Why this dashboard
Google is asking you to report the spend that meets the Better and Best criteria in their procurement standard, the country of origin of every product, and the availability and cost of switching to products that meet those criteria.
Econori can give you a dashboard like this one. It places every purchased product in Google's Better or Best tier using the supplier evidence, specification sheets, origin data and global seasonal calendar held in the platform, shows what is still to be evidenced, and prices the switches that move you towards your target. Tiers are tags you set against criteria on the Metrics & scoring page, so they can be configured per customer. When you are ready to report, you share a dated snapshot of the dashboard carrying your logo and your client's, so you don't have to spend hours manually creating a report to send them.
This is a mockup dashboard and uses generated data to show what it could look like once your data is populated.
Spend against the standard
How much of in-scope spend meets the Better and Best criteria, which criteria are being met, and how that is movingIn-scope spend
$18.4M
5 categories · 1,214 products · 41 suppliers
+3.2% vs FY2024
Meets Better or Best
52.7%$9.70M
share of in-scope spend
▲ 6.1 pts vs FY2024
Meets Best
12.6%$2.32M
share of in-scope spend
▲ 2.4 pts vs FY2024
Awaiting supplier evidence
$2.58M14%
spend with no verified claim yet · 11 suppliers
4 claims expired this quarter
Spend by category and tierHighest tier each product line qualifies for · in-scope spend, reporting currency USD
BestBetterStandard (not yet meeting)
Criteria met, by share of category spendEvery criterion in the standard, whatever its evidence source: supplier claims, product specification sheets, origin and risk data, or the seasonal calendar. A product can meet several criteria; each % is of the spend in the categories that criterion covers.
CriterionCategoryTierSourceSpend meetingShare of category spend
Share of spend meeting Better or Best — monthlyFY2025 · dashed line is the 65% target set with the client
Supplier evidence statusShare of in-scope spend by the state of the supplier's claims
Origin, regionality and seasonality
Where products come from, how well origin is evidenced, how close sourcing is to each site, and whether produce was in season against the global seasonal calendarSpend by country of originProduct origin (traced preferred over self-reported) · dots mark deforestation and labour risk of the origin country
High riskMedium riskLow riskBar = spend, USD
Origin traceabilityShare of in-scope spend by how origin is known
Traced to farm / fisherySupplier evidence on file
38%Self-reported by supplierDeclared, not yet evidenced
47%Not recorded$2.7M · 214 products
15%Regional sourcing by siteShare of each region's spend by where it comes from, measured from each buying site · the regional radius is set per site, so island and city sites can use a wider one than continental sites
Within the site's regional radiusSame country, beyond radiusImported from beyond radius
Regional radius per site 1,000 km Singapore · 500 km Malaysia, Philippines & Indonesia37% of in-scope spend is regional
Seasonality of fruit & vegetable spend by siteWhether produce was in season where it was grown when it was bought · uses Econori's global seasonal calendar, keyed by produce and origin country, with your own overrides where needed · "regional" uses each site's radius
Global seasonal calendar. Maintained by Econori for every produce type and origin country, so it works for any customer and any site. You can override individual rows for your own sourcing; 3 rows are overridden here.
In season, regionalIn season, importedOut of season at originOrigin or season unknown
61% of fruit & veg spend was in season at origin
Products and evidence
Every purchased product placed in its tier, with the criteria it meets and the supporting evidence on fileProducts by tier and subcategoryEvery purchased product in scope, grouped by the highest tier it qualifies for · click a tier or subcategory to expand or collapse it · 4 products per page within each subcategory · Best and its first subcategory are open to start · evidence links open the supplier's certificate or audit on file
| Product | Supplier | Origin | Spend FY25 | Criteria met | Evidence | Supporting evidence |
|---|
Risk exposure
Deforestation, labour and water risk before and after supplier evidence, what mitigated it, and what is left to act onRisk exposure of in-scope spendFor each risk domain: the risk level of in-scope spend before any supplier evidence, the level after verified claims are applied, and which claims did the mitigating · the list underneath is what is left to act on
LowMediumHighShare of in-scope spend at each level
Mitigations applied verified supplier claims that lowered the risk level of the spend they cover
| Risk domain | Mitigating claim | Products covered | Supplier | Spend covered | Level before | Level after | Evidence |
|---|
Outstanding exposures to act on high and medium risk spend with no mitigating claim on file
| Products | Supplier | Risk domain | Level | Spend at risk | Recommended action |
|---|
Path to target
The product switches, cheapest uplift first, that take the Better or Best share from today to the targetPath to the 65% target: the switches that get you thereEach switch moves a Standard product to a Better or Best alternative your suppliers already list, cheapest uplift first. Every segment of the bar is one switch; the table lists the same switches in the same order with running totals. Costs are extra spend per year at FY25 volumes, price gap only.
| # | Switch | Tier | Availability | Unit price now → alt. | Δ | Extra cost / yr | Spend moved | Share after | Cost so far |
|---|