We permit the publication of our auditors’ report, provided the report is published in full only and is accompanied by the full financial statements to which our auditors’ report relates, and is only published on an access-controlled page on your website, to enable users to verify that an auditors’ report by independent accountants has been commissioned by the directors and issued. Such permission to publish is given by us without accepting or assuming any responsibility or liability to any third party users save where we have agreed terms with them in writing.

Our consent is given on condition that before any third party accesses our auditors’ report via the webpage they first document their agreement to the following terms of access to our report via a click-through webpage with an 'I accept' button. The terms to be included on your website are as follows:

I accept and agree for and on behalf of myself and the Trust I represent (each a "recipient") that:

  1. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”) accepts no liability (including liability for negligence) to each recipient in relation to PwC’s report. The report is provided to each recipient for information purposes only. If a recipient relies on PwC’s report, it does so entirely at its own risk;
  2. No recipient will bring a claim against PwC which relates to the access to the report by a recipient;
  3. Neither PwC’s report, nor information obtained from it, may be made available to anyone else without PwC’s prior written consent, except where required by law or regulation; and
  4. PwC’s report was prepared with Hermes Property Unit Trust's interests in mind. It was not prepared with any recipient's interests in mind or for its use. PwC’s report is not a substitute for any enquiries that a recipient should make. The financial statements are as at 25 March 2017, and thus PwC’s auditors’ report is based on historical information. Any projection of such information or PwC’s opinion thereon to future periods is subject to the risk that changes may occur after the reports are issued and the description of controls may no longer accurately portray the system of internal control. For these reasons, such projection of information to future periods would be inappropriate.
  5. PwC will be entitled to the benefit of and to enforce these terms.
I accept

1. Select your country

  • United Kingdom
  • Austria
  • Australia
  • Belgium
  • Denmark
  • Finland
  • France
  • Germany
  • Iceland
  • Ireland
  • Italy
  • Luxembourg
  • Netherlands
  • Norway
  • Singapore
  • Spain
  • Sweden
  • Switzerland
  • USA
  • Other

2. Select your investor type

  • Financial Advisor
  • Discretionary Investment Manager
  • Wealth Manager
  • Family Office
  • Institutional Investor
  • Investment Consultant
  • Charity, Foundation & Endowment Investor
  • Retail Investor
  • Press
  • None of the above

3. Accept our terms and conditions

By clicking Proceed I confirm I have read the important information and agree to the terms of use.


The Hermes Investment Management website uses cookies to remember your preferences and help us improve the site.
By proceeding, you agree to cookies being placed on your computer.
Read our privacy and cookie policy.

Compass Group

Food safety

Home / EOS Case Studies / Compass Group

Compass Group provides catering services to a wide range of institutions, including large companies, hospitals, schools, universities and sports arenas. It operates in more than 55,000 locations in over 50 countries and serves over five billion meals a year.

Several high-profile fraud incidents have struck the food sector in recent years. According to the Food Fraud Initiative MSU, food fraud costs the global food industry $40 billion each year.

In 2013, a number of retailers, major manufacturers and foodservice operators found that some of their products inadvertently contained horsemeat. Although not directly affected, Compass did retrospectively identify a mislabelling incident in relation to a supplied product that it had previously withdrawn from its Irish supply chain.

Our engagement
We commenced engagement with the company in 2015. One of our objectives was to ensure that the company could demonstrate effective food safety policies and control processes to avoid the recurrence of a similar scandal. We had conversations on a number of occasions with the company’s director of health, safety and environment and with the head of supply chain integrity. We also met the former chair of the corporate responsibility committee to request that the company report on the progress it has made.

Changes at the company
Following the horse meat scandal, the company made significant improvements to the management of its food supply chain, such as the inclusion of a food safety incident rate measure in its executive bonus scheme.

In 2015, it launched a new version of its global supply chain integrity standards to make it more resilient to food fraud. This included an increased focus on horizon-scanning for new and emerging risks, supplier mapping and the routine testing of products. In 2017, the company conducted a gap analysis on the implementation of these standards with action plans to address any shortfalls in its operations in individual countries. In 2018, following discussions with us regarding the importance for the company to ensure awareness of the speak-up channel in its supply chain, Compass reviewed its supplier code.

Food fraud involves sophisticated criminal activity, which is why, in addition to strong company actions, cross-industry collaboration is required. As reported in its 2017 CSR report, Compass has demonstrated leadership on food fraud by being a founding member of an initiative on food integrity – the Food Industry Intelligence Network – through which UK food businesses share intelligence by submitting anonymous data on product testing.

The EU Food Fraud Network reported 775 cases of suspected fraud in 2017, a significant jump from 243 in 2016. Therefore, we will continue to engage with the company on the level of control and visibility over its supply chain. Potential solutions include more sophisticated supplier mapping, supply chain assurance, as well as food tracking and detection systems, including the use of blockchain technology.

Share this post:
Pauline Lecoursonnois Pauline Lecoursonnois is sector co-lead for consumer goods and retail and responsible for company engagements in Australia. Prior to joining Hermes EOS, she worked as a research analyst at Institutional Shareholder Services, focusing on governance matters, and as a research assistant at the Universities Superannuation Scheme. Pauline holds a Master in Management & Sustainable Development from Sherbrooke University and the ESCEM School of Business and Management. She speaks French and has a good working knowledge of Spanish.
Read all articles by Pauline Lecoursonnois
Previous article:
United Utilities
Next article:
Samsung Electronics

Engagement objective

Strategy, risk and communication: Food safety

Find posts by author

  • Alex Knox, ACA
  • Amy Wilson
  • Andrew Jackson
  • Bill Mackenzie
  • Bruce Duguid
  • Christine Chow
  • Claire Gavini
  • Colin Melvin
  • Darren Brady
  • Dominic Burke
  • Dr Michael Viehs
  • Emeric Chenebaux
  • Emma Hunt
  • Geoffrey Wan, CFA
  • Hans-Christoph Hirt
  • Harriet Steel
  • Ilana Elbim
  • Jaime Gornsztejn
  • Jonathan Pines, CFA
  • Joseph Buckley
  • Justine Lutterodt
  • Kimberley Lewis
  • Leon Kamhi
  • Louise Dudley
  • Mark Sherlock, CFA
  • Maxime Le Floch, CFA
  • Maxine Wille
  • Michael Russell, CFA
  • Michael Vaughan
  • Michael Viehs
  • Natacha Dimitrijevic
  • Nick Spooner
  • Nina Röhrbein
  • Peter Hofbauer
  • Philip Nell
  • Rochelle Giugni
  • Roland Bosch
  • Sachi Suzuki
  • Saker Nusseibeh
  • Silvia Dall’Angelo
  • Tatiana Bosteels
  • Tim Goodman
  • Tommaso Mancuso
  • Yasmin Chowdhury

Find posts by category

  • eos
  • risk
  • social