We just completed our framework reporting mini webinar series, starting with CDP — you can see the blog recap here. CDP’s 2025 disclosure cycle emphasizes continuity—but don’t mistake that for status quo. While the structure and number of data points remain largely stable, there are strategic refinements that every company should be aware of—especially when it comes to how your performance is scored.
If your business reports environmental data through CDP—or works with clients that do—here’s what you need to know.
1. Scoring: Stability with subtle shifts
CDP will continue to score companies separately across climate change, forests, and water security in 2025. Plastics and biodiversity disclosures remain unscored, but companies are encouraged to start tracking and reporting this data in preparation for future accountability.
The scoring methodology itself is holding steady, but refinements for clarity and consistency have been introduced. That means the bar isn’t necessarily higher, but it’s becoming clearer—and easier to measure against.
Companies that receive C or higher scores should be especially alert. Many now must meet expectations for essential criteria previously reserved for top-tier responders. If you’ve been aiming for a B or A score, now’s the time to refine your disclosures and verification practices accordingly.
2. Questionnaire integration: A unified format
Following the 2024 consolidation of CDP’s climate, forests, and water questionnaires into a single integrated structure, the 2025 version retains this format. While that simplifies reporting, it also demands cross-functional coordination across teams (e.g., finance, operations, procurement) to ensure consistent, accurate responses.
Not every company is required to respond to every environmental theme:
- All full disclosers must report on climate change, plastics, and biodiversity.
- Forests and water are requested based on industry classification, supply chain requests, or self-assessment.
Notably, opting out of a relevant module when eligible can negatively affect your CDP score—so alignment across teams and early decision-making is key.
3. Module-level changes that matter
While most modules remain structurally consistent, several updates may affect how companies prepare and present data:
- Module 1: Introduction
- Currency reporting (Q1.2) is now mandatory.
- Clearer guidance on aligning CDP reporting boundaries with financial statements.
- Module 5: Business strategy
- CDP now recognizes questionnaire responses as evidence of a climate transition plan, though mainstream reporting is still preferred.
- New guidance on targets, capital expenditure, and capacity building.
- Module 7: Climate performance
- Improved alignment with the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (ICVCM).
- Verification questions now allow multiple document uploads for ease.
- Modules 8 & 9: Forests and water
- Only minor guidance updates and better dropdown logic, but these still affect scoring if disclosures are incomplete or misaligned.
- Module 12: Financial services
- Scoring questions remain unchanged but are now more tailored to relevant portfolios with enhanced definitions (e.g., taxonomy-aligned assets, deforestation, nature-based solutions).
- Scoring questions remain unchanged but are now more tailored to relevant portfolios with enhanced definitions (e.g., taxonomy-aligned assets, deforestation, nature-based solutions).
4. SME questionnaire: Still an on-ramp, but standards are tightening
The simplified SME questionnaire remains available for companies below the headcount and revenue thresholds (typically under $250 million in annual revenue). While the format is stable, the expectations for future readiness are rising.
If you’re currently using the SME version, consider this your signal to begin preparing for the full corporate questionnaire in the near term—especially as clients and investors demand more complete data.
What it means for businesses
For companies already engaged in environmental disclosure, the 2025 CDP updates won’t feel seismic. But they do reflect a maturing framework—one where consistency, completeness, and verification are no longer aspirational; they’re expected.
Whether you’re aiming for a better score, preparing to transition out of SME status, or just want to ensure compliance, now’s the time to review:
- Your internal reporting boundaries
- Third-party verification of Scope 1 and 2 (and ideally Scope 3)
- Readiness to disclose across plastics and biodiversity, even if not yet scored
And as always, maintaining an accurate carbon inventory—and being ready to tell a coherent story with your data—remains your best defense against reputational and regulatory risk.
