Concordia University
OP-9: Sustainable Procurement System
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
|
1.72 / 7.00 |
Caroline
Bogner Senior Director Procurement Services |
9.1 Supplier code of conduct
Copy of the institution’s supplier code of conduct:
Online location of the institution’s supplier code of conduct:
Does the institution’s supplier code of conduct include one or more expectations in regard to environmental impact that exceed or are additional to regulatory compliance?:
Does the institution’s supplier code of conduct include one or more expectations in regard to the treatment of workers that exceed or are additional to regulatory compliance?:
Does the institution’s supplier code of conduct include one or more expectations in regard to governance and ethical business practices that exceed or are additional to regulatory compliance?:
Does the institution’s supplier code of conduct include one or more expectations in regard to the advancement of sustainability in the supply chain?:
Does the institution’s supplier code of conduct include one or more expectations of monitoring and review?:
The Reporting Tool will automatically calculate the following figure:
9.2 Percentage of bid solicitations that identify sustainability considerations
Percentage of bid solicitations that identify product sustainability specifications:
Percentage of bid solicitations that identify supplier sustainability considerations:
Description of the methodology used to assess the institution’s bid solicitations:
Using data from SEAO from October 2023 through September 2024. Mid 2023, SEAO began tracking sustainability indicators. In the above period, 50 calls for public tender were issued, 26 were identified to have sustainability indicators. Therefore, 52% of Concordia’s Calls for Public Tenders identified sustainability considerations.
Senior buyers were consulted.
If claiming points for this indicator, at least one of the following two fields is also required:
Document supporting the percentage of bid solicitations reported:
The Reporting Tool will automatically calculate the following figure:
9.3 Average weight given to sustainability considerations in bid appraisal
Average weight assigned to supplier sustainability considerations in the institution’s bid appraisal process:
Narrative outlining how the average weights given to sustainability considerations were determined:
The average weight given to sustainability considerations is 10% (marge preferentielle) for all public tenders selected on quality. 11 of the calls for public tender were selected based on quality. Therefore, the weighted average given to sustainability considerations in bid appraisals is 5.5%.
The Reporting Tool will automatically calculate the following figure:
9.4 Percentage of contract spend with social impact suppliers
Performance year for contract spend:
Local currency code:
Total annual contract spend:
Annual contract spend with social impact suppliers:
Narrative and/or website URL providing an a overview of the institution’s contracts with social impact suppliers:
Description of the methodology used to assess the institution’s contract spend with social impact suppliers:
The Reporting Tool will automatically calculate the following two figures:
Points earned for indicator 9.4:
Optional documentation
Additional documentation for this credit:
The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution or simply email your inquiry to stars@aashe.org.