§01 · The integration

What SustainQ puts into a portal.

A demonstration of the Diolog and SustainQ connection. Every figure on this page is illustrative and every one is in the register on the disclosures page. What is real here is the SHAPE: what a sustainability figure carries when it arrives over the connection, and what is refused at the boundary.

Everything numeric on this page is illustrative. SustainTrue Pty Ltd publishes no emissions inventory, no readiness assessment and no alignment scores, and none is derived here from anything it does publish. The figures are authored to show the shape the integration produces. What is not illustrative is the rule they follow and the boundary at the foot of the page: both are the agreed design, and both are the point.
§02 · The figures

Every number arrives with its unit, its basis and its method.

The rule the connection is built around: a numeric value carries what it measures, the period it covers, and whether it was metered or estimated. The source column holds the method version rather than a document, because a figure resolved over the connection resolves to its method.

What is illustrative here
8 of 8 rows are illustrative and are marked.
FactValueSource
Scope 1, direct1.2 tCO₂e · FY26 · meteredSustainQ · GHG Protocol Corporate Standard · method v2026.03
Scope 2, market-based8.4 tCO₂e · FY26 · meteredSustainQ · market-based method · method v2026.03
Scope 2, location-based11.9 tCO₂e · FY26 · meteredSustainQ · location-based method · method v2026.03
Scope 3, total142.6 tCO₂e · FY26 · estimatedSustainQ · spend and activity-based · method v2026.03
Scope 3, largest categoryPurchased goods and services · 61.3 tCO₂e · FY26 · estimatedSustainQ · category 1 · method v2026.03
Total, all scopes152.2 tCO₂e · FY26 · mixed basisSustainQ · derived from the rows above · method v2026.03
Assurance statusUnaudited · not subject to external assuranceSustainQ · assurance state on the figure record
Restatements this periodNone · no figure carries supersededBySustainQ · figure registry
Aggregates only, never supplier line itemsAssurance state travels on the figure
§03 · Readiness

Position against the four pillars.

AASB S2 reports against governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets. The platform maps every obligation to an owner and a piece of evidence, and reports what is answered as a proportion of what is due, by pillar.

82%Governance

61%Strategy

74%Risk management

58%Metrics and targets

Illustrative throughout. A readiness proportion is a statement about evidence held against obligations owed, so it moves as evidence is filed rather than as a period closes.

§04 · Policy against practice

Where commitment and practice diverge.

The platform reads the same questions separately by board, management and staff. The spread between the three is the finding: a commitment held at the top and not felt below is the exposure the company calls greenwashing risk.

78Board

71Management

64Staff

Illustrative aggregates. The individual responses behind a score are identifiable employees describing their own employer, so they stay where they were collected and only the aggregate crosses. That is a boundary rather than a setting.

§05 · The boundary

What does not cross, and why.

Raw source records

Invoices, general-ledger extracts and commuting-survey responses stay in the finance system they came from. Hashes and counts cross, never rows.

Individual survey responses

The Dissonance aggregate is one of the most useful things the platform holds. The responses behind it are identifiable employees describing their employer, and they are not shared.

Named-individual attributions

Evidence is attributed to the division that holds it, never to the person who filed it.

Site addresses and the asset register

Per-site physical risk crosses as an identifier and a loss estimate. Every site with its replacement value is an insurance schedule and a target list.

Supplier-identified Scope 3

Aggregated totals cross. Line items naming a supplier need that supplier’s consent, which is not the reporting company’s to give.

Emission factors and method internals

The factor database stays on SustainQ’s side of the fence. Holding it would mean being able to recompute the numbers, and the fence would become a document rather than a fact.

Whose determination is it? When an answer reaches an investor through this portal but was computed in the sustainability platform, the obligation to explain it is unassignable unless somebody writes it down. Australian automated-decision disclosure becomes enforceable inside the window this connection is being built in, so it carries a joint manifest per customer: purpose, model, provider, inference region, data classes, whether a human decision point exists, and who is affected. This portal states it rather than leaving a reader to work out which system answered them.