Overall Rating Platinum
Overall Score 86.87
Liaison Carrie Metzgar
Submission Date Nov. 5, 2024

STARS v2.2

University of California, San Diego
PA-4: Reporting Assurance

Status Score Responsible Party
Complete 1.00 / 1.00 Carrie Metzgar
Campus Sustainability Officer
Utilities & Sustainability
"---" indicates that no data was submitted for this field

Please note that assured reports are still subject to review by AASHE staff prior to publication, which may require additional revisions. AASHE reserves the right to withhold points for this credit if it is determined that the assurance process was clearly unsuccessful in identifying and resolving inconsistencies or errors (e.g., when AASHE staff identify a significant number of issues that were either not mentioned in the completed review template or not resolved successfully).

Has the institution completed an assurance process that provides independent affirmation that the information in its current STARS report is reported in accordance with credit criteria?:
Yes

Did the assurance process include internal review, an external audit, or both?:
Internal review

The name, title, and organizational affiliation of each reviewer:

Reviewers:

  • Carrie Metzgar, Campus Sustainability Officer, Utilities & Sustainability
  • Mike Salisbury, Sustainability Data Analyst, Utilities & Sustainability
  • Michelle Perez, Energy and Sustainability Manager, Utilities & Sustainability
  • Jeff Gnann, Meter Reader/Analyst, Utilities & Sustainability
  • Carly Kupka, Campus Utilities & Energy Analyst, Utilities & Sustainability
  • Chris McMahon, Business Systems Analyst, Utilities & Sustainability
  • Hikari Nakamura, Administrative and Facilities Assistant, Utilities & Sustainability

A brief description of the institution’s assurance process:

After each credit was ready for review, the Responsible Party completes a self-check of the credit for completion, accuracy, and to ensure that common issues outlined by AASHE have been addressed. Then, an internal reviewer (“Reviewer #1”) -- who was not directly involved in the data collection process for that credit -- completes an additional review for completion, accuracy, and to check for common issues. They also have the option to include comments and suggestions for improvement. After this step, the Responsible Party has an opportunity to respond, addressing all suggestions and comments. If and as needed, an additional internal reviewer (“Reviewer #2”) -- who was not directly involved in the data collection process for that credit -- completes an additional review for completion, accuracy, and to check for common issues. After this step, the Responsible Party can again address all suggestions and comments. The credit is then marked completed. 


Affirmation from the reviewer(s) that the report has been reviewed in full and that all identified inconsistencies and errors have been successfully addressed prior to submitting it to AASH​E:
Completed STARS Review Template:

Optional

Affirmation from the reviewer(s) that the report has been reviewed in full and that all identified inconsistencies and errors have been successfully addressed prior to ​submitting it to AASHE (2nd review):
Completed STARS Review Template (2nd review):
---

Affirmation from the reviewer(s) that the report has been reviewed in full and that all identified inconsistencies and errors have been successfully addressed prior to ​submitting it to AASHE​ (3rd review):
Copy of completed STARS Review Template (3rd review):
---

Website URL where information about the institution’s reporting assurance is available:
Additional documentation to support the submission:
---

Data source(s) and notes about the submission:

A total of seven staff members served on the internal review team. All team members used the same shared spreadsheet to conduct the internal reivew (see attached above). All signed letters of affirmation are available to view here: https://app.box.com/s/gxca3m1fe06eh1oq4c47qaecwi72npjx

UC San Diego found the internal review process to be very effective in identifying issues, determining areas for improvement, and making revisions in order for credits to satisfy STARS criteria.


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.