Prose Beauty
Evaluation Completed:
November 7, 2025
Adults
Evaluation Summary
Company Insights
Every once in a while we come across a company that has some new and novel approaches to addressing the issues that matter from an ethical business perspective. Prose is one of those companies. They have a unique way of disclosing their ingredients that includes hazard scores as well as countries of origin, and they offer an “opt-out” mechanism to reduce packaging waste from plastic pumps. We’d love to see these more broadly adopted by companies in the personal care industry. Being a B-corp also gets out kudos. We’d like to see the company move beyond an offset-driven approach to climate protection and formalize their responsible sourcing practices, among other improvements.
Ingredient Safety
Foundational Gaps
Solid Baseline
Strong Performance
Hilde Likes
Avoiding known problem chemicals
This company appears to take a good first step by restricting the use of toxic chemicals that are common to their product categories
Providing full ingredient disclosure
Telling people what is in your products is a basic (but sometimes missing) step towards safer products
Opportunities for Improvement
Tackling advanced ingredient safety issues
We would like to see this company build on their solid safety baseline by including laboratory testing and a process for addressing contaminants
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
Measuring greenhouse gas emissions
This company is taking an important first step by measuring their greenhouse gas emissions using trusted methods
Taking steps to reduce packaging impacts
This company is taking some good initial steps to reduce the environmental impacts of their packaging like using post-consumer recycled raw materials
Using circular design thinking
We appreciate that this company appears to be integrating more circular approaches to designing and making products and packaging to help reduce environmental impacts
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
Formalizing biodiversity protection efforts
We would like to see this company build on their initial efforts related to more sustainable raw materials production by establishing an internal biodiversity protection policy and goal
Setting packaging sustainability targets
We think this company should start to set time-bound goals for reducing the environmental impacts of their packaging and publicly report on their progress towards them
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
Employee ownership
This company appears to promote greater economic equality by giving their employees a direct financial stake in the success of the business
More supply chain transparency
This company provides some useful information about where they source raw materials and where their products are manufactured
Opportunities for Improvement
Providing paid maternity leave
We would like to see this company adopt a paid maternity leave policy for their employees that goes beyond regulatory requirements and share it publicly
Better claims substantiation for people benefits
More transparency by the company is needed related to their claims for people benefits topics because we were unable to find sufficient publicly available substantiation for some criteria
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
Mission alignment with sustainability
We appreciate that this company has included safety and sustainability as part of their mission
Opportunities for Improvement
Substantiating advocacy claims
This company appears to recognize the potential for industry-wide change through advocacy but should provide additional details about their efforts
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
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.