E-01. ESG STAR STANDARD — EVIDENCE PROTOCOL V1.0 ================================================ Template to be completed and adopted by the parties; requires legal and tax review for each specific implementation. - Version: 1.0 - Date drafted: 25 September 2026 - Status: template to be completed and adopted - Operator: [TO BE COMPLETED] - Approved by: [TO BE COMPLETED] - Date adopted: [TO BE COMPLETED] - Date of application: [TO BE COMPLETED] Scope: Assessment of evidence quality within a defined scope of an organisation. The matrix and thresholds are a proprietary proposal, not a reproduction of an ISO standard or statutory requirements. Related Q&A: Q&A: ESG Star 1–5, 9 — https://tardigrada.ai/qa ID | Subject | Metric and unit | Example evidence | Thematic reference E1 | Energy | kWh/period; kWh/unit of product or service | Invoices, meter readings, production data, measurement boundaries | VSME E2 | GHG emissions | tCO2e/period; stated scopes and emission categories | Activity data, factors with version and source, method | VSME E3 | Materials, water, waste | kg of material and waste; m³ of water; documented treatment route | Records, measurements, transfer documents | VSME S1 | Occupational safety | Number of accidents; rate with a stated hours-worked denominator | Incident and working-time records, corrective actions | VSME; SDG 3 S2 | Equality | Representation in %; pay gap in % with defined population and pay | Aggregated HR data, disclosed method | VSME; SDG 5, 10 S3 | Education | Hours/person; change in skills test result | Training records, before/after assessment | VSME; SDG 4 S4 | Accessibility and inclusion | Number of barriers identified/removed; scope assessed | Accessibility audit, evidence of fixes, user feedback | ISO 26000; SDG 10 S5 | Partnership outcomes | Number of unique beneficiaries and a defined outcome | Outcome measurement, period, partner contributions | ISO 26000; SDG 17 G1 | Governance accountability | Share of objectives with owner, deadline and review | Resolutions, responsibility matrix, minutes | ISO 26000 G2 | Ethics and conflicts | Number of reports, handling time, disclosed conflicts and recusals | Procedures, anonymised log, decisions | ISO 26000 G3 | Suppliers | % of suppliers covered by risk assessment with a defined denominator | Assessments, selection rationale, remediation plans | ISO 26000 G4 | Data quality | % of indicators with complete source, method, period and owner | E-04 cards, data versions, correction history | VSME; ISO/IEC 17029 principles Each metric is interpreted in the context of sector, size, operational boundaries and base year. An increase or decrease in ethics reports is not on its own evidence of improvement or deterioration. The standard does not require publishing sensitive personal data; S data is presented in aggregated form. Evidence assessment (for each criterion separately): 0 — no data; 1 — declaration with a responsible person; 2 — documented measurement with method and period; 3 — independently verified evidence within a defined scope. "Not applicable" requires justification and the verifier's approval. Missing data remains missing data, not zero impact. Conditions for a complete pilot report: all 12 criteria have a status and a card; every criterion material to the scope reaches at least level 2; any claim presented publicly as independently verified reaches level 3 in the relevant scope. Materiality is justified before the assessment and recorded in the report. Failing a condition leads to a gap report, not a positive confirmation of completeness. Critical breaches and an unresolved suspicion of fabrication block a positive decision. Interpretation: the evidence level is not an ethical judgement of the company. The protocol does not add results up into stars or a rating. A favourable environmental result does not offset violations of human rights or governance principles. A report does not entitle anyone to a designation without E-03 and fulfilment of L-01. References: VSME serves to organise information; ISO 26000 provides guidance; ISO/IEC 17029 concerns the principles of verification bodies. Linking to these sources does not prove conformity or accreditation. The SDGs are a map of goals, not proof of effect. Statutory reporting obligations (including ESRS) are determined separately according to the specific organisation's obligations. SOURCES ======= 3. Commission Recommendation (EU) 2025/1710 — VSME (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reco/2025/1710/oj) — Voluntary sustainability reporting for SMEs. The identity and subject of the document were checked; no compliance audit of the whole matrix against every VSME disclosure was performed. 4. ISO 26000 — social responsibility (https://www.iso.org/iso-26000-social-responsibility.html) — ISO describes the standard as guidance, not a basis for certification. 5. ISO/IEC 17029 — verification principles (https://www.iso.org/news/ref2448.html) — Official description of competence, impartiality and consistency of verification bodies; TarDigRada has not been assessed against the full standard. 6. Directive (EU) 2024/825 (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/825/oj) — EU date of application of the transposing measures: 27 September 2026. The status of Polish transposition was not verified at the date of drafting. Requirements for labels and claims must be addressed before any designation is launched. 7. Regulation (EU) 2024/3005 — ESG ratings (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/3005/oj) — The ESG Star model requires individual qualification; this document does not determine whether it is in or out of scope. Public sources are substantive references. They do not imply patronage, accreditation or endorsement of the project. Before signing, the templates must be completed and checked against the specific business. Project and content author: Ada Margo — TarDigRada.ai