How we review companies for gender diversity inclusion

We built this review to give a clear, fair and consistent picture of how companies and services treat trans and gender diverse people. Every company carries two ratings, shown side by side. The gap between them is often the real story.

Two ratings

What they say is built only from the documents a company publishes itself: its diversity and inclusion policy, its human rights statement, its code of conduct, its sustainability and annual reports. We score four markers: whether gender reassignment, gender identity or trans status is named where it matters; whether there is practical support and a complaints route; whether the company holds itself to account with targets or ownership; and the direction of travel over time.

What others report is built from the public record rather than the company's own words: recognition by inclusion schemes such as Stonewall or the HRC index; the company's gender pay gap against the national average; what employees say in public; the published employment tribunal record; and how the company represents trans and LGBTQ+ people in its marketing and giving.

Each rating is one of:

  • Inclusive: clear, specific inclusion of trans and gender diverse people, consistent across the evidence.
  • Some progress, gaps remain: real intent but clear gaps. General diversity language without naming gender reassignment, gender identity or trans status sits here.
  • Not inclusive: the evidence does not include trans and gender diverse people in any meaningful way, or contradicts inclusion.

How we handle the public record fairly

The second rating draws on sources beyond the company's control, so we hold it to careful rules. We count tribunal cases only from published decisions, and a claim is never treated as a finding. Employee sentiment is read from public posts only, labelled as lower confidence, and is never on its own the reason for the lowest rating. Every marker carries the source it rests on, so you can check it yourself. A "not inclusive" mark always rests on cited evidence, never on the mere absence of information.

What this review does and does not tell you

It measures public commitment, transparency and the public record. It is not a judgement on the experience of any individual employee or customer, because that lived experience is rarely visible in public sources.

Fairness and right of reply

Any organisation that believes we have missed a published source, or that something has changed, is welcome to contact us. We will review the evidence and update the assessment where it is warranted, and we record the date of each review so you can see how current it is.

How often we review

Companies change, so each assessment carries the date it was last reviewed. We revisit companies on a regular cycle, and when a company writes in to flag something new.

Anything here you want me to explain in plain language?

Sammy's here to help