CACI
The biggest 1000 U.S. companies by revenue according to form 10-K.
Rating Overview
Rating Criteria
Rating Criteria Detail
Corporate Weaponization
Criteria:
Has canceled customers, suppliers, or vendors due to their political views or religious beliefs OR corporately boycotts, divests, or sanctions regions, people groups, or industries.
Risk Level:
MediumRationale:
CACI integrates ESG into its business practices. From its 2023 CSR Report: the Board addressed ESG-related matters, including “Approve ESG initiatives and linkage to executive compensation” (1). The company promotes divisive sex and gender policies. Its Supplier Code of Conduct requires international vendors to include sexual orientation and gender identity in their nondiscrimination policy (2). However, CACI has not canceled customers, suppliers, or vendors based on political views or religious beliefs (3).
Criteria:
Charitable giving (including employee matching programs) policies or practices discriminate against charitable organizations based on views or religious beliefs.
Risk Level:
LowerRationale:
CACI does not appear to discriminate against charitable organizations based on views or beliefs (1).
Criteria:
Employment policies fail to protect against viewpoint or other discrimination and/or are ideological in nature.
Risk Level:
MediumRationale:
CACI does not provide viewpoint protections for its employees (1).
Corporate Governance and Public Policy
Criteria:
Uses corporate reputation to support causes, organizations, or policies hostile to freedom of expression.
Risk Level:
MediumCriteria:
Uses corporate funds to advance ideological causes, organizations, or policies hostile to freedom of expression.
Risk Level:
MediumRationale:
CACI is an Advocate level partner of PFLAG, an LGBTQ+ activist group that promotes books for children with sexually explicit and gender fluid content and advocates against laws that inform parents of their child’s gender dysphoria or prevent unapproved transgender medical treatments for minors (1)(2)(3). Otherwise, there are no publicly known cases of the company using corporate funds to advance ideological causes, organizations, or policies (4).