CDP submission.
Three questionnaires.
Climate, Water, Forests.
CDP is structurally different from FTSE Russell, MSCI, or Sustainalytics. The submission is questionnaire-driven like DJSI/CSA, but uniquely runs three separate questionnaires — Climate Change, Water Security, and Forests — each with its own scoring track, sector-specific question sets, and annual deadline. Scoring follows a 9-band ladder from A (Leadership) down through A–, B, B–, C, C–, D, D– to F (Failure to disclose). The score chain is sequential: D = Disclosure → C = Awareness → B = Management → A = Leadership; you can’t reach Management band without completing Awareness band, and you can’t reach Leadership without Management. CDP is fully TCFD-aligned (first questionnaire to integrate TCFD framework in 2018) and has now been integrated with the IFRS S2 climate disclosure standard — meaning your CDP Climate Change response and your IFRS S2 disclosure architecture share substantial methodology overlap and most of the same evidence base. The CDP request is signed by 700+ institutional investors with combined ~$130T AUM, making non-disclosure a material institutional flag. Othello’s CDP engagement leans on the FTSE 4.0/5.0 anchor as related-methodology evidence และเป็น IFRS S2 climate disclosure architecture as the substantive evidence base. การส่งคำถาม CDP สามชุด
From F to A. Disclosure → Awareness → Management → Leadership.
Nine bands. Sequential score chain. CDP A List leadership.
CDP scoring is a 9-band ladder: A (Leadership), A– (Leadership entry), B (Management), B– (Management entry), C (Awareness), C– (Awareness entry), D (Disclosure), D– (Disclosure incomplete), F (Failed to disclose). The methodology is uniquely sequential: each band represents a level of organizational maturity, and the score is determined by the lowest band where you’ve completed the requirements. A company with Leadership-band practice but incomplete Awareness-band disclosure will score C, not A. This is the most common reason Thai SET-listed companies under-score CDP relative to their actual operational ESG performance: the disclosure architecture isn’t built to CDP’s sequential progression. The CDP A List is the published annual leaderboard of A-scored companies per questionnaire — institutional investors, ESG fund managers, and corporate procurement teams treat the list as a primary leadership signal. The ~1.5–3% of disclosing companies that achieve A each year per questionnaire are concentrated in sustainability-mature European, Japanese, and Korean issuers; Thai SET-listed presence on the A List is rare but achievable with a 24–36 month structured Standard or Deep Tier engagement from B baseline.
Three separate questionnaires. Climate, Water, Forests. Each its own scoring track.
CDP is the only major ESG rating engagement that runs three structurally separate questionnaires, each with its own sector-specific question set, its own annual deadline, its own A→D– scoring, and its own A List leaderboard. Most Thai SET-listed companies complete only CDP Climate Change (the most common — required for any company in Climate-disclosure-mandated investor portfolios). CDP Water Security applies where the company has material water-related operations or supply chain — agriculture, food processing, beverages, pulp & paper, mining, petroleum refining, semiconductors. CDP Forests applies where the company sources or uses forest-risk commodities — palm oil, timber, soy, cattle products, rubber, cocoa. The three questionnaires share methodology architecture (same sequential D→C→B→A score chain, same TCFD-alignment for climate elements, same evidence-based response style) but have independent submission deadlines and independent scoring — a company can score A on Climate Change and C on Water Security in the same year. Othello’s engagement scopes each questionnaire separately at engagement letter and prices each as a discrete workstream.
สภาพภูมิอากาศ Change.
The flagship CDP questionnaire. Required for any Thai SET-listed company in climate-disclosure-mandated investor portfolios. TCFD-aligned since 2018, IFRS S2-aligned since 2024. Submissions cover governance, strategy (including scenario analysis), risk management, targets and metrics, Scope 1/2/3 GHG emissions, energy, climate-related opportunities, supplier engagement.
Water Security.
For companies with material water-related operations or supply chain. Applies to agriculture, food processing, beverages, pulp & paper, mining, petroleum refining, semiconductors, electric utilities (water-cooled), and chemicals. Covers water withdrawal/discharge, water-stress exposure, catchment-level risk, water-related targets, governance of water issues, and supplier water-management engagement.
Forests.
For companies sourcing or using forest-risk commodities. Applies to palm oil, timber & timber products, soy, cattle products (leather, beef, dairy), rubber, cocoa, and coffee operations. Covers commodity-specific risk, deforestation governance, sustainable sourcing certification (FSC, RSPO, RTRS, etc.), traceability, supplier engagement on land-use change, and EUDR (EU Deforestation Regulation) readiness for EU-exposed supply chains.
April opens. July 31 hard deadline. December public scores.
CDP runs a fixed annual cycle: questionnaires open in April, the submission deadline is July 31 (hard — extensions are rare and not granted lightly), CDP’s scoring period runs August through Novemberและ scores are released publicly in December. This is identical to the DJSI / S&P CSA cycle structure in being a hard-deadline annual submission — and the same procurement implication applies: Othello engagement must start in February–April for a current-year submission, otherwise the realistic engagement window misses the deadline and the company forces itself into a 12-month wait until the next cycle. The cycle compresses around the July 31 deadline more aggressively than DJSI’s September deadline; the Climate + Water + Forests questionnaire combination for multi-questionnaire companies can require parallel drafting workstreams across April–July.
Six phases. From baseline question mapping to post-score gap analysis.
Othello’s CDP submission methodology runs six sequential phases, each with a specific deliverable and timeline anchor against the annual cycle. The methodology accommodates Climate Change as the standalone scope or Climate + Water + Forests as a combined multi-questionnaire engagement. Each phase is bilingual EN/TH where applicable, with CDP-side response language in English (CDP submissions are English-only) and internal/board working papers in Thai.
Baseline + Question Mapping
The starting diagnostic. Pull prior-year CDP score and response text (if any) from CDP’s portal; map every question to the company’s current evidence base (IFRS S2 architecture, GHG inventory, climate risk assessment, materiality assessment, supplier framework, etc.). Identify gap questions where evidence is missing or insufficient for the targeted score band. Confirm questionnaire scope (Climate only vs. Climate + Water + Forests).
Evidence Compilation
The substantive engineering phase. Pull evidence from the GHG inventory, IFRS S2 disclosure architecture, climate scenario analysis, materiality assessment, supplier code, sustainability report. Where evidence is missing, identify the smallest-scope additional work needed (e.g., Scope 3 partial inventory build, scenario analysis refresh) and either deliver in-cycle or document the gap for next-cycle uplift. Verification status of all GHG and water data confirmed (ISO 14064-3 / AA1000AS).
Drafting CDP-Style Responses
The CDP-specific layer. Draft response text in CDP’s expected sequential D→C→B→A structure: each question’s evidence drafted to the band of evidence available, not above. The most common Thai SET-listed scoring failure is drafting Leadership-band ambition language without the underlying Awareness/Management-band evidence — CDP scores on evidence, not aspiration. Climate, Water, Forests responses drafted in parallel for multi-questionnaire clients.
การตรวจสอบ Layer + Review
The points-bonus layer. ISO 14064-3 GHG verification statements attached to all Scope 1/2/3 emissions data (in-house Othello Lead Auditor). AA1000AS Type 1/2 assurance evidence attached to materiality and stakeholder engagement responses. Climate risk scenario analysis cross-referenced to IFRS S2 § 22–24 and TCFD pillar disclosures. Internal review by ESG bench specialists before client sign-off.
Submission + Portal Management
The mechanical layer. Upload responses into CDP’s Online Response System (ORS) portal; reconcile all sector-specific question routing; confirm all required attachments (verification statements, board minutes, policy documents). Final pre-submission technical review against CDP’s scoring methodology document. Submit before July 31 deadline. Submission confirmation receipt logged.
Post-Score Gap Analysis
The closing phase. After December score release, retrieve the CDP scoring report (band per section + indicative reasoning) from CDP’s portal. Document where the score under-achieved the modeled target and why (typically a sequential chain gap — leadership-band evidence on some sections but awareness gap on others dragged the overall band). Year 2 uplift plan locked in by January with prioritized gap closure for the next cycle.
Methodology-credentialed. IFRS S2-anchored. FTSE 4.0/5.0 as related-methodology proof.
Othello does not claim a CDP A List-anchored track record. The CDP engagement model is methodology-credentialed: drawing on the in-house ESG bench’s IFRS S2, ISO 14064, AA1000AS, GRI, TGO, and ISO 17100 credentials, with the FTSE Russell ESG 4.0/5.0 outcome — independently verifiable through FTSE Russell published score data — provided as the related-methodology proof at procurement stage. The CDP Climate Change response shares ~70–80% evidence base with IFRS S2 disclosure; the architecture investment in IFRS S2 directly enables the CDP submission. Specific Othello-supported CDP scoring engagements are available under mutual NDA at procurement stage, with the lead specialist named in the engagement letter.
Cross-Anchor
รับรอง
หัวหน้าผู้ตรวจสอบบัญชี
ACSAP
Auditor
ผู้ฝึกอบรมที่ได้รับการรับรอง
การแปลภาษา
Six deliverables. From question mapping to post-score gap plan.
A CDP submission engagement produces six interlocking deliverables, each bilingual EN/TH where applicable. The CDP-specific features — sequential D→C→B→A scoring, verification points, the multi-questionnaire architecture, the December public-scores release — show up in each deliverable. The work integrates substantially with IFRS S2 disclosure (since CDP Climate Change is IFRS S2-aligned), making the same architecture investment efficient across both destinations.
Baseline Score + Question Map
The starting diagnostic. Prior-year CDP score and response text retrieved from CDP’s portal (if available). Every question mapped to current evidence base: where the evidence exists, what’s missing, what’s drafted to which band. Gap register prioritized by score-uplift impact. Lock the target band before drafting starts.
Evidence Compilation Workbook
The mechanical foundation. Every CDP question cross-mapped to IFRS S2, GHG inventory, climate risk assessment, materiality, supplier framework, FTSE Russell themes, MSCI Key Issues, Sustainalytics MEIs. The single evidence base feeds all destinations. Gaps surface immediately and are prioritized by which combinations would close the most cross-agency exposure.
CDP-Style Response Pack
The submission text. Responses drafted to CDP’s sequential D→C→B→A structure, English (CDP submission language), with each question targeted to the band of evidence available. Multi-questionnaire scope (Climate + Water + Forests) drafted in parallel where applicable. Internal Thai-language summary pack for board review and sign-off. Final pack uploaded into CDP’s Online Response System (ORS) portal.
Verification Pack + Attachments
The points-bonus layer. ISO 14064-3 GHG verification statements for Scope 1/2/3 emissions; AA1000AS Type 1/2 assurance evidence on materiality, stakeholder engagement, and supplier responses. Board minutes documenting climate oversight; policy documents referenced in responses. All attachments CDP-portal-ready and pre-tagged to the questions they support.
CDP Portal Submission
The execution layer. Submission uploaded into CDP’s Online Response System portal with all sector-specific question routing reconciled. All required attachments uploaded and tagged. Final pre-submission technical review against CDP scoring methodology document. Submission confirmation receipt logged with timestamp. Submitted before July 31 hard deadline.
Score Variance + Year 2 Gap Plan
The closing deliverable. December score release retrieved with CDP’s section-by-section scoring report. Variance analysis vs. modelled target. Identification of sequential chain gaps (where the score was capped by Awareness gap despite Leadership-band evidence elsewhere). Year 2 prioritized uplift plan with gap closure ordered by score-impact-per-effort.
Three tiers. Single questionnaire to multi-agency deep.
CDP Engagement tiers scale to questionnaire scope and starting band. Refresh (6–8 weeks) for annual cycle preparation where the company has an established CDP baseline and current-year submission window. Standard (14–20 weeks) for the first full CDP engagement — most common, taking the company from Disclosure or Awareness baseline to first Management-band outcome. Deep (24–32 weeks) for combined uplift across multiple rating agencies — CDP + FTSE Russell + MSCI + DJSI/CSA + Sustainalytics + SET ESG — all built from a single Climate-disclosure-integrated architecture.
Annual Cycle Refresh
- Baseline score retrieval + variance analysis
- Refreshed question mapping (current-cycle methodology)
- Current-cycle evidence base refresh
- Response text update for current cycle
- Verification statements attached
- CDP portal submission pre July 31
- Post-December score variance memo
- Full multi-questionnaire scope build (Tier 2)
- Multi-agency uplift (Tier 3)
Full CDP Engagement
- Everything in Tier 01 +
- Baseline score diagnostic with gap register
- Full Climate Change response drafting
- Water Security + Forests where applicable
- Cross-mapped evidence workbook (IFRS S2, FTSE, MSCI)
- ISO 14064-3 + AA1000AS verification pack
- CDP-style response pack (D→C→B→A drafted)
- Bilingual board-review pack + portal submission
- Year 2 gap plan + uplift roadmap
- Multi-agency combined uplift (Tier 3)
Multi-Agency Combined
- Everything in Tier 02 +
- FTSE Russell ESG Readiness bundled (anchor)
- MSCI ESG Rating Strategy bundled
- DJSI / S&P CSA bundled where applicable
- Sustainalytics ESG Risk Rating bundled
- SET ESG Ratings (“AA” target) aligned
- Single shared evidence architecture across agencies
- Multi-cycle calendar coordinated (DJSI Sep · CDP Jul · MSCI rolling)
- Combined RFP response for procurement teams
- Annual maintenance retainer Year 2+
Six scenarios. Where CDP submission becomes the commercial answer.
CDP submission drives specific commercial outcomes — CDP A List visibility, institutional investor preferred-list candidacy, sustainable-finance covenant satisfaction, climate-mandated mandate eligibility, EUDR readiness for forest-risk commodity exposure, and TCFD/IFRS S2 compliance evidence. Below are the six contexts where Thai SET-listed companies most commonly commission the CDP engagement.
CDP-requested response obligation.
The most common context. The CDP request landed in the IR or sustainability mailbox earlier in the year — typically March–April — signed by an institutional investor or customer with material shareholding or supply-chain relationship. Non-response means an F score publicly attached to the company on cdp.net. Standard Tier engagement converts the obligation into a structured submission targeting C-band or higher.
CDP A List leadership push.
For mature ESG SET-listed clients already at B-band+ and seeking CDP A List inclusion. The work involves multi-cycle compounding: Year 1 from B to A–, Year 2 to A. Requires verified Scope 1+2+3 emissions, SBTi-validated targets, board-level climate oversight with disclosed responsibilities, scenario analysis with multiple climate pathways, and supplier engagement programs. Standard or Deep Tier.
Sustainable finance covenant evidence.
Green bond, sustainability-linked bond (SLB), sustainability-linked loan issuance frequently references CDP score as a covenant trigger or framework-substantiation reference. Some SLB margin step-down triggers are pegged to CDP score thresholds (B-band or higher). CDP A-band evidence strengthens Second Party Opinion review and ICMA Green Bond Principles alignment substantiation. Sustainable Finance →
Multi-agency rating parallel uplift.
For SET-listed companies with multi-agency mandates — CDP + FTSE Russell + MSCI + DJSI/CSA + Sustainalytics + SET ESG. The Deep Tier engagement runs all six from a shared Climate-disclosure-integrated architecture. The CDP Climate Change response and the IFRS S2 disclosure architecture share ~70–80% evidence base, making CDP one of the highest-leverage workstreams in the multi-agency engagement. FTSE 4.0/5.0 anchor →
CDP Forests + EUDR readiness.
For SET-listed companies with palm oil, timber, soy, cattle, rubber, cocoa, or coffee exposure where EU customers or financiers are involved. CDP Forests response evidence overlaps materially with EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) compliance documentation. The same supplier mapping, commodity certification audit, traceability evidence, and land-use governance documents feed both. Standard or Deep Tier engagement; CDP submission converts existing EUDR work into a scoring outcome.
IFRS S2 substantiation via CDP evidence.
For SET-listed companies completing first-time IFRS S2 climate disclosure. CDP Climate Change response can serve as substantive evidence for IFRS S2 disclosures — since the two are methodologically aligned. The CDP submission becomes the operational evidence layer behind the IFRS S2 disclosure architecture. Standard Tier engagement runs both workstreams as a single integrated cycle. IFRS S2 disclosure →
Fixed engagement. Tier-priced.
CDP Engagement pricing is fixed-fee by tier. Scope is locked at engagement based on: number of questionnaires (Climate only vs. Climate + Water vs. Climate + Water + Forests), starting baseline band (F or D– requires more foundational disclosure work; B baseline requires uplift work), sector complexity (sector-specific question routing varies — financial services, food & beverage, oil & gas have substantially more questions than other sectors), and tier selection. Quotes within one business hour of source files and signed mutual NDA.
Tier-Priced
Pricing structured by tier — Refresh, Standard, Deep — with adjustments for: questionnaire scope (Climate only vs. multi-questionnaire — Water and Forests each add ~30–40% to drafting effort); starting baseline band (F or D– requires foundational disclosure work; C or B baseline focuses on uplift); sector complexity (financial services, food & beverage, oil & gas have ~20–30% more questions); multi-agency bundling (Deep Tier covers CDP + FTSE + MSCI + DJSI + Sustainalytics + SET ESG).
Multi-engagement discount applies where CDP directly bundles with Othello-delivered IFRS S2 disclosure, GHG Inventory, ความพร้อมตามเกณฑ์ FTSE Russellหรือ กลยุทธ์การยกระดับ MSCI ESG Rating. The CDP Climate Change response shares ~70–80% evidence base with IFRS S2, making the bundle materially more efficient than CDP alone.
Annual Maintenance Retainer
The compounding uplift cycle. Year 1 Standard Tier full CDP engagement; Year 2 Refresh Tier annual update + evidence refresh + score variance memo; Year 3+ Refresh Tier sustained band + sequential-chain gap monitoring. Retainer pricing reflects efficiency on subsequent years: ~55–65% reduction on Year 2 and Year 3 components vs. standalone Refresh Tier pricing.
The Year 2 compounding effect: the Year 1 evidence architecture is now scored from a stable baseline, the sequential-chain gaps from Year 1 are documented, the verification statements are operational. Year 2 marginal uplift work targets the specific sequential-chain gap closure (typically the Awareness-to-Management transition), while maintaining the verification and disclosure foundation that prevents band drift. Many SET-listed clients see a one-band uplift from Year 1 to Year 2 (e.g., C to B–, or B– to B) on the same retainer cycle.
Building an RFP for CDP submission engagement?
โอเทลโล่ ถูกออกแบบมาสำหรับการจัดซื้อในระดับองค์กร Every standard rating-agency advisory procurement requirement is met — ISO 17100:2015 certification, in-house IFRS Foundation S2 certified specialist for the CDP Climate Change response (CDP is IFRS S2-aligned as of 2024), in-house ISO 14064 Lead Auditor (CQI/IRCA) for GHG verification statement attachment (CDP awards scoring bonus points for ISO 14064-3 verification), in-house AA1000AS ACSAP for materiality and stakeholder engagement evidence assurance, in-house TGO CFO + CFP Auditor for Thai national methodology reconciliation, in-house GRI Certified Trainer for sustainability report integration, mutual NDA from first email, GDPR + PDPA compliance.
Related-methodology track record is independently verifiable through FTSE Russell published score data — Othello secured FTSE Russell ESG 4.0/5.0 for a SET-listed healthcare operator in 2025. CDP Climate Change response and the IFRS S2 disclosure architecture share substantial methodology overlap. Standard RFP response is 3–5 วันทำการ. Quote on engagement scoping within one business hour.
What IR and sustainability teams ถามเป็นอันดับแรก
คำถามที่ 01How is CDP different from FTSE Russell, MSCI, or Sustainalytics?
Four structural differences. (1) Questionnaire-driven — CDP is a structured questionnaire submission with hard annual deadline, like DJSI/CSA. FTSE Russell, MSCI, and Sustainalytics are disclosure-mined: they score from publicly-disclosed information without requiring company submission.
(2) Sequential D→C→B→A score chain — CDP uses an organizational maturity ladder (Disclosure → Awareness → Management → Leadership) where each band must be completed before the next. Other rating agencies use numeric or letter scoring without an explicit maturity chain.
(3) Three separate questionnaires — Climate Change, Water Security, Forests — each with its own scoring track and A List leaderboard. No other rating agency separates climate, water, and forest responses into discrete scored workstreams.
(4) Direct TCFD + IFRS S2 alignment — CDP is the only rating agency methodology directly aligned with both TCFD framework (since 2018) and IFRS S2 climate disclosure standard (since 2024). This means CDP Climate Change response and IFRS S2 disclosure architecture share ~70–80% evidence base.
คำถามที่ 02What is the sequential score chain?
CDP scoring uses a sequential maturity ladder: D = Disclosure (information disclosed), C = Awareness (issue acknowledged with some context), B = Management (active management with measurable practice), A = Leadership (best-in-class with strategic integration). Each band represents an organizational maturity level, and a company’s final score is determined by the lowest band where it has completed all required evidence.
Practical implication: a company can have Leadership-band practice on three CDP sections (verified Scope 1+2+3 emissions, SBTi-validated targets, board-level climate governance) but score C overall because it missed Awareness-band questions on two other sections. The sequential chain is the most common reason Thai SET-listed companies under-score CDP relative to their actual ESG operational practice. Drafting evidence to the band of evidence available — not above — is the methodological discipline that determines final score.
คำถามที่ 03Do we have to submit Climate, Water, AND Forests?
ลำดับ Each questionnaire is scoped separately based on the request you received. Most Thai SET-listed companies receive only the CDP Climate Change request, since climate disclosure is the primary investor-mandated screening dimension. Water Security applies where the company has material water-related operations or supply chain — agriculture, food processing, beverages, pulp & paper, mining, petroleum refining, semiconductors, water-cooled electric utilities, chemicals. Forests applies where the company sources or uses forest-risk commodities — palm oil, timber, soy, cattle products, rubber, cocoa, coffee.
The questionnaires have separate scoring, separate A List leaderboards, and separate engagement workstreams. A company can submit Climate Change only without prejudicing its position on Water or Forests; conversely, a company exposed to water or forests material risk that does not submit those questionnaires may receive an institutional flag for non-disclosure even if Climate is well-scored. Othello scopes each questionnaire separately at engagement letter.
คำถามที่ 04What happens if we miss the July 31 deadline?
The submission is recorded as F = Failed to disclose on cdp.net and published in the December scores release. The F score remains attached to the company for the full 12-month cycle until the next year’s submission window. Many institutional investor mandates explicitly exclude F-scored companies from ESG-screened portfolios, treating non-disclosure as a material screening flag equivalent to severe controversy.
Extensions are technically possible but rarely granted — CDP requires substantive cause (acquisition activity, regulatory disruption, force majeure) and discretion sits with CDP’s response team. Banking on an extension is not a viable engagement strategy. The Othello engagement workflow targets submission at least 2 weeks ahead of July 31 to absorb any final-stage technical issues with portal upload, attachment routing, or pre-submission technical review findings.
คำถามที่ 05Does Othello have a CDP track record we can verify?
Honest answer: Othello does not claim a specific CDP A List engagement with publicly named attribution. CDP scores are publicly visible on cdp.net for every disclosing company, but specific Othello-supported engagement attribution requires client release that Othello does not represent without consent. Othello’s CDP engagements are anonymised under standard NDA convention.
What Othello does have is related-methodology track record: FTSE Russell ESG 4.0/5.0 secured for a SET-listed healthcare operator in 2025, alongside SET ESG “AA” sustained 2 consecutive years for the same client. The methodology overlap between FTSE Russell themes and CDP question architecture is substantial — same disclosure investment drives both ratings. The FTSE 4.0/5.0 outcome is independently verifiable through FTSE Russell’s published score data and serves as the related-methodology proof at procurement stage. Othello-supported CDP engagements are available as references under mutual NDA at procurement stage, with the lead specialist named in the engagement letter.
คำถามที่ 06How does CDP integrate with IFRS S2?
CDP and the IFRS Foundation announced full alignment in 2024. The CDP Climate Change questionnaire now mirrors the IFRS S2 climate disclosure standard structure: governance (§ 6–9), strategy including scenario analysis (§ 13–22), risk management (§ 25–28), metrics and targets (§ 29–37). A company drafting its IFRS S2 disclosure architecture is effectively drafting ~70–80% of its CDP Climate Change response evidence base.
Practical implication: an Othello IFRS S2 disclosure engagement directly feeds the CDP submission. The Othello Standard Tier CDP engagement is materially more efficient when delivered alongside or immediately after an IFRS S2 disclosure engagement. The two workstreams share governance disclosures, scenario analysis, Scope 1/2/3 inventory, climate-related risks and opportunities, and metrics & targets — with CDP requiring some additional sector-specific operational detail and supplier engagement evidence that IFRS S2 does not. Multi-engagement discount applies when both are commissioned together.
คำถามที่ 07What about the Supply Chain CDP program?
CDP runs a parallel program where large corporate buyers (CDP Supply Chain members) request CDP responses from their suppliers. The supplier responses feed the buyer’s Scope 3 supplier-engagement evidence and inform the buyer’s own CDP submission. Thai SET-listed companies may receive CDP requests through this channel from international corporate customers (e.g. multinational consumer goods, automotive, electronics buyers).
Supply Chain CDP responses are scored on the same A→D– ladder using the same questionnaire structure, but the institutional audience is the requesting buyer rather than the broader investor universe. Many Thai SET-listed companies first encounter CDP through this supply-chain channel before receiving direct investor-driven requests. Othello’s CDP Standard Tier engagement covers Supply Chain CDP requests identically to investor-driven CDP requests — same methodology, same submission architecture, same scoring framework, same Othello bench credentials.
คำถามที่ 08Can we bundle CDP with FTSE, MSCI, DJSI, and Sustainalytics?
Yes — and CDP is one of the highest-leverage workstreams in a multi-agency bundle because CDP Climate Change response shares ~70–80% evidence base with IFRS S2 disclosure architecture. The Deep Tier engagement explicitly covers CDP + FTSE Russell ESG Readiness + MSCI ESG Rating Strategy + DJSI / S&P CSA Preparation + Sustainalytics ESG Risk Rating + SET ESG Ratings from a single Climate-disclosure-integrated architecture.
The bundle is efficient because all six rating agencies score on substantially overlapping evidence categories — governance, strategy, risk management, GHG inventory, materiality, supplier framework, climate scenario analysis. The differences are agency-specific methodology overlays (CDP sequential chain + 3 questionnaires; FTSE 300+ indicator granularity; MSCI GICS peer modeling + controversies; DJSI questionnaire + yearbook; Sustainalytics Exposure × Management decomposition). The Deep Tier delivers materially better efficiency than six sequential single-agency engagements — typically 50–60% reduction in advisory fee versus standalone procurement.
คำถามที่ 09Can Othello respond to a formal RFP for CDP engagement?
Yes. Othello responds to formal procurement processes for CDP submission engagements from SET-listed corporates, prospective listing applicants, sustainable finance issuers, EU-supply-chain-exposed companies (CDP Forests + EUDR readiness), CDP Supply Chain program respondents, multi-agency rating-cycle clients, post-IFRS-S2 disclosure clients integrating CDP, and procurement teams scoping larger ESG advisory engagements. Standard procurement requirements are met: ISO 17100:2015 certification, in-house IFRS Foundation S2 certified specialist for CDP Climate Change response drafting (IFRS S2-aligned since 2024), in-house ISO 14064 Lead Auditor (CQI/IRCA accredited) for GHG verification statement attachment under ISO 14064-3 (CDP awards scoring bonus), in-house AA1000AS ACSAP for materiality and stakeholder-engagement evidence assurance, in-house TGO CFO + CFP Auditor for Thai national methodology reconciliation, in-house GRI Certified Trainer for sustainability report integration, CDP Online Response System (ORS) portal capability with multi-questionnaire submission and sector-specific question routing, GDPR + PDPA compliance, mutual NDA from first email, and related-methodology track record verifiable through FTSE Russell published score data (4.0/5.0 secured 2025).
Standard RFP response is 3–5 วันทำการ. RFP response covers: methodology approach (6-phase Othello workflow from baseline question mapping to post-score gap analysis), evidence cross-mapping (CDP × IFRS S2 × FTSE × MSCI × Sustainalytics × DJSI matrix), tier recommendation per scenario, named bench credentials, capacity allocation, pricing structure (fixed engagement fee per questionnaire + optional annual maintenance retainer), engagement timeline aligned with CDP April–July submission window and December score release, multi-questionnaire workstream coordination, integration approach with IFRS S2 and other rating-agency engagements, related-methodology track record (FTSE 4.0/5.0 verifiable), and sample question-evidence cross-mapping excerpt (anonymised). Quote response on engagement scoping is within one business hour of receipt of source files and signed NDA.
The submission. From C to B–. From B– to A.
CDP Climate / Water / Forests submission engagement service. Methodology-credentialed bench. IFRS S2-anchored evidence architecture. ISO 14064-3 verification statements. AA1000AS materiality assurance. Multi-questionnaire scope (Climate Change + Water Security + Forests). Sequential D→C→B→A response drafting. Related-methodology track record: FTSE Russell ESG 4.0/5.0 secured for a SET-listed healthcare operator in 2025 — independently verifiable through FTSE Russell published score data. Mutual NDA from the first email. Quote response within one business hour, Bangkok time.
ยูนิต 12-03 อาคาร Chartered Square · 152 ถนนสาทรเหนือ
สีลม · บางรัก · กรุงเทพฯ 10500 · ประเทศไทย