Reporting, Disclosure & Frameworks
Communication on Progress (UNGC)
The mandatory annual disclosure through which UN Global Compact participants report on implementing the Ten Principles.
Expert review openNo editor-accepted expert review yetDefinition
A Communication on Progress is the annual public disclosure required of all business participants in the UN Global Compact, describing actions taken to implement its Ten Principles on human rights, labour, environment and anti-corruption and to support the Sustainable Development Goals. The current format combines a CEO statement of continued support with a standardised questionnaire.
References
mandatory annual CoP; CEO statement plus questionnaire; delisting for non-communication
current policy cycle and objectives
Overview
What it means
It is the UNGC's principal accountability mechanism — participation without reporting leads first to 'non-communicating' status and ultimately to delisting.
How it is used
Companies submit the CoP through the UNGC platform; stakeholders use it to track corporate sustainability commitments over time.
Why it matters
It anchors the world's largest corporate sustainability initiative in transparent, comparable reporting rather than membership alone.
Review
Public comments appear only after editor acceptance. Draft comments stay in the review queue.
Reviewers choose the definition or an overview paragraph, leave a comment or replacement, and attach evidence or a source link.
Editors compare reviewer cards side by side. AI may help find agreement, conflicts, unsupported claims and possible source issues.
Only an editor-accepted synthesis changes the public page. Reviewer identities are shown only with consent and verification.
Submitted reviews stay private until accepted.
Loading verified endorsements… Endorsements are not votes and never determine publication.
Endorse this definition
Endorse the exact version shown here. This is not a vote, and publication remains an editorial decision.
Review board
Comment on a specific line. Each reviewer stays separate until an editor accepts a merged draft.
Each person comments on the definition or overview in their own draft card, with role, evidence and suggested wording kept together.
AI can compare comments against the current text, flag conflicting claims, surface missing evidence and identify where reviewers agree.
An editor merges compatible suggestions into a draft change, checks sources, records disagreements and decides what can be published.