Why a structured checklist matters
The CDP questionnaire opens in early April and closes in early June. Eight weeks. For a first time respondent, that window is barely enough to fill in a form, let alone collect missing data, run scenario analysis, or set up verification. For experienced respondents, it is just enough if the underlying work happened in the previous quarters.
The companies that score well year after year share a common practice: they do not start CDP work in March. They run a structured preparation programme from October to March, with discrete milestones each month. By the time the questionnaire opens, they are reviewing answers and refining narrative, not chasing data.
This article gives you that programme as a checklist. Each item is a discrete preparation task, with the deadline by which it should be complete to maximise scoring impact in the upcoming cycle.
October to November: foundation
These two months establish whether the cycle will be smooth or panicked.
Confirm boundary. List every entity, site, and joint venture in operational and financial control. Compare with the prior year. Document any additions or removals with the methodology change. CDP scoring penalises silent boundary changes more than honest ones.
Lock in the inventory baseline period. Decide which 12 months will be reported. Most companies use the calendar year matching their financial reporting; some use fiscal year aligned with the annual report.
Identify questionnaire modules in scope. Climate Change is mandatory for any climate response. Decide whether to add Water Security and Forests this cycle. The decision should reflect sector materiality, customer requests, and internal capacity.
Confirm SBTi status. If you have validated targets, ensure the most recent version is reflected in your internal records. If targets are in validation, plan around the expected approval date. If not yet committed, decide whether to commit before April.
Engage verification provider. If you intend to verify the inventory for this cycle, the engagement letter should be signed in October. Limited assurance work typically takes 3 to 5 months.
December: data collection
This is the heaviest month for the data team.
Scope 1 and 2 inventory completion. Stationary combustion, mobile combustion, fugitive emissions, purchased electricity, heat, and steam. Both location based and market based Scope 2. Documented methodology aligned with GHG Protocol and AR6 GWPs.
Scope 3 screening update. Reconfirm which categories are material. Run preliminary calculations on the top categories using activity data where possible.
Water data collection (if Water Security is in scope). Withdrawal by source, consumption, and discharge by site. Basin level risk screening using WRI Aqueduct or WWF Water Risk Filter.
Forests data collection (if Forests is in scope). Volumes by commodity and origin, certification coverage, NDPE policy status, and supplier traceability.
Energy mix and renewable procurement. Document grid versus on site versus power purchase agreement (PPA) breakdown for the reporting period.
January: governance and risk
These are the sections where unprepared companies lose points unnecessarily.
Board oversight evidence. Document how often climate (or water, or forests) was on the board agenda in the reporting period. Identify the responsible director by name. Confirm committee terms of reference reflect climate responsibility.
Executive incentive structures. Document any climate or environmental KPIs in executive compensation. Note the percentage weight and how it affects payouts.
Risk and opportunities register. Identify substantive risks (physical, transition, regulatory, reputational). For each: type, time horizon, financial impact range, and management response. Aim for at least 10 to 12 substantive risks across categories.
Scenario analysis. Run analysis under at least two scenarios: a 1.5 to 2 degree pathway (e.g., IEA Net Zero 2050) and a higher warming pathway (e.g., 2.5 to 3 degree). Document financial implications for the company.
Transition plan. Confirm capex allocation aligned with targets, milestones, and timeline. If SBTi targets have just been validated, ensure the transition plan reflects them.
February: review and gaps
By February, all the heavy data lifting should be done. This month is for closing gaps and aligning narrative.
Internal review by sustainability lead. Read the prior year submission and identify the top three improvement areas based on the score feedback received in November.
Cross functional review. Sustainability, finance, procurement, operations, and legal review the draft. Each function confirms the data points relevant to them.
Verification statement draft. The verifier should be in the substantive testing phase. Draft statement should be available by mid February.
Supplier engagement summary. Compile evidence of supplier engagement programme: number of suppliers engaged, percentage of Scope 3 covered, outcomes achieved. CDP rewards quantitative outcomes more than narrative.
Targets and progress data. Final calculation of progress against existing targets. Note any deviations and explanations.
March: drafting and finalisation
The questionnaire is not yet open in CDP, but most companies use the prior year structure as a working draft.
Build response in working document. Use the previous year as a template. Update each answer with the current cycle data and narrative.
Internal review and sign off. Sustainability lead, CFO or equivalent, and legal review and approve the draft. Assurance providers see the final draft if relevant.
Final verification statement. Issued and uploaded to the questionnaire system as soon as available.
Logistics. Confirm CDP user access, payment of any fees, and submission deadlines for any supply chain customers requesting the response separately.
April to early June: questionnaire and submission
When the questionnaire opens in early April, the work is moving from drafting to refining.
Transfer answers from working document to CDP platform. CDP responses are entered through the platform interface. Allow at least 5 working days for the transfer and quality review.
Run the platform’s quality checks. CDP provides automated checks for completeness and consistency. Address any flags before submission.
Final cross check between sections. Confirm consistency: the same emissions number appears the same way wherever asked. Boundary descriptions match across questions. Targets match what is in the SBTi dashboard.
Submit before deadline. Most companies submit a few days before the deadline to avoid last minute platform issues. The deadline for the standard cycle is typically the second week of June.
After submission: feedback loop
CDP scores are released between November and February. When yours arrives:
Read the score feedback carefully. CDP provides a structured feedback document indicating where points were earned or lost. This is the input for the next cycle.
Plan year on year improvements. Identify the three to five areas with the highest scoring potential for the next cycle. Build them into the October to March programme.
Communicate internally. Share the score and the improvement plan with the executive team and the board. CDP scores improve faster when leadership understands the trajectory.
Where Dcycle fits
A structured CDP preparation programme depends on having the data continuously available, not collected in panic between January and March. Dcycle provides exactly this: continuous data collection from operational systems, structured into the GHG Protocol categories and CDP question formats. Companies typically reduce preparation time by 60 to 80 percent and free up the team to focus on improving answers, not chasing data.
To see how this would apply to your reporting calendar, request a demo. For broader context on the CDP scoring system see the scoring methodology guide, and for first time respondents the first time respondent guide is the natural starting point.
Final thought
CDP is won in the months before the questionnaire opens, not in the eight weeks during which it is open. Companies that internalise this run smoother cycles, score better, and free up bandwidth for the work that genuinely improves environmental performance. The checklist above is the difference between a panicked May and a defended A list.