Cdp Disclosure

CDP Real Estate Disclosure

Help an institutional real estate owner complete and improve their CDP response using data already in the Soapbox platform.

Version discipline — read first

CDP restructures its questionnaire periodically (the 2024 reform merged climate, water, and forests into one integrated corporate questionnaire with numbered modules and sector-specific questions). Do not rely on memorized question IDs. At the start of any engagement:

1. Ask which reporting year and questionnaire track applies (full corporate vs SME).
2. Fetch the current year's questionnaire structure and real-estate sector questions — from the user's CDP portal export if available, else web-search CDP's published questionnaire and scoring methodology for that year, and cite what you used.
3. Anchor all mapping to the themes in references/data-map.md, then bind them to the current year's actual question numbers.

Workflow

1. Scope the response

• Reporting boundary: which entities/funds/portfolios; operational vs equity control (align with the boundary used in GHG accounting — cross-check the scope3-accounting skill's output if present).
• Prior submissions: last year's response and score if available (baseline for YoY).
• Deadline and track (investor-requested vs voluntary; full vs SME).

2. Map platform data to questionnaire themes

Work through references/data-map.md theme by theme. For each theme record: { theme, current-year question refs, answer draft, data source, confidence, gaps }. Key mappings:

• Emissions inventory → scope3-accounting skill (Scope 1/2/3, PCAF Category 13/15)
• Energy → ESPM / Arcadia / utility data; portfolio EUI and fuel mix
• Targets & transition plan → CRREM pathway alignment, committed decarb plans (Audette roadmaps), interim targets
• Risks & opportunities → physical risk MCPs + TCFD/ISSB work (CDP is TCFD-aligned; reuse the tcfd-reporting skill's scenario analysis if present)
• Governance, strategy, engagement → user-provided; draft from org documents on file
• Water/waste (real estate sector) → utility data where metered; else flag as gap

3. Validate against scoring levels

For each answered theme, assess which CDP scoring level the draft supports: Disclosure (question answered) → Awareness (impacts assessed) → Management (actions, targets, governance in place) → Leadership (best practice: verified data, science-based targets, value-chain engagement). Produce a gap table: what one concrete addition moves each theme up a level. Flag hard blockers for high scores (e.g. third-party verification of emissions data is required for top bands — Soapbox's verifier findings ledger is supporting evidence, not a substitute for external assurance).

4. Export

CDP submissions go through CDP's own portal — there is no public write API. Export as:

• A submission workbook: one row per question — question ref, drafted answer, source citation, confidence, reviewer sign-off column (XLSX via mila/report tooling, or markdown table).
• Copy-paste-ready answer blocks per module, respecting CDP's character limits where the current questionnaire specifies them.

5. Year-over-year tracking

Store (in the portfolio memory / asset files): reporting year, submitted answers export, score received, and the gap table. On the next cycle, diff against it and lead with "what changed since last year" — CDP scoring rewards trajectory and consistency.

Rules

• Never invent question IDs, character limits, or scoring weights — bind to the current year's published questionnaire and cite it.
• Every quantitative answer carries source + method (same discipline as GRESB/TCFD skills).
• Emissions numbers must reconcile with the scope3-accounting output — if they diverge, stop and resolve before drafting.
• Recommend external verification early if the user targets Management/Leadership bands.