GRI^™ Index

During 2018, Leidos business was aligned into four segments:

• National Security Solutions (Surveillance & Reconnaissance; Integrated Systems; Global Services)
• Information Systems & Global Solutions (Enterprise IT Services; Software Development & Integrated Systems; Cybersecurity; Data Analytics; Air Traffic Management; Health Management Services; Energy Management & Operations; Acquisition, Program Management & Logistics)
• Health (Federal Health; Commercial Health; Life Sciences) and Infrastructure (Security Products; Power Grid Engineering; Federal Environmental & Engineering; Transaction & Valuation Consulting)
• Corporate and Other

Total number of employees by employment contract (permanent and temporary), by gender.

Total number of employees by employment contract (permanent and temporary), by region.

Total number of employees by employment type (full-time and part-time), by gender.

Whether a significant portion of the organization’s activities are performed by workers who are not employees. If applicable, a description of the nature and scale of work performed by workers who are not employees.

Any significant variations in the numbers reported (such as seasonal variations in the tourism or agricultural industries).

An explanation of how the data have been compiled, including any assumptions made.

Significant changes to the organization’s size, structure, ownership, or supply chain, including:

Changes in the location of, or changes in, operations, including facility openings, closings, and expansions;

Changes in the share capital structure and other capital formation, maintenance, and alteration operations (for private sector organizations);

Changes in the location of suppliers, the structure of the supply chain, or relationships with suppliers, including selection and termination.

A list of all entities included in the organization’s consolidated financial statements or equivalent documents;

Whether any entity included in the organization’s consolidated financial statements or equivalent documents is not covered by the report.

An explanation of the process for defining the report content and the topic Boundaries;

An explanation of how the organization has implemented the Reporting Principles for defining report content.

GRI Standards Index

About Our Reporting

Explanation  of  the  material  topic  and  its  Boundary

An  explanation  of  why  the  topic  is  material;

• The Boundary for the material topic,  which includes a  description of where the impacts occur; the organization’s involvement with the impacts. For example, whether the organization has caused or contributed to the impacts, or is directly linked to the impacts through its business relationships;
• Any specific limitation regarding the topic Boundary

The management approach and its components

a. An explanation of how the organization manages the topic.

b. A statement of the purpose of the management approach.

c. A description of the following, if the management approach includes that component:

1. i.Policies;
2. ii.Commitments;
3. iii.Goals and targets;
4. iv.Responsibilities;
5. v.Resources;
6. vi.Grievance mechanisms;
7. vii.Specific actions, such as processes, projects, programs and initiatives

Key topics and concerns that have been raised through stakeholder engagement, including:

How the organization has responded to those key topics and concerns, including through its reporting;

The claim made by the organization, if it has prepared a report in accordance with the GRI Standards, either:

• ‘This report has been prepared in accordance with the GRI Standards: Core option’;
• ‘This report has been prepared in accordance with the GRI Standards: Comprehensive option’

The GRI content index, which specifies each of the GRI Standards used and lists all disclosures included in the report.

For each disclosure, the content index shall include:

• The number of the disclosure (for disclosures covered by the GRI Standards);
• The page number(s) or URL(s) where the information can be found, either within the report or in other published materials;
• If applicable, and where permitted, the reason(s) for omission when a required disclosure cannot be made.

A description of the organization’s policy and current practice with regard to seeking external assurance for the report.

If the report has been externally assured:

• A reference to the external assurance report, statements, or opinions. If not included in the assurance report accompanying the sustainability report, a description of what has and what has not been assured and on what basis, including the assurance standards used, the level of assurance obtained, and any limitations of the assurance process;
• The relationship between the organization and the assurance provider;
• Whether and how the highest governance body or senior executives are involved in seeking external assurance for the organization’s sustainability report.

Governance structure of the organization, including committees of the highest governance body.

Committees responsible for decision-making on economic, environmental, and social topics.

Leidos is governed by a board of directors comprising thirteen directors, twelve of which are independent directors as defined by the New York Stock Exchange and corporate governance guidelines. The board includes four standing committees, including an Corporate Governance and Ethics Committee, chartered with the responsibility to review such environmental, social and governance issues that may significantly impact the Company’s business operations, reputation or relations with employees, customers, stockholders and other constituents. The Governance and Ethics Committee also reviews legislative and regulatory trends and public policy developments that may affect the Company’s business, including government relations activity.

A description  of  internal  and  external  mechanisms  for:

• Seeking  advice  about  ethical  and  lawful  behavior,  and  organizational  integrity;
• Reporting concerns about unethical or unlawful behavior,  and organizational integrity.

Direct economic value generated and distributed

Direct economic value generated and distributed (EVG&D) on an accruals basis, including the basic components for the organization’s global operations as listed below. If data are presented on a cash basis, report the justification for this decision in addition to reporting the following basic components:

• Direct economic value generated: revenues;
• Economic value distributed: operating costs, employee wages and benefits, payments to providers of capital, payments to government by country, and community investments;
• Economic value retained: ‘direct economic value generated’ less ‘economic value distributed’.
• Where significant, report EVG&D separately at country, regional, or market levels, and the criteria used for defining significance.

See 2018 Annual Report

Community > Corporate Philanthropy

Financial implications and other risks and opportunities for the organization's activities due to climate change

Risks and opportunities posed by climate change that have the potential to generate substantive changes in operations, revenue, or expenditure, including:

• A description of the risk or opportunity and its classification as either physical, regulatory, or other;
• A description of the impact associated with the risk or opportunity;
• The financial implications of the risk or opportunity before action is taken;
• The methods used to manage the risk or opportunity;
• The costs of actions taken to manage the risk or opportunity.

Leidos reports relevant climate change risks and opportunities through CDP. Our latest response can be found here. Information on climate-related risks and opportunities can be found in section C2 – Risks and Opportunities.

Defined  benefit  plan  obligations  and  other  retirement  plans

If the plan’s liabilities are met by the organization’s general resources, the estimated value of those liabilities.

If a separate fund exists to pay the plan’s pension liabilities:

• The extent to which the scheme’s liabilities are estimated to be covered by the assets that have been set aside to meet them;
• The basis on which that estimate has been arrived at;
• When that estimate was made.
• If a fund set up to pay the plan’s pension liabilities is not fully covered, explain the strategy, if any, adopted by the employer to work towards full coverage, and the timescale, if any, by which the employer hopes to achieve full coverage.
• Percentage of salary contributed by employee or employer.
• Level of participation in retirement plans, such as participation in mandatory or voluntary schemes, regional, or country-based schemes, or those with financial impact.

As of January 1, 2018, the Leidos Biomedical Research plan has 689 active participants, 539 deferred vested participants and 581 receiving pensions. This plan is approximately 99 percent funded as of January 1, 2018, on a stabilized funding basis. This plan was fully frozen on August 30, 2019. All participant accruals are fully frozen.

As of January 1, 2019, the Leidos Biomedical Research plan has 645 active participants, 532 deferred vested participants and 623 receiving pensions. This plan is approximately 99 percent funded as of January 1, 2019, on a stabilized funding basis. This plan was fully frozen on August 30, 2019. All participant accruals are fully frozen.

The second plan includes, as of 31 March 2018: 172 deferred members, 69 pensioner members (including 5 dependent pensioner members) and funding level of 94%. It is also closed to future participants, is sponsored by the Calanais Pension Trustee Co., Ltd., and is approximately 85 percent funded.  

As of 31 March 2019 the Calanais Pension trustee Co., LTD sponsored plan included: 156 deferred members, 78 pensioner members (including 6 dependent pensioner members) and funding level of 97%.

Energy consumption within the organization:

1. Total fuel consumption within the organization from non-renewable sources, in joules or multiples, and including fuel types used.
2. Total fuel consumption within the organization from renewable sources, in joules or multiples, and including fuel types used.
3. In joules, watt-hours or multiples, the total:
   1. electricity  consumption
   2. heating consumption
   3. cooling  consumption
   4. steam  consumption
4. In joules, watt-hours or multiples, the total:
   1. electricity sold
   2. heating sold
   3. cooling sold
   4. steam sold
5. Total energy consumption within the organization, in joules or multiples.
6. Standards, methodologies, assumptions, and/or calculation tools used.
7. Source of the conversion factors used.

Energy consumption outside of the organization:

1. Energy consumption outside of the organization, in joules or multiples.
2. Standards, methodologies, assumptions, and/or calculation tools used.
3. Source of the conversion factors used.

Energy intensity:

1. Energy intensity ratio for the organization.
2. Organization-specific metric (the denominator) chosen to calculate the ratio
3. Types of energy included in the intensity ratio; whether fuel, electricity, heating, cooling, steam, or all.
4. Whether the ratio uses energy consumption within the organization, outside of it, or both.

1. 95.7 kBtu/ft² (buildings energy only, fleet vehicle energy excluded)
2. Total owned and lease floor area is 6,804,316 ft² (Leidos-occupied floor area only, subleased floor area excluded)
3. Natural gas and electricity consumption in owned and leased buildings. Leidos does not purchase heating, cooling, steam, or any other fuels. Fleet vehicle fuel consumption is not captured because the base metric of the intensity ratio is floor area of buildings. Note that fleet vehicle fuel consumption accounts for less than 2% of total energy.
4. All reported energy is consumed within the organization.

Reduction of energy consumption:

1. Amount of reductions in energy consumption achieved as a direct result of conservation and efficiency initiatives, in joules or multiples.
2. Types of energy included in the reductions; whether fuel, electricity, heating, cooling, steam, or all.
3. Basis for calculating reductions in energy consumption, such as base year or baseline, including the rationale for choosing it.
4. Standards, methodologies, assumptions, and/or calculation tools used.

Direct greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (Scope 1):

1. Gross direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions in metric tons of CO₂ equivalent.
2. Gases included in the calculation; whether CO₂, CH₄, N₂O, HFCs, PFCs, SF₆, NF₃, or all.
3. Biogenic CO₂ emissions in metric tons of CO₂ equivalent.
4. Base year for the calculation, if applicable, including:
   1. the rationale for choosing it;
   2. emissions in the base year;
   3. the context for any significant changes in emissions that triggered recalculations of base year emissions.
5. Source of the emission factors and the global warming potential (GWP) rates used, or a reference to the GWP source.
6. Consolidation approach for emissions; whether equity share, financial control, or operational control.
7. Standards, methodologies, assumptions, and/or calculation tools used.

Energy indirect (Scope 2) GHG emissions:

1. Gross location-based energy indirect (Scope 2) GHG emissions in metric tons of CO₂ equivalent.
2. If applicable, gross market-based energy indirect (Scope 2) GHG emissions in metric tons of CO₂ equivalent.
3. If available, the gases included in the calculation; whether CO₂, CH₄, N₂O, HFCs, PFCs, SF₆, NF₃, or all.
4. Base year for the calculation, if applicable, including:
   1. the rationale for choosing it;
   2. emissions in the base year;
   3. the context for any significant changes in emissions that triggered recalculations of base year emissions.
5. Source of the emission factors and the global warming potential (GWP) rates used, or a reference to the GWP source.
6. Consolidation approach for emissions; whether equity share, financial control, or operational control.
7. Standards, methodologies, assumptions, and/or calculation tools used.

Other indirect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (Scope 3):

1. Gross other indirect (Scope 3) GHG emissions in metric tons of CO₂ equivalent.
2. If available, the gases included in the calculation; whether CO₂, CH₄, N₂O, HFCs, PFCs, SF₆, NF₃, or all.
3. Biogenic CO₂ emissions in metric tons of CO₂ equivalent.
4. Other indirect (Scope 3) GHG emissions categories and activities included in the calculation.
5. Base year for the calculation, if applicable, including:

• the rationale for choosing it;
• emissions in the base year;
• the context for any significant changes in emissions that triggered recalculations of base year emissions.

6. Source of the emission factors and the global warming potential (GWP) rates used, or a reference to the GWP source.
7. Standards, methodologies, assumptions, and/or calculation tools used.

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions intensity:

1. GHG emissions intensity ratio for the organization.
2. Organization-specific metric (the denominator) chosen to calculate the ratio.
3. Types of GHG emissions included in the intensity ratio; whether direct (Scope 1), energy indirect (Scope 2), and/or other indirect (Scope 3).
4. Gases included in the calculation; whether CO₂, CH₄, N₂O, HFCs, PFCs, SF₆, NF₃, or all.

1. 8.4 kgCO2e/ft2 (market-based)
2. Total owned and lease floor area is 6,804,316 ft² (Leidos-occupied floor area only, subleased floor area excluded)
3. INCLUDED: Scope 1 GHG emissions from natural gas combustion for heating, diesel fuel combustion in generators, and fugitive refrigerants from owned large air conditioning and refrigeration equipment. Also, market-based Scope 2 GHG emissions from purchased electricity and purchased natural gas heating in full-service leases.
4. EXCLUDED: Scope 1 GHG emissions from fleet vehicles and Scope 3 GHG emissions from employee commuting and business travel are not captured in the emissions intensity ratio, because the base metric is building floor area.
5. All gases are included; however, Leidos activities do not generate any PFCs, SF₆, NF₃.

Reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions:

1. GHG emissions reduced as a direct result of reduction initiatives, in metric tons of CO2 equivalent.
2. Gases included in the calculation; whether CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, SF6, NF3, or all.
3. Base year or baseline, including the rationale for choosing it.
4. Scopes in which reductions took place; whether direct (Scope 1), energy indirect (Scope 2), and/or other indirect (Scope 3).
5. Standards, methodologies, assumptions, and/or calculation tools used.

1. 12,763 mtCO2e
2. CO2, CH4, N2O. Reduction initiatives did not affect any other GHGs.
3. 2017 was selected as the base year for GHG reductions reported in this section to evaluate year-over-year improvements.
4. Scope 1 and Scope 2 only.
5. GHG emissions were reduced as a direct result of three initiatives: elimination of under-performing real estate assets, renewable energy purchases, and energy efficiency improvements.
6. The GHG reduction from eliminated real estate was assumed proportional to the reduction of Leidos-occupied floor area from 2017 to 2018 (-6.3%).
7. The GHG reduction from increased renewable energy purchases were determined by multiplying increase in renewable purchases (in kWh) from 2017 to 2018 by the eGRID emission factors for the sub-region in which the purchasing facilities operate.
8. The GHG reduction from energy efficiency improvements were determined by multiplying the projected annual energy savings (in kWh) of each project by the eGRID emission factors for the sub-region in which each project was completed.

Waste by type and disposal method:

Report the total weight of hazardous and non-hazardous waste, by the following disposal methods:

• Reuse
• Recycling
• Composting
• Recovery, including energy recovery
• Incineration (mass burn)
• Deep well injection
• Landfill
• On-site storage
• Other (to be specified by the organization)

Total weight of non-hazardous waste, with a breakdown by the following disposal methods where applicable:

• Reuse
• Recycling
• Composting
• Recovery, including energy recovery
• Incineration (mass burn)
• Deep well injection
• Landfill
• On-site storage
• Other (to be specified by the organization)

How the waste disposal method has been determined:

• Disposed of directly by the organization, or otherwise directly confirmed
• Information provided by the waste disposal contractor
• Organizational defaults of the waste disposal contractor

Leidos has national contracts with professional waste management companies for recycling and waste disposal at all owned (not leased) facilities. Total recycling and compost waste details are provided in the Environment > Corporate Footprint and Environmental Stewardship section.

Leidos disposes of hazardous waste using Clean Harbors Environmental Services. In all cases, we are considered a small quantity generator per US EPA (less than 1,000 kilograms of hazardous waste per month). The waste is generally landfilled or incinerated at an EPA-permitted hazardous waste Treatment Storage and Disposal Facility (TSDF), as reported to Leidos by Clean Harbors Environmental Services.

New suppliers that were screened using environmental criteria

Percentage of new suppliers that were screened using environmental criteria.

Negative  environmental  impacts  in  the  supply  chain  and  actions  taken:

1. Number of suppliers assessed for environmental impacts.
2. Number of suppliers identified as having significant actual and potential negative environmental impacts.
3. Significant actual and potential negative environmental impacts identified in the supply chain.
4. Percentage of suppliers identified as having significant actual and potential negative environmental impacts with which improvements were agreed upon as a result of assessment.
5. Percentage of suppliers identified as having significant actual and potential negative environmental impacts with which relationships were terminated as a result of assessment, and why.

1. None
2. None
3. None
4. 0 %
5. 0%

Types  of  injury  and  rates  of  injury,  occupational  diseases, lost  days,  and  absenteeism,  and  number  of  work-related  fatalities:

1.  Types  of  injury,  injury  rate  (IR),  occupational  disease  rate  (ODR),  lost  day  rate  (LDR),  absentee  rate  (AR),  and  work-related  fatalities,  for  all  employees,  with  a  breakdown  by:
   1. Region;
   2. Gender.
2. Types  of  injury,  injury  rate  (IR),  and  work-related  fatalities,  for  all  workers  (excluding  employees)  whose  work,  or  workplace,  is  controlled  by  the  organization,  with  a  breakdown  by:
   1. Region;
   2. Gender.
3. The  system  of  rules  applied  in  recording  and  reporting  accident  statistics.

Leidos reports for the company's overall injury rate by total workforce only (vs. by gender or region).

Environment > Environmental-health-and-safety

Programs  for  upgrading  employee  skills  and  transition assistance  programs:

1. Type and scope of programs implemented and assistance provided to upgrade employee skills.
2. Transition assistance programs provided to facilitate continued employability and the management of career endings resulting from retirement or termination of employment.

Diversity  of  governance  bodies  and  employees:

• Percentage  of  individuals  within  the  organization’s  governance  bodies  in  each  of  the  following  diversity  categories:
  • Gender;
  • Age  group:  under  30  years  old,  30-50  years  old,  over  50  years  old;
  • Other  indicators  of  diversity  where  relevant  (such  as  minority  or  vulnerable  groups).
• Percentage  of  employees  per  employee  category in  each  of  the  following  diversity  categories:
  • Gender;
  • Age  group:  under  30  years  old,  30-50  years  old,  over  50  years  old;
  • Other  indicators  of  diversity  where  relevant  (such  as  minority  or  vulnerable  groups).

For governance composition, see 102-18 response.

People > Employee Demographics and Statistics

New  suppliers  that  were  screened  using  social  criteria

Negative  social  impacts  in  the  supply  chain  and  actions  taken:

1. Number of suppliers assessed for social impacts.
2. Number  of  suppliers  identified  as  having  significant  actual  and  potential  negative  social  impacts.
3. Significant  actual  and  potential  negative  social  impacts  identified  in  the  supply  chain.
4. Percentage  of  suppliers  identified  as  having  significant  actual  and  potential  negative  social  impacts  with  which  improvements  were  agreed  upon  as  a  result  of  assessment.
5. Percentage  of  suppliers  identified  as  having  significant  actual  and  potential  negative  social  impacts  with  which  relationships  were  terminated  as  a  result  of  assessment,  and  why..

Supplier and Small Business Relationships

Ethics and Compliance

Operations  with  local  community  engagement,  impact  assessments,  and  development  programs:

• Percentage  of  operations  with  implemented  local  community  engagement,  impact  assessments,  and/or  development  programs,  including  the  use  of:
  • Social  impact  assessments,  including  gender  impact  assessments,  based  on  participatory  processes;
  • Environmental  impact  assessments  and  ongoing  monitoring;
  • Public  disclosure  of  results  of  environmental  and  social  impact  assessments;
  • Local  community  development  programs  based  on  local  communities’  needs;
  • Stakeholder  engagement  plans  based  on  stakeholder  mapping;
  • Broad  based  local  community  consultation  committees  and  processes  that  include  vulnerable  groups;
  • Works  councils,  occupational  health  and  safety  committees  and  other  worker  representation  bodies  to  deal  with  impacts;
  • Formal local community grievance processes that  include  vulnerable  groups;
  • Works  councils,  occupational  health  and  safety  committees  and  other  worker  representation  bodies  to  deal  with  impacts;
  • Formal local community grievance processes 

Leidos does not currently track this metric. Most of our locations, however, engage in outreach within their communities. Included in this report are several examples of our efforts in both specific communities and amongst specific populations, as well as our community engagement priority areas. We believe that these programs and activities are effective, yet continue to look for ways to maximize their positive effects and minimize any negative impacts.

Community

Community > Corporate Philanthropy

Operations  assessed  for  risks  related  to  corruption:

• Total  number  and  percentage  of  operations  assessed  for  risks  related  to  corruption.
• Significant risks related to corruption identified through the risk assessment.

Communication  and  training  about  anti-corruption  policies  and  procedures:

• Total number and percentage of governance body members that the organization’s anti-corruption policies and procedures have been communicated to, broken down by region.
• Total number and percentage of employees that the organization’s anti-corruption policies and procedures have been communicated to, broken down by employee category and region.
• Total number and percentage of business partners that the organization’s anti-corruption policies and procedures have been communicated to, broken down by type of business partner and region. Describe if the organization’s anti-corruption policies and procedures have been communicated to any other persons or organizations.
• Total number and percentage of governance body members that have received training on anti-corruption, broken down by region.
• Total number and percentage of employees that have received training on anti-corruption, broken down by employee category and region.

Confirmed incidents of corruption and actions taken:

• Total number and nature of confirmed incidents of corruption.
• Total number of confirmed incidents in which employees were dismissed or disciplined for corruption.
• Total number of confirmed incidents when contracts with business partners were terminated or not renewed due to violations related to corruption.
• Public legal cases regarding corruption brought against the organization or its employees during the reporting period and the outcomes of such cases.

Political  contributions:

• Total  monetary  value  of  financial  and  in-kind  political  contributions  made  directly  and  indirectly by  the  organization  by  country  and  recipient/beneficiary.
• If  applicable,  how  the  monetary  value  of  in-kind  contributions  was  estimated..

Legal  actions  for  anti-competitive  behavior,  anti-trust,  and  monopoly  practices:

• Number  of  legal  actions  pending  or  completed  during  the  reporting  period  regarding  anti-competitive  behavior  and  violations  of  anti-trust  and  monopoly  legislation  in  which  the  organization  has  been  identified  as  a  participant.
• Main  outcomes  of  completed  legal  actions,  including  any  decisions  or  judgments.

Non-compliance  with  laws  and  regulations  in  the  social and  economic  area:

• Significant  fines  and  non-monetary  sanctions  for  non-compliance  with  laws  and/or  regulations  in  the  social  and  economic  area  in  terms  of:
  • total  monetary  value  of  significant  fines;
  • total  number  of  non-monetary  sanctions;
  • Cases brought through dispute resolution mechanisms.
• If the organization has not identified any non-compliance with laws and/or regulations, a brief statement of this fact is sufficient.
• The context against which significant fines and non-monetary sanctions were incurred.

None

Ethics and Compliance

Substantiated  complaints  concerning  breaches  of  customer privacy  and  losses  of  customer  data:

• Total number of  substantiated complaints  received concerning  breaches of customer  privacy, categorized by:
  • complaints  received from  outside parties  and substantiated  by the organization;
  • complaints from regulatory bodies.
• Total number of identified leaks,  thefts,  or losses of customer data.
• If the organization has not identified any substantiated complaints,  a  brief statement of this fact is sufficient.

None

Ethics and Compliance > Data Privacy