// Compliance & Standards

Assurance Readiness

Prepare sustainability data for external assurance before an assurance provider finds the gaps.

A pre-assurance review of data, evidence and controls against what a provider will test, with the gaps closed before the engagement begins.

Discuss your requirements Speak with an expert

// Context

Why this matters

Assurance on sustainability data is becoming mandatory rather than voluntary. In Singapore, limited assurance on Scope 1 and 2 emissions is being phased in, with deadlines that have already been extended for some groups.

Organisations approaching a first assurance engagement usually discover the same thing: the number is defensible but the evidence trail is not. Calculations exist in spreadsheets nobody has reviewed, source documents cannot be retrieved for the period, and no one signed anything off.

Assurance providers test process and evidence, not just arithmetic. Preparing that in advance is substantially less disruptive than discovering it mid-engagement, when the reporting deadline is fixed.

// The engagement

How CER helps

Readiness assessment against limited assurance expectations
Data trail testing -- can each reported figure be traced to source evidence
Control identification and documentation
Evidence retention review and remediation
Methodology documentation review
Sample testing of key metrics using an assurance-style approach
Materiality and misstatement threshold consideration
Management sign-off and review process design
Gap remediation planning and support
Support during the assurance engagement, including information requests

// Deliverables

What you receive

Assurance readiness assessment report
Data trail test results by metric
Control documentation
Gap register with remediation actions and owners
Evidence file structured to assurance requirements
Sign-off and review process documentation
Engagement support and information request handling

// Fit

Who this is for

Companies facing a first mandatory assurance requirement
Organisations that received findings in a previous assurance engagement
Groups consolidating data from multiple entities for assurance
Finance and internal audit functions taking on sustainability data

// Why CER

Practitioners, not report writers

CER works from Singapore with organisations across Asia, which matters for this service because requirements arriving from European regulators, regional supervisors and local listing rules do not align neatly.

Engagements run through to implementation: the data collection process, the documentation, the controls and the internal handover, so that the second cycle is cheaper than the first and can be run without us.

Where an organisation would be better served by building the capability internally, CER Academy delivers the same technical material as training.

Meet the people behind the work

// Our people

Expertise on this service

Raymond Cheung

Advisor & Lead Trainer

Over twenty years in actuarial science and risk management, working across ESG, sustainability and ESG investment.

Actuarial science · Risk management · ESG and sustainability

View Raymond Cheung’s profile

Chan Ee Chong

Lead Consultant

Over twenty years in wealth management and business consultancy, with ESG project experience across South-East Asia.

ESG advisory · Wealth management · Business consultancy

View Chan Ee Chong’s profile

// Questions

Frequently asked

What is the difference between limited and reasonable assurance?

Limited assurance provides a conclusion expressed in the negative -- nothing came to the provider's attention suggesting the information is materially misstated. Reasonable assurance is a higher level of testing and gives a positive opinion. Mandatory requirements generally start with limited assurance.

Can CER provide the assurance?

No. Assurance must be independent, and a provider cannot assure information it helped prepare. We prepare you for the engagement and support you through it. Your assurance provider is separately appointed.

How far ahead should we prepare?

Far enough that remediation can happen within a reporting cycle. Gaps in evidence retention often cannot be fixed retrospectively -- if source records for a period were never kept, no amount of later effort recreates them.

Which metrics get tested?

Typically those that are material to the disclosure and highest risk. Scope 1 and 2 emissions are the usual starting point under current mandatory requirements.

// Related