How to use it
Take it as a skeleton, not a script. The modules are sequenced so each depends only on the ones before it, the assessment questions are all answerable from the linked pages, and the contact times are planning estimates rather than promises. Adapt, reorder, cut, or co-brand it — no permission needed and no attribution required. If you teach BRSR and something here is wrong or missing, that is the most useful thing you could tell us.
It carries no certification and no accreditation, and it is not affiliated with any institute or training body. It is a course outline built from public regulation and this site's own reference pages.
The modules
01
Who has to file, and what they file
45 minBy the end: Decide whether a given company owes a BRSR at all, which parts of it, and from which financial year.
Why here: Everything downstream is wasted effort if applicability is wrong. It is also the question consultants are asked first and most often.
Hands-on
BRSR applicability check →Run three companies through it: a top-1000 listed filer, an unlisted supplier to one, and a company outside the value chain. Note where the obligations differ.
Check they got it
- ·Which companies are inside the BRSR mandate, and which threshold decides it?
- ·What is the difference between BRSR, BRSR Core and BRSR Essential, and who owes which?
- ·A listed client's unlisted supplier is asked for data. On what basis, and is the supplier itself a filer?
02
Sections A and B: the entity, and its nine policies
60 minBy the end: Assemble the general disclosures and assess whether a client's NGRBC policy set actually covers all nine principles.
Why here: Sections A and B are not gap-analysed the way Section C is, so they get skipped in teaching — then block the filing at the end. Policies also recur year to year, which makes them the easiest part to get right once.
Check they got it
- ·Name the nine NGRBC principles without looking, then check yourself against the glossary.
- ·A client has one combined sustainability policy. What has to be true for it to satisfy Section B?
- ·Which Section A disclosures come from the annual report rather than from the sustainability team?
03
Principle 6, part one: energy and greenhouse gases
120 minBy the end: Compute Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions from a client's actual bills, state the factor and its source, and explain why the number is defensible.
Why here: The most asked-for and most often wrong numbers in the whole report, and the ones every other framework also wants. Teach these properly and the rest of P6 is method, not mystery.
Hands-on
Scope 1 & 2 calculator →Take one month of a real electricity bill and one diesel invoice. Produce a tCO2e figure, then write the one sentence that says which factor you used and where it comes from. An answer without that sentence is not assurance-ready.
Check they got it
- ·Why does grid electricity sit in Scope 2 rather than Scope 1?
- ·Which CEA grid emission factor version did you use, and why does the version matter?
- ·A client reports emissions intensity but not absolute emissions. What is missing and why does it matter?
04
Principle 6, part two: water, waste and air
90 minBy the end: Build the water balance, the waste split and the non-GHG air figures, and say for each whether it is metered, computed or estimated.
Why here: These are where assurance most often fails, because withdrawal, consumption and discharge get conflated and waste streams get double-counted.
Check they got it
- ·Withdrawal minus discharge should equal consumption. When it does not, what are the legitimate reasons?
- ·A client has ZLD at one of four plants. How is that disclosed without overstating coverage?
- ·Which of these figures can be metered, and which are necessarily estimates? Say so in the disclosure.
05
Principle 6, part three: sensitive areas, assessments and compliance
60 minBy the end: Handle the qualitative end of P6: operations near ecologically sensitive areas, impact assessments, and the compliance record.
Why here: Mostly narrative rather than numeric, which learners find harder, not easier. A vague answer here is what auditors query first.
Check they got it
- ·What makes an area 'ecologically sensitive' for this disclosure, and who determines it?
- ·A client had one environmental penalty three years ago, since resolved. Is it disclosed?
- ·How would you evidence that value-chain partners were assessed, rather than merely asked?
06
The social principles: employees and human rights
120 minBy the end: Collect the workforce and human-rights disclosures, and recognise where the honest answer is a number the client does not yet track.
Why here: The social principles carry more disclosures than P6 and get a fraction of the teaching, largely because the data sits with HR rather than EHS and nobody has asked for it in this shape before.
Hands-on
Wellbeing schedule →Fill it for a mid-size manufacturer. Mark every cell where the number would have to come from HR rather than from a filing, and note who you would have to ask.
Check they got it
- ·Which of these disclosures need a headcount split the client's payroll may not produce?
- ·What distinguishes a human-rights due-diligence process from a policy statement?
- ·A client has no POSH complaints recorded. What are the two possible readings, and how would you tell them apart?
07
Collect once, report to several frameworks
90 minBy the end: Take a set of BRSR figures and say, for each, which GRI, TCFD, IFRS, CDP or EcoVadis requirement it also answers.
Why here: Clients reporting under several frameworks are asked for the same number repeatedly. Seeing the overlap is what turns BRSR from a compliance chore into the spine of a reporting programme.
Hands-on
Framework crosswalk →Pick five P6 disclosures and list every other framework that wants the same figure. Note where the overlap is exact and where the definitions differ enough to need a restatement.
Check they got it
- ·Which BRSR disclosures have no GRI counterpart, and why might that be?
- ·CDP has no waste module. What does that imply for a client reporting to both?
- ·Give one case where two frameworks want the same metric but define its boundary differently.
08
Making it survive assurance
90 minBy the end: Judge whether a completed disclosure would pass reasonable assurance, and fix the ones that would not.
Why here: The last module because it is a way of re-reading everything already built. BRSR Core assurance is where under-evidenced numbers surface, and it is the part clients are least prepared for.
Hands-on
Assurance readiness check →Run a completed P6 set through it. For every figure, produce the source document, the person who owns it, and the date. Anything without all three is not ready, however correct the number is.
Check they got it
- ·What does an assurance provider ask for beyond the number itself?
- ·Why is reasonable assurance a higher bar than limited, and which does BRSR Core require?
- ·A figure is correct but its only evidence is a spreadsheet someone typed. What is the problem?