This metric is asking whether the company’s Conflict Minerals Report describes due diligence conducted directly by the company, (e.g. through site visits, reviewing incident reports).
Some companies have outsourced this responsibility entirely by relying on third party schemes such as the Conflict Free Sourcing Initiative (CFSI)'s Conflict Free Smelter Program (CFSP) or the Global e-Sustainability Initiative, who check the due diligence practices of smelters / refiners.
Yes - Where the company has undertaken its own due diligence, give a “Yes” value and quote the relevant part of the report as a comment. For an example see Apple’s 2016 report, which discusses how it reviews reports on incidents that may be linked to its smelters / refiners, conducts spot audits and engages directly with its smelters / refiners: page 4 “Further Due Diligence: Incident Review and Resolution” and page 5 “Leveraging Expertise to Drive Desired Outcomes”.
No - Where the company does not describe any due diligence it has conducted directly give a “No“ value. If the report references a third party scheme such as CFSI, please make a note about this as a comment.
Tip: Try searching (ctrl-f) for terms like “visit”, “site“, “facility” or “SOR” - if you find any other good search terms for this metric please add them here.