Edloe Finch
Evaluation Completed:
November 12, 2025
Evaluation Summary
Company Insights
Edloe Fince is owned by the company Exemplis. Hilde evaluates parent companies rather than individual brands. Learn more here.
Our evaluation of Exemplis left us scratching our heads. On one hand, the company owns a brand (Sitonit Seating) that seems to have found a niche for commercial customers who are looking to comply with green building standards. The company references that brand’s documentation related to ingredient safety and sustainability. Even the sustainability report referenced on the company website appeared to be for a single brand and not representative of the parent company. Documentation branding aside, a bigger issue for us was that it was unclear the extent to which the efforts that may be underway at this brand were actually being carried out by the parent company and the other brands they control. If they are being applied holistically across all the brands they own, then there would appear to be some initial efforts in place. Hopefully the company will provide clearer communication and better substantiation on their efforts in the future.
Ingredient Safety
Foundational Gaps
Solid Baseline
Strong Performance
Hilde Likes
Recognizing the importance of ingredient safety
This company provides information indicating that avoiding chemicals of concern in their products is a material issue
Opportunities for Improvement
Adopting a comprehensive approach to ingredient safety
We would like to see this brand adopt a precautionary safer chemicals policy, use a publicly available Restricted Substances List, address sources of contaminants, and use laboratory testing to ensure purity and assess compliance
Better claims substantiation on ingredient safety
We would like to see more and better information related to this company's ingredient safety claims
Verification of ingredient safety efforts
We think this company should start using or expand the use of high-quality certifications that help verify their claims related to ingredient safety
Category Definition
Our ingredient safety evaluation criteria are designed to help us determine how a company measures, manages, and discloses, the use of chemicals of concern that may be present in raw materials, ingredients, manufacturing processes, and finished products.
Foundational Gaps
The company does not meet sufficient baseline criteria for this category and has many opportunities for improvement.
Solid Baseline
The company meets most of our basic criteria and sometimes demonstrates a deeper commitment than other companies on issues in this category.
Strong Performance:
The company appears to be a top performer in this evaluation category and exhibits leadership on one or more of the issues we evaluate.
Environmental Impact
Foundational Gaps
Solid Baseline
Strong Performance
Hilde Likes
None Identified
Opportunities for Improvement
Committing to a science-based climate goal
We would love to see this company build on their existing climate efforts by publicly adopting a greenhouse gas emissions reduction goal aligned with a science-based approach
Improving climate pollution disclosures
We think this company should start measuring and publicly disclosing their annual GHG emissions including those from their value chain (Scope 3)
Launching efforts to protect biodiversity & ecosyse
We would like to see this company take steps to understand and mitigate the impacts their operations, supply chain, or products have on biodiversity, nature, and ecosystems and communicate about them publicly
Category Definition
Our environmental impact reduction evaluation criteria are designed to help us determine how a company measures, manages, and discloses information about the impacts that their operations, products, and supply chain may have on our air, land, water, and ecosystems.
Foundational Gaps
The company does not meet sufficient baseline criteria for this category and has many opportunities for improvement.
Solid Baseline
The company meets most of our basic criteria and sometimes demonstrates a deeper commitment than other companies on issues in this category.
Strong Performance:
The company appears to be a top performer in this evaluation category and exhibits leadership on one or more of the issues we evaluate.
Worker Fairness
Foundational Gaps
Solid Baseline
Strong Performance
Hilde Likes
None Identified
Opportunities for Improvement
Committing to living wages
This company has the policies and resources in place to make a formal commitment to fair or living wages for their employees and the people in their supply chain
Launching a responsible sourcing program
We would like this company to launch a responsible sourcing program that includes an internal policy, defines higher-risk raw materials, and their process for mitigating impacts to people & the planet
Filling gaps on people impacts
We believe this company should put credible efforts in place to ensure that their employees are treated fairly, that human rights are protected for people in their supply chain, raw materials are sourced responsibly, and publicly share info about their work
Category Definition
Our worker fairness evaluation criteria are designed to help us determine how a company measures, manages, and discloses information about the way they treat their employees, workers in their supply chain, and other stakeholders.
Foundational Gaps
The company does not meet sufficient baseline criteria for this category and has many opportunities for improvement.
Solid Baseline
The company meets most of our basic criteria and sometimes demonstrates a deeper commitment than other companies on issues in this category.
Strong Performance:
The company appears to be a top performer in this evaluation category and exhibits leadership on one or more of the issues we evaluate.
Accountability
Foundational Gaps
Solid Baseline
Strong Performance
Hilde Likes
None Identified
Opportunities for Improvement
Linking incentives & sustainability performance
We think this company should link incentives for key internal stakeholders to performance on sustainability goals and share those metrics publicly to help drive action on these issues
Securing sustainability data & reporting assurance
We think this company should strengthen the credibility of the data and information they report related to their sustainability performance by having it audited and assured by an independent external organization
Providing public disclosure and reporting
We think this company should start publishing regular annual reports on sustainability or ESG topics for consumers or other stakeholders and maintain a publicly available archive of past reports
Establishing good governance practices
We think this company should integrate sustainability into the business model and decision making while enabling accountability mechanisms at the executive and board level
Category Defition
Our corporate accountability evaluation criteria are designed to help us determine how a company integrates sustainability across their organization to help govern decision making and engage with external stakeholders in socially responsible ways.
Foundational Gaps
The company does not meet sufficient baseline criteria for this category and has many opportunities for improvement.
Solid Baseline
The company meets most of our basic criteria and sometimes demonstrates a deeper commitment than other companies on issues in this category.
Strong Performance:
The company appears to be a top performer in this evaluation category and exhibits leadership on one or more of the issues we evaluate.