Jenny Mae from Vandelanotte

We recently sat down with Jenny Mae Vansteenlandt, Senior Sustainability Advisor at Vandelanotte who has spent over two years auditing carbon footprints across companies of all sizes. We sat down with her to understand what makes a carbon footprint truly auditable and why the choice of tool matters more than most companies realise.

The Starting Point: boundaries and completeness

Before looking at a single emissions figure, Jenny Mae focuses on the organisational boundary where comparability throughout the years is very important. A boundary that shifts between reporting cycles makes it nearly impossible to track progress and is one of the first red flags auditors look for.

From there, her team conducts a completeness review of Scope 3 categories: not just checking what is reported, but assessing what might be missing. "Based on our understanding of the company, its sector, and peer practices, we assess whether all relevant Scope 3 categories have been included.The frameworks guiding this work are CSRD/ESRS for the disclosure structure and the GHG Protocol for the underlying calculation methodology.

The Documentation Gap: where audits slow down

When calculations are buried in complex Excel files with undocumented formulas, tracing figures back to source data becomes a time-consuming exercise.

Ask any auditor what causes the most friction, and the answer is almost always the same: a lack of transparency. "The origin of certain numbers is not always immediately clear," Jenny Mae says.

What makes an audit run smoothly, then? Clear and logical structure, transparent formulas, documented assumptions, verifiable input data and a concise summary of results, whether a slide deck or a short report, that gives auditors the necessary context before they dive in.

What changes when Carbon+Alt+Delete is in the picture

Having audited carbon footprints built in Carbon+Alt+Delete, Jenny Mae has a clear view of the difference. It's not just a matter of preference - it has a measurable impact on audit efficiency and data quality.

"The platform clearly shows the exact input which is needed for each carbon footprint calculation, along with the associated supporting documents and templates." For an auditor, this is significant: instead of searching for what was used and why, everything is structured and accessible from the start.

She highlights several specific advantages over Excel-based approaches:

The cumulative effect is clear: "The data is typically easier to navigate, making our audit process more efficient."

The Business Case: structured tools pay back at audit time

Jenny Mae makes this argument directly to clients who are weighing the cost of dedicated software against doing it in-house with Excel. The savings show up later at verification time:

"All these things lead to more efficiency, which helps a company shift focus to improving data quality and on emission reduction." The audit becomes less about finding information and more about assessing it.

Demand is growing - even ahead of regulation

Third-party verification demand is rising, and Jenny Mae sees it coming from two directions. On one side, external pressure: companies looking to improve their EcoVadis scores, meet expectations from customers, or satisfy requirements from banks and investors. On the other, a genuine internal motivation to improve data quality and identify the most significant emission sources.

Notably, some companies falling under CSRD from 2028 onwards are already asking for verification today - not because they have to, but because they want to build maturity early. "They mainly do this so their data collection and reporting processes are more robust by the time it becomes mandatory."

The Auditor–Consultant Relationship: what structure changes

When structured platforms are used, the relationship between consultant and auditor becomes cleaner. The auditor has a dedicated view where they are able to review, comment, and verify without being able to alter inputs. This protects independence without creating friction.

Jenny Mae is also candid about the human side of auditing. Because her team supports other clients in building carbon footprints - and is working on their own internally - they understand the practical reality behind the numbers. "Data is not always perfect, and companies are often working with the best available information at a given point in time." That experience shapes an audit approach that is critical where it needs to be, but realistic in its expectations.

This also speaks to a broader advantage of Carbon+Alt+Delete that Jenny Mae highlights: the community. "When we conduct audits or are doing carbon accounting for other clients, we can be rest assured that our approach is well thought out. In case of doubts we do have the ability to get second opinions from experts of the platform or other companies who are performing audits and doing carbon accounting." Fast, expert feedback on methodology questions is not a small thing.

Would you recommend Carbon+Alt+Delete to companies seeking verification?

"Yes, Carbon+Alt+Delete offers a well-structured approach to carbon footprinting, with clear methodologies aligned to the GHG Protocol and a consistent way of working. The platform also allows you to generate transparent reports with sufficient detail, which is particularly useful when external stakeholders such as banks or investors ask for supporting evidence."

She closes with a nuance worth keeping in mind:

"The key is not the tool itself, but the level of transparency, structure, and documentation behind the carbon footprint — and platforms like Carbon+Alt+Delete tend to support that very well."

About Carbon+Alt+Delete

We provide carbon accounting software for sustainability consultants and consultancies that guide companies towards net zero. Curious to discover how our software can improve your carbon accounting services? Reach out at [email protected] or book a meeting with one of our experts.