Assurance
Assurance scope
Balfour Beatty engaged Sd3 to carry out an independent assurance of its Safety, Environment and Social Report 2006, specifically covering the accuracy of data, data collection systems and procedures. The assurance covered UK environment data, global safety, health and social data for the 2006 calendar year. In addition, Sd3 has assured the written and visual interpretation of this data. The assurance did not cover the materiality of the issues reported on, or the appropriateness of the metrics chosen. The assurance was carried out in line with Sd3's Assurance Code of Conduct*.
Methodology
Information provided in the report was checked through site visits, telephone interviews and e-mail correspondence. Sd3 reviewed all data aggregated at Group level and processes for checking and aggregating this data. Based on this review, Sd3 selected sample data sets and operating companies for further investigation. For the sample data sets Sd3 checked reported safety, health and environmental data back to the responsible party at the operating company level along with the recording processes. Four operating companies were sampled in greater depth for environmental data and four for health and safety. Headcount data was checked via a site visit to the Group headquarters.
Our Opinion
Based on the activities outlined, Sd3 found the environmental reporting systems to be sufficiently robust to collect data that provides a fair representation of the company's performance in the metrics chosen. Where environmental data was estimated, acceptable processes were used. However, Group environmental reporting processes were not always well embedded at the operating company level. This led to considerable variation in the ease of data collection across the Group. Increased central support and the clarification of definitions and boundaries are, as in 2004, again recommended. Renewed training effort is recommended to ensure continuing competence of personnel in Group reporting protocols.
In general the company's safety reporting processes were found to be consistent across the Group, with UK accident figures being similar to or better than the relevant UK national statistics. In 2004 Balfour Beatty's previous incident reporting system was replaced by the Tr@ction system. During the transition, duplication in reporting caused minor confusion in some operating companies. This confusion has been reduced with the full switch to Traction for the 2005 reporting year, although the inconsistent and/or lack of reporting from international operating companies and significant joint ventures remains a concern. The use of Traction across the UK operating companies has been achieved, although there is still inconsistency of use with respect to the classification of major and more than three day injuries and also in action tracking and close out from accident investigations. The definition of 'Permanent disabling injuries' has not been clearly communicated to all operating companies and it is currently used inconsistently across the operating companies. This lack of clarity in definition and application has meant that Permanent Disabling Injury data are not assurable. There are several different programmes across the Group addressing behavioural safety and targeting the individual needs of the operating companies. Currently it is too early to determine if such programmes are having a positive effect on the accident statistics. Occupational health data were not recorded to a sufficient standard across the Group, to allow any data assurance to be given. The company recognises this challenge and expects to revisit this area.
Jason Perks
Ian Buckland