports the mass of waste kept out of disposal, broken down by composition, recovery operation, and onsite/offsite. For Concentrix all recovery is non-hazardous · Recycling · offsite (third-party). Units are metric tonnes (t) (GRI 306: Waste 2020, clause 2.2 — 1,000 kg = 1 t).

Basis: GRI 306-4 · measured · BEST Trash-to-Cashback ledger · 2021–2026 · 18 NCR sites · non-hazardous, Recycling, offsite. Preparation-for-reuse and other-recovery = 0 (not tracked).

💡 In plain terms This is the hard, measured number — how many tonnes of office waste we kept out of the landfill by recycling it. It's weighed on a scale at every drop-off, not estimated. If you only read one figure in this report, read this one.

2.1 By material composition (GRI 306-4-a / -c-ii)

Material (composition)	Diverted (t)	Share	Recovery operation
Office / mixed paper & corrugated carton	129.6	86.9%	Recycling · offsite
PET plastics	13.9	9.3%	Recycling · offsite
Metal (tin / steel)	5.7	3.8%	Recycling · offsite
Glass	0.03	<0.1%	Recycling · offsite
TOTAL recycled (non-haz, offsite)	149.2	100%	Recycling · offsite

Contextual (306-4-e): direct measurements from the BEST T-t-C ledger (per-deposit weights by designated site-coordinator card). Onsite recovery = none. Hazardous diverted = none (treated as non-hazardous office streams). The ledger lumps office paper + carton into one fiber stream; a documented blended factor is used where carton must be split (see Methodology).

2.2 By site (GRI 306-4-d — offsite recovery, top sites)

Concentrix site	City	Diverted (t)
Glorietta 5	Makati	15.6
Tera Tower	Bridgetowne	15.0
Ayala North	Makati	13.9
SLC Makati	Makati	11.5
Exxa Tower	Bridgetowne	10.9

Full per-site breakdown across all 18 sites is available in the live dashboard. Smaller sites (North EDSA, Cubao, MOA) round to <3.5 t each.

2.3 Year-on-year (GRI 306-4 trend — supports a stated diversion target)

Year	Period	Diverted (t)	EP issued
2021	Mar–Dec	16.5	55,855
2022 ⚠️	Jan only	3.6	13,410
2023	full year	35.5	92,600
2024	full year	41.8	91,888
2025	full year	35.5	73,676
2026	Jan–Jun	16.5	34,724

⚠️ 2022 is a January-only export — a partial pull / program gap. Do not annualize it; real full-year 2022 recovery is higher. This is disclosed, not smoothed.

3. Carbon — three numbers, never netted

The carbon view renders three distinct figures. The separation is the integrity firewall: they answer different questions and are never summed or netted together (GHG Protocol Scope 3 Technical Guidance, Ch. 5; GRI 306-4).

💡 In plain terms Think of these as three answers to three different questions, kept in three separate boxes so nobody mixes them up: ① how much waste did we keep out of the bin? (a weight) · ② how much CO₂ did the recycling itself cause? (tiny) · ③ how much CO₂ did the world avoid by recycling instead of making things from scratch? (big, but an estimate). Adding them together would give a misleading number — so we never do.

① Waste diverted · MEASURED

~149 t

A mass kept out of disposal — the hard headline. Non-hazardous · Recycling · offsite.

Basis: GRI 306-4 · measured · BEST ledger 2021–2026 (18 sites; 2022 = Jan-only).

② Process emissions · INVENTORY (+)

≈ 13 t CO₂e

A small positive figure — the only carbon number that belongs inside an emissions inventory.

Basis: GHG Protocol Scope 3 Cat. 5 (formula 5.2) · EPA GHG Emission Factors Hub 2024, Table 9 "Recycled" column · excludes avoided emissions · t→short-ton converted (÷0.90718).

💡 In plain terms The small bit of CO₂ from the recycling process itself (trucking, sorting, reprocessing). It's the only carbon number here that belongs inside an official emissions tally — and it's tiny.

③ ⚠️ Estimated AVOIDED emissions · reported SEPARATELY

≈ 68 – 455 t CO₂e

Conservative floor ≈ 68 t (boundary B, DEFRA mfg-only) shown next to the ~455 t headline (boundary A, EPA WARM). Never shown as "455 t" alone.

ESTIMATE — not a tradable / owned / sellable carbon credit

Basis: EPA WARM v15/16, boundary A (recycling vs virgin production, incl. forest carbon); conservative floor = DEFRA 2024 (v1.1) Material-use diff, boundary B (manufacturing-only). US factors applied to PH waste → directional only, not a precise PH value. Reported separately — never deducted from any Scope 1/2/3 total.

💡 In plain terms An estimate of the CO₂ the world DIDN'T emit because we recycled instead of making paper, plastic and metal from scratch. It's a real benefit — but it's an estimate, and it's never a "carbon credit" you can sell. We show the cautious low end first (≈68 t) so the number is never oversold.

⚠️ Forest-carbon footnote (mandatory): ~97% of the paper/carton avoided-CO₂e under boundary A is modeled avoided forest-carbon sequestration, not avoided mill emissions (EPA WARM v15 Exhibit 3-17 component columns). This is the single most important under-claim — which is why the ~68 t manufacturing-only floor is shown alongside the headline.

💡 In plain terms Most of the paper/carton benefit assumes trees keep storing carbon because we didn't cut them down for new paper. It's a recognised, standard method — but it's the biggest assumption in the whole report, so we also show a conservative low estimate that leaves it out.

Illustrative equivalencies

Translated from the boundary-A estimate via the EPA Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator (Calculations & References). Illustrative only — they carry the same estimate-not-credit caveat as ③, and scale with whichever end of the 68–455 t range is used.

~99passenger cars off the road for a year (≈4.6 t CO₂e/car/yr)

~7,500tree-seedlings grown for 10 years (≈0.06 t CO₂e/seedling)

Why three numbers. ① answers "how much did we keep out of disposal?" (a mass). ② answers "what did treating that waste emit?" (small positive, inside the inventory). ③ answers "what did recycling-vs-virgin avoid?" (large, reported separately, never subtracted from a Scope total). Mixing them is the #1 way ESG numbers become wrong — so this report keeps them apart on purpose.

Carbon-credit readiness (gated, watch-only). ~149 t over five years is below standalone-project materiality, and an office program is almost certainly non-additional (RA 9003 already mandates segregation). This is an ESG avoided-emissions story + readiness pathway — keep the auditable ledger; revisit only as an aggregated multi-institution program — not a creditable project today.

4. Source-segregation integrity statement

This is why the number is defensible, not greenwashing. The avoided-emissions claim is honest only for material that is genuinely remanufactured — and source separation is exactly what makes that true.

💡 In plain terms Because our eco-warriors sort the recycling cleanly at the desk — not all-mixed-in-one-bin — almost none of it gets thrown away at the sorting plant. That's why we're allowed to count the climate benefit on it: we only count what actually gets turned into new products, not what gets collected and then rejected.

♻ Source-segregated by eco-warrior → 🧼 Clean capture uncontaminated → 📦 Recycling-ready high real yield → 🔄 Remanufactured product closed loop

Skips the contamination funnel. Single-stream contamination runs ~16–25%+ of inbound tonnage and spikes to 50% on bad loads; whole loads can be rejected once contamination crosses a threshold (UF / FL DEP MRF Contamination Report 2020; NWRA via FiveThirtyEight 2019). Source-separated material never enters that loss funnel.
Counted on verified-recycled tonnage only. We apply WARM recycling factors to what is actually recovered and remanufactured — not to gross collection that would be downcycled or rejected. That is the integrity hinge.
Compliance-aligned by construction. RA 9003 §21 mandates waste segregation at source for commercial/industrial generators in the Philippines — the program does exactly what the law requires.

What each clean, source-separated stream becomes (the closed loop)

Material (our stream)	What it becomes	Loop reality
Carton / office & white paper ~129.6 t	New containerboard & paperboard	Closed-loop, high yield
PET bottles ~13.9 t	New PET bottles / polyester fiber	Closed-loop when clean
Metal — tin / steel ~5.7 t	New metal cans & products	Closed-loop, recyclable indefinitely
Glass — clear bottles trace	New glass containers (if color-sorted)	Closed-loop only when source-separated

Sources: EPA Source Separation & Sustainable Materials Management hierarchy; Ellen MacArthur Foundation Circular Economy; AF&PA / Fibre Box Assoc. (fiber recovery); APR / ACS Sust. Chem. & Eng. 2018 (PET); Aluminum Assoc. (metals); Container Recycling Institute (glass). Full citations in the appendix.

5. Framework crosswalk

How this program maps to the recognized disclosure frameworks. The honest placement: it is a strong GRI 306-4 waste-diversion disclosure and an employee-engagement "S" story — not a core SASB metric for a BPO.

💡 In plain terms These are the disclosure rule-books big companies report against — GRI, PFRS S1/S2, CDP, SASB. This table simply shows which slot our recycling data plugs into in each one. The honest read: it's a strong fit for the waste & "people/engagement" sections, and we deliberately don't force it into slots where it doesn't belong (like SASB, where a BPO's real topics are data security and staff).

Framework	Where this program lands	What it supplies
GRI 306-4 (Waste 2020)	Waste diverted from disposal — recycling, offsite, non-haz	The hard headline: tonnes by material / site / year (this report §2)
GHG Protocol Scope 3, Cat. 5	Waste generated in operations (third-party recycling)	Small positive inventory line (≈13 t); avoided reported separately, never netted
PH SEC MC4 s.2019	Sustainability Report, Annex A — Materials / Waste / Emissions	Comply-or-explain template most PH institution clients are bound by
PH SEC MC16 s.2025 (PFRS S1 / S2)	Entity-specific material topic (S1) + climate metrics (S2)	ISSB-aligned, phased FY2026+; recycling as an entity-specific E disclosure
CDP	Waste / circular-economy & plastics module (Scope 3)	Measured diversion + PET volumes; avoided CO₂e flagged as estimate (not inflating verified Scope 1/2)
SASB Professional & Commercial Services	Not a core metric — BPO material issues are data security & human capital	Best framed as employee-engagement evidence (the "S") via IFRS/PFRS S1, not forced into an environmental SASB slot

Filing-entity strategy — attach to existing targets. Concentrix's parent is NASDAQ-listed (CNXC), not a PH PLC, so PH SEC PLC rules bind the PH entity only by threshold. The highest-credibility move is to position this tonnage as PH-site evidence under Concentrix's existing public commitments — −27% emissions vs 2019, the 2030 −50% goal, and "One Earth, One Concentrix" — rather than asserting a new claim or a specific filing obligation. Substantiate an existing target; confirm the filing entity per client.

Sources: GRI 306: Waste 2020; GHG Protocol Scope 3 Standard + Tech Guidance Ch.5; SEC MC No. 4 s.2019 & MC No. 16 s.2025 (PFRS S1/S2); CDP integrated questionnaire 2024; SASB Professional & Commercial Services Standard; Concentrix 2024 ESG / 2025 Sustainability Report. Full URLs in the appendix.

6. Known limitations & gaps

Disclosed, not hidden. Under-claiming is the posture — these are the boundaries of what the data supports.

Item	Limitation	How we handle it
GRI 306-3 (total waste generated)	Total waste & full composition are not instrumented — the ledger only sees the diverted-to-recycling side	Disclosed as a gap; not estimated. Diversion rate not asserted.
GRI 306-5 (waste directed to disposal)	Waste-to-landfill / incineration is not instrumented (needs facility waste-bin data)	Disclosed as a gap; not guessed.
2022 period	Export covers January only — a partial pull / program gap	Shown as Jan-only; not annualized. Real full-year 2022 is higher.
Emission factors	EPA WARM / Hub factors are US grid & US recycling infrastructure; PH conditions differ	Avoided figure labelled directional only; IPCC 2006 Vol.5 preferred for a PH inventory line.
Avoided emissions ③	A modeled WARM estimate vs a virgin/landfill baseline — assumption-laden; ~97% forest-carbon at boundary A	Shown as a range with the floor first; never a credit; never netted into a Scope total.
Paper / carton split	Ledger lumps office paper + corrugated carton into one fiber stream	A documented blended factor (~3.3) is used until the BEST material-type field is parsed.
Assurance	This is a DRAFT	External limited assurance is pending before any filing-grade use.

Net effect on credibility: every gap above shrinks the claim or flags an estimate — none inflates the headline. The measured diverted mass (§2) stands on its own and is the figure to rely on.

7. Methodology & sources appendix

7.1 Data lineage

Source of record = the BEST "Trash to Cashback" ledger (Company Reports CO_CONCENTRIX_2021…2026). Per-deposit weights by material are stamped to the org tree (Institution → City → Building → Department → Employee) at verification time — the same append-only ledger that issues Environmental Points. The institution layer never creates EP; it only attributes a real, already-verified recovery. Live figures in this report are pulled from the hosted PASUYO institution API (/institutions/inst_concentrix/rollup & /leaderboard); modeled CO₂e is derived at read-time from measured material grams × the factors below.

7.2 Emission factors (with version + year)

Use	Material	Factor	Source · version · year
Inventory line ② MT CO₂e / short ton	Mixed paper (offices)	0.03	EPA GHG Emission Factors Hub, Feb 2024, Table 9 "Recycled" column (excludes avoided). Underlying: EPA WARM Dec 2023.
	Corrugated carton	0.11
	Mixed metals / steel	0.23 / 0.32
	PET / glass	0.23 / 0.05
Avoided estimate ③ · boundary A kg CO₂e / kg recycled	Office / mixed paper	3.15	EPA WARM v15 (Nov 2020), values unchanged through v16 (Dec 2023) for our materials — Exhibits 3-17 (paper), 2-17 (metals), 5-11 (plastics), 1-14 (glass). Negative WARM sign = net reduction; stored as positive avoided.
	Corrugated carton	3.46
	PET	1.15
	Steel / tin	2.02
	Glass · aluminum	0.31 · 10.06
Avoided floor ③ · boundary B kg CO₂e / kg	Paper/board (mfg-only)	~0.10–0.30	UK DEFRA/DESNZ GHG Conversion Factors 2024 (v1.1, Oct 2024), "Material use" sheet — primary minus closed-loop-source. Excludes forest carbon → the conservative floor.

Conversion: kg CO₂e/kg = |MT CO₂e/short ton| × 1.10231 (1 short ton = 907.18 kg). The ~455 t boundary-A figure ÷ the conservative ~68 t boundary-B floor differ almost entirely by modeled forest-carbon sequestration (~97% of the paper/carton high end). Equivalencies via EPA GHG Equivalencies Calculator.

💡 In plain terms — "boundaries A / B / C" These are just different ways of drawing the line on what counts as an avoided emission. Boundary A counts the most (including the trees-keep-storing-carbon benefit); boundary B counts only the factory/manufacturing savings (the cautious floor we lead with); boundary C variants sit in between. Same recycling, different yardstick — we report the conservative one first.

7.2b Worked calculation — how the ~455 t is derived (auditable)

Formula (boundary A): avoided tCO₂e = Σ_materials ( mass_tonnes × WARM net factor_{kg CO₂e per kg} ), factors from §7.2 (WARM v15/16 exhibits; MT CO₂e/short ton × 1.10231 = kg/kg). Applied to the measured BEST-ledger tonnage:

Material	Mass (t)	× factor (kg CO₂e/kg)	= tCO₂e
Paper & carton	129.6	3.15 – 3.46	408 – 448
PET	13.9	1.15	16.0
Steel / tin	5.7	2.02	11.5
Glass	0.033	0.31	0.01
Total (boundary A)	149.2	—	≈ 436 – 476 · headline 455

Paper is ~90% of the total and swings it by paper-type assumption — office paper (3.15) → ~436 t · corrugated (3.46) → ~476 t · a documented blended ~3.30 → the ~455 t headline. Non-paper is fixed. Conservative boundary-B floor ≈ 68 t (DEFRA, manufacturing-only, excludes forest carbon). WARM signs are net-negative (a reduction); stored as positive avoided. Independently recomputed and cross-checked against the EPA WARM v16 exhibits on 2026-07-02 — no unit error; 455 sits mid-range. Energy equivalent corrected to ~590 MWh (~4,100 kWh/short-ton paper, EPA) from an earlier ~690.

7.3 Frameworks cited

GRI 306: Waste 2020 (effective 1 Jan 2022) — 306-3, 306-4, 306-5; units in metric tonnes.
GHG Protocol Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Standard + Technical Guidance Ch. 5 (Category 5, formula 5.2; avoided-emissions reported separately, 2022 ed.).
EPA WARM v15 (Nov 2020) & v16 (Dec 2023); EPA GHG Emission Factors Hub Feb 2024 Table 9; EPA GHG Equivalencies Calculator.
UK DEFRA/DESNZ GHG Conversion Factors 2024 (condensed set v1.1).
PH SEC MC No. 4 s.2019; MC No. 16 s.2025 (PFRS S1 / S2, ISSB-aligned).
CDP integrated questionnaire 2024; SASB Professional & Commercial Services Standard (ISSB).
RA 9003 Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000, §21 (segregation at source).
Contamination / recovery-yield evidence: UF / FL DEP MRF Contamination Report 2020; NWRA via FiveThirtyEight 2019; EPA Source Separation & SMM guidance; Ellen MacArthur Foundation; AF&PA / Fibre Box Assoc.; APR / ACS Sust. Chem. & Eng. 2018; Aluminum Assoc.; Container Recycling Institute.

7.3b Source references — live URLs (primary sources, verified 2026-07-02)

Emission-factor & accounting method:

EPA WARM — model versions (v16, Dec 2023): epa.gov/waste-reduction-model/versions-waste-reduction-model
EPA WARM v16 — background documentation (PDF): warm-background_v16_dec.pdf
EPA WARM — documentation chapters (per-material factors): epa.gov/waste-reduction-model/documentation-chapters…
EPA GHG Emission Factors Hub (inventory line, Table 9): epa.gov/climateleadership/ghg-emission-factors-hub
EPA GHG Equivalencies Calculator — calculations & references: epa.gov/energy/…equivalencies…
UK DEFRA/DESNZ GHG conversion factors 2024 (boundary-B floor): gov.uk/…conversion-factors-for-company-reporting
GHG Protocol — Scope 3 Technical Guidance, Ch.5 Waste (avoided emissions reported separately): ghgprotocol.org/…Ch5_GHGP_Tech.pdf

Frameworks / disclosure: GRI standards: globalreporting.org/standards (GRI 306: Waste 2020) · PH SEC MC No.4 s.2019: 2019MCNo4.pdf · RA 9003: lawphil.net/…ra_9003_2001

Carbon-credit non-eligibility (why this is ESG, not credits): Verra Plastic Waste Reduction Standard: verra.org/programs/plastic-waste-reduction-standard · PWRM0001 methodology (PDF): PWRM0001 v1.1 · CDM AMS-III.AJ (excludes already-recycled material): AMS-III.AJ · Carbon Market Watch on additionality: carbonmarketwatch.org

PH EPR context (Concentrix is NOT an obliged enterprise): EMB RA 11898: emb.gov.ph/ra-11898… · obliged-enterprise definition (PCX): pcxmarkets.com/…epr-law

Recovery-yield / contamination evidence (context / secondary — supports the source-segregation argument, not the headline figures): UF / FL DEP MRF Contamination Report 2020 · NWRA via FiveThirtyEight 2019 · EPA Source-Separation & SMM guidance · Ellen MacArthur Foundation · AF&PA / Fibre Box Assoc. · APR / ACS Sust. Chem. Eng. 2018 (PET) · Aluminum Assoc. · Container Recycling Institute. Cited by name; deep links maintained in docs/esg/SOURCE_SEGREGATED_ADVANTAGE.md & EMISSION_FACTORS.md. All primary URLs above HTTP-verified 2026-07-02 (Verra / EMB / LawPhil return 403 to automated checkers — bot-block, not dead; open in a browser).

7.3c Provenance & how to verify

No figure in this report relies on AI judgment. Every number is one of two things: (1) measured — a real weight from the BEST "Trash to Cashback" append-only ledger, reproducible from the raw deposits; or (2) derived — that measured mass multiplied by a public, third-party emission factor (EPA WARM / EPA Hub / DEFRA) whose exhibit, version and year are named in §7.2, using the arithmetic shown in §7.2b. Any reader can reproduce the CO₂e figure by hand from the tonnage and the cited factors — nothing is asserted on authority. Frameworks, factors and legal references are cited to their primary sources with live URLs (§7.3b). The tool that assembled this report is not itself a source and must not be cited as one; cite the underlying primary documents.

Status: DRAFT — external limited assurance pending. Money, carbon-credit claims, and client comms remain human-gated. Every figure is source-cited (framework / factor + version + year); the three carbon numbers are never summed or netted; the avoided estimate always shows its floor first and the not-a-credit label; known gaps are disclosed.

7.4 Glossary / acronyms — plain-language key

💡 Glossary / acronyms — tap to expand

GRI (and GRI 306-4): Global Reporting Initiative — the most widely-used sustainability reporting rule-book. 306-4 is its specific rule for "waste diverted from disposal" — i.e. how many tonnes you kept out of the landfill. This is our hard, measured headline.
GHG: Greenhouse Gas — the warming gases (mainly CO₂) that emissions accounting tracks. The "GHG Protocol" is the global rule-book for measuring a company's emissions.
Scope 3 (Category 5): The emissions a company causes indirectly through its value chain. Category 5 is "waste generated in operations" — for us, the small CO₂ from recycling our office waste. The only carbon number that belongs inside an official tally.
CO₂e: "Carbon-dioxide equivalent" — a single common unit that rolls all greenhouse gases into the warming impact of CO₂, so everything can be compared on one scale.
Avoided emissions: An estimate of CO₂ the world didn't emit because we recycled instead of making things from virgin materials. A real benefit — but an estimate, and never a sellable carbon credit.
EPA WARM: The US Environmental Protection Agency's "Waste Reduction Model" — a standard tool that estimates the climate benefit of recycling each material. We use it for the high-end avoided estimate.
Boundaries A / B / C: Different ways of drawing the line on what counts as an avoided emission. A counts the most (incl. forest carbon); B counts only manufacturing savings (our cautious floor). We lead with the conservative one.
Forest carbon: The carbon trees keep storing when they're not cut down for new paper. A recognised method, but the biggest assumption — so we also show a low estimate without it.
EP (Environmental Points): The reward points eco-warriors earn for every verified recyclable they deposit. A measured, ledger-backed count — not money and not a carbon credit.
PFRS S1 / S2: Philippine Financial Reporting Standards for sustainability (the local version of the global ISSB standards). S1 = general sustainability disclosures, S2 = climate-specific. Disclosure rule-books big PH-filing companies report against.
CDP: A global environmental-disclosure platform (formerly "Carbon Disclosure Project") where companies report climate, water and waste data to investors.
SASB: Industry-specific sustainability standards. For a BPO the core topics are data security and people — which is why we frame recycling as engagement evidence, not a forced SASB metric.
GRI 306-3 / 306-5: Sister rules to 306-4: total waste generated (306-3) and waste sent to disposal (306-5). We don't have full data for these yet, so we disclose them as honest gaps rather than guess.
RA 9003: The Philippine Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 — §21 requires sorting waste at the source, which is exactly what the program does.
BEST: The "Trash to Cashback" ledger that is our source of record — every recyclable is weighed and logged there before any number in this report is calculated.

ESG Report

Concentrix Eco-WarriorsRecycling & Circular-Impact Report

1. Executive summary

2. GRI 306-4 — Waste diverted from disposal

2.1 By material composition (GRI 306-4-a / -c-ii)

2.2 By site (GRI 306-4-d — offsite recovery, top sites)

2.3 Year-on-year (GRI 306-4 trend — supports a stated diversion target)

3. Carbon — three numbers, never netted

Illustrative equivalencies

4. Source-segregation integrity statement

What each clean, source-separated stream becomes (the closed loop)

5. Framework crosswalk

6. Known limitations & gaps

7. Methodology & sources appendix

7.1 Data lineage

7.2 Emission factors (with version + year)

7.2b Worked calculation — how the ~455 t is derived (auditable)

7.3 Frameworks cited

7.3b Source references — live URLs (primary sources, verified 2026-07-02)

7.3c Provenance & how to verify

7.4 Glossary / acronyms — plain-language key

Not enough Behavioral Points to unlock this

Concentrix Eco-Warriors
Recycling & Circular-Impact Report