Evaluation Summary
Company Insights
Wooly Willy is owned by the company Play Monster Group. Hilde evaluates parent companies rather than individual brands. You can read more about why we think this approach is more helpful for consumers on our blog.
Play Monster doesn’t appear to have more than a few sentences about anything related to ingredient safety, sustainability, or corporate accountability. In our experience, not having any information (beyond a statement about complying with regulations) about ingredient safety or ingredient safety is particularly unusual given the kinds of products the company makes. Given the lack of public disclosure, you can probably guess that the company doesn’t score well on our evaluation criteria. We really hope they’ll start sharing more about these important issues soon.
Ingredient Safety
Hilde Likes
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
Disclosing chemicals and ingredients
We feel strongly that this company should provide consumers with greater transparency about the chemicals and ingredients present in their products and packaging
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
Hilde Likes
Opportunities for Improvement
Adopting strategies to increase circularity
We see a big opportunity for this company to reduce the environmental impact of their products and packaging by assessing the lifecycle and make more informed decisions about the ingredients and materials they use
Establishing programs to address environmental impacts
We think this company should establish credible efforts to measure and disclose their environmental impacts and create time bound goals to improve performance
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)
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
Hilde Likes
Opportunities for Improvement
Crafting a strong Supplier Code of Conduct
We think this company should craft or revise their existing code of conduct to align with recognized international standards
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
Hilde Likes
Opportunities for Improvement
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.
