public investor-owned electric and gas utility

PG&E

A public investor-owned electric and gas utility serving northern and central California. PG&E provides essential infrastructure, but wildfire deaths and liabilities, monopoly utility power, shareholder governance, rate recovery, and fossil-gas exposure make it one of the clearest low-scoring utility anchors.

Why this matters: Electric and gas service is unavoidable for many households, so utility ownership and safety failures matter more than ordinary consumer preference.

Letter grade F Malignant High confidence (AI) Rubric gcd-rubric-v1 Last reviewed May 12, 2026

Final Score -23* F - Malignant

FMALIGNANT-23 pts

* Tentative scaffolding score. Not human-checked or final.

Base Material15

Bonus+0

Cap35Ownership <= 2 and Governance <= 2

After Cap15

Penalties-38

!Not Verified

Represent this organization?

Request verification to have the evidence record checked against primary materials and organization-supplied documents. Verification does not buy a higher score; scores change only when review finds factual errors, omissions, or miscalibration.

Request verification

Evaluation Overview

F - Malignant

The score turns mainly on Scale Integrity, with the largest penalty coming from Human Harm.

Strengths

Scale Integrity4/5
Extraction2/10
Labor Sovereignty2/7

Penalties

Human Harm-12
Ecological Harm-8
Policy Capture-6
High-Carbon Products-6

Evidence state

ConfidenceHigh confidence (AI)
ThoroughnessDeveloped (AI)
Linked claims17
Direct axis claims17
Coverage17/17

Scoring Axes

Axis	Score	Why this score
Ownership ? Control rights: shareholder-dominated at 0, worker cooperative control at 10.	1 / 10	PG&E's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. PG&E's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. On Ownership, PG&E belongs low because control and surplus are mainly held by shareholders, executives, landlords, investors, or institutional boards while users face practical dependence. In a high-contact category like Utilities, that asymmetry counts more heavily than it would for an optional purchase. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence PG&E's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. [1] context PG&E's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2] context PG&E's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3] context PG&E's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4] context PG&E operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5] context PG&E's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6] context PG&E operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7] context PG&E's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8] context PG&E's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Governance ? Binding decision authority: centralized control at 0, democratic stakeholder control at 10.	1 / 10	PG&E's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. PG&E's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. On Governance, PG&E belongs low because control and surplus are mainly held by shareholders, executives, landlords, investors, or institutional boards while users face practical dependence. In a high-contact category like Utilities, that asymmetry counts more heavily than it would for an optional purchase. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence context PG&E's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. [1] PG&E's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2] context PG&E's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3] context PG&E's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4] context PG&E operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5] context PG&E's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6] context PG&E operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7] context PG&E's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8] context PG&E's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Extraction ? Surplus allocation, wage share, CEO pay ratio, margins, and structured extraction judgment.	2 / 10	PG&E's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. PG&E's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. On Extraction, PG&E belongs low because control and surplus are mainly held by shareholders, executives, landlords, investors, or institutional boards while users face practical dependence. In a high-contact category like Utilities, that asymmetry counts more heavily than it would for an optional purchase. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence context PG&E's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. [1] context PG&E's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2] PG&E's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3] context PG&E's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4] context PG&E operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5] context PG&E's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6] context PG&E operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7] context PG&E's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8] context PG&E's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Labor Sovereignty ? Worker power: coercive conditions at 0, co-determination or ownership at 7. Employee dissatisfaction matters only when source-backed evidence shows concrete limits on worker agency, such as coercive scheduling, retaliation, wage theft, harassment, unsafe conditions, suppression of worker voice, or extreme turnover.	2 / 7	PG&E's linked public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. PG&E's linked public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. On Labor Sovereignty, PG&E belongs low because control and surplus are mainly held by shareholders, executives, landlords, investors, or institutional boards while users face practical dependence. In a high-contact category like Utilities, that asymmetry counts more heavily than it would for an optional purchase. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence context PG&E's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. [1] context PG&E's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2] context PG&E's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3] PG&E's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4] context PG&E operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5] context PG&E's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6] context PG&E operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7] context PG&E's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8] context PG&E's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Solidarity with the Unemployed ? Treatment of exits and nonworkers, including severance, redeployment, and non-competes.	2 / 7	PG&E operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. PG&E operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. On Solidarity with the Unemployed, PG&E belongs low because control and surplus are mainly held by shareholders, executives, landlords, investors, or institutional boards while users face practical dependence. In a high-contact category like Utilities, that asymmetry counts more heavily than it would for an optional purchase. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence context PG&E's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. [1] context PG&E's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2] context PG&E's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3] context PG&E's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4] PG&E operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5] context PG&E's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6] context PG&E operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7] context PG&E's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8] context PG&E's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Loss-Bearing Fidelity ? Willingness to absorb costs to preserve values, workers, users, and public obligations.	1 / 7	PG&E's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. PG&E's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. On Loss-Bearing Fidelity, PG&E belongs low because control and surplus are mainly held by shareholders, executives, landlords, investors, or institutional boards while users face practical dependence. In a high-contact category like Utilities, that asymmetry counts more heavily than it would for an optional purchase. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence context PG&E's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. [1] context PG&E's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2] context PG&E's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3] context PG&E's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4] context PG&E operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5] PG&E's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6] context PG&E operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7] context PG&E's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8] context PG&E's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Market Conduct ? Pricing fairness, switching costs, lock-in, and rent extraction.	1 / 5	PG&E operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. PG&E operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. On Market Conduct, PG&E belongs low because control and surplus are mainly held by shareholders, executives, landlords, investors, or institutional boards while users face practical dependence. In a high-contact category like Utilities, that asymmetry counts more heavily than it would for an optional purchase. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence context PG&E's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. [1] context PG&E's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2] context PG&E's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3] context PG&E's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4] context PG&E operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5] context PG&E's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6] PG&E operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7] context PG&E's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8] context PG&E's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Product Integrity ? Preservation of quality rather than degradation for monetization.	1 / 5	PG&E's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. PG&E's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. On Product Integrity, PG&E belongs low because control and surplus are mainly held by shareholders, executives, landlords, investors, or institutional boards while users face practical dependence. In a high-contact category like Utilities, that asymmetry counts more heavily than it would for an optional purchase. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence context PG&E's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. [1] context PG&E's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2] context PG&E's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3] context PG&E's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4] context PG&E operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5] context PG&E's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6] context PG&E operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7] PG&E's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8] context PG&E's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Scale Integrity ? Whether growth improves or degrades fairness and accountability.	4 / 5	PG&E's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. PG&E's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. On Scale Integrity, PG&E sits in the middle because the structure has real public, nonprofit, or service value, but users still do not hold decisive control over prices, access rules, quality, or institutional priorities. That places it above ordinary shareholder firms but below democratic or member-owned alternatives. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence context PG&E's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. [1] context PG&E's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2] context PG&E's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3] context PG&E's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4] context PG&E operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5] context PG&E's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6] context PG&E operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7] context PG&E's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8] PG&E's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]

Penalties

Penalty	Applied	Why this penalty
Human Harm ? Severity, scale, culpability, vulnerable targets, willful reoffense, reputation laundering, pattern escalation, and time decay. Range: -20 to 0.	-12	PG&E's public record makes Human Harm relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. PG&E's public record makes Human Harm relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. This warrants a Human Harm penalty because the evidence shows harm or risk tied to the institution's actual role: housing, tax, utility, healthcare, storage, or childcare power over people with limited alternatives. The penalty is calibrated to this entity's severity rather than assigned automatically to the whole category. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence PG&E's public record makes Human Harm relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [10]
Ecological Harm ? Footprint, trajectory, irreversibility, culpability, and scale, including whether ecological harm is central to the model and continued after credible notice. Range: -30 to 0.	-8	PG&E's public record makes Ecological Harm relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. PG&E's public record makes Ecological Harm relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. This warrants a Ecological Harm penalty because the evidence shows harm or risk tied to the institution's actual role: housing, tax, utility, healthcare, storage, or childcare power over people with limited alternatives. The penalty is calibrated to this entity's severity rather than assigned automatically to the whole category. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence PG&E's public record makes Ecological Harm relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [11]
Policy Capture ? Private-interest attempts to bend law, regulation, subsidies, taxes, enforcement, trade, labor, safety, competition, environmental, healthcare, housing, surveillance, civil-liberties, or consumer policy against workers, customers, citizens, affected communities, or ecological life. Public-interest advocacy is not penalized merely because it is lobbying. Range: -15 to 0.	-6	PG&E's public record makes Policy Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. PG&E's public record makes Policy Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. This warrants a Policy Capture penalty because the evidence shows harm or risk tied to the institution's actual role: housing, tax, utility, healthcare, storage, or childcare power over people with limited alternatives. The penalty is calibrated to this entity's severity rather than assigned automatically to the whole category. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence PG&E's public record makes Policy Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [12]
High-Carbon Products ? Core products, services, financing, or supply chains that materially depend on fossil-fuel combustion, high-emissions transport, industrial animal agriculture, meat, dairy, or other unusually carbon-intensive activity. This is scored separately from general ecological harm so ordinary consumers can see carbon-intensive product exposure directly. Range: -10 to 0.	-6	PG&E's public record makes High-Carbon Products relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. PG&E's public record makes High-Carbon Products relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. This warrants a High-Carbon Products penalty because the evidence shows harm or risk tied to the institution's actual role: housing, tax, utility, healthcare, storage, or childcare power over people with limited alternatives. The penalty is calibrated to this entity's severity rather than assigned automatically to the whole category. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence PG&E's public record makes High-Carbon Products relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [13]
Subscription Capture ? Manipulative recurring-payment, automatic-renewal, cancellation-friction, bundling, trial-conversion, or refund designs that profit from inertia or confusion. Range: -5 to 0.	-1	PG&E's public record makes Subscription Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. PG&E's public record makes Subscription Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. This warrants a Subscription Capture penalty because the evidence shows harm or risk tied to the institution's actual role: housing, tax, utility, healthcare, storage, or childcare power over people with limited alternatives. The penalty is calibrated to this entity's severity rather than assigned automatically to the whole category. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence PG&E's public record makes Subscription Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [14]
Accountability Opacity ? Material opacity, reputation laundering, or hidden accountability structures that prevent public accountability. Range: -2 to 0.	-2	PG&E's public record makes Accountability Opacity relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. PG&E's public record makes Accountability Opacity relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. This warrants a Accountability Opacity penalty because the evidence shows harm or risk tied to the institution's actual role: housing, tax, utility, healthcare, storage, or childcare power over people with limited alternatives. The penalty is calibrated to this entity's severity rather than assigned automatically to the whole category. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence PG&E's public record makes Accountability Opacity relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [15]
Surveillance Capture ? Invasive surveillance, unreasonably non-optional tracking, facial recognition, biometric identification, or AI behavior scanning of customers, workers, bystanders, or the public. Range: -5 to 0.	-1	PG&E's public record makes Surveillance Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. PG&E's public record makes Surveillance Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. This warrants a Surveillance Capture penalty because the evidence shows harm or risk tied to the institution's actual role: housing, tax, utility, healthcare, storage, or childcare power over people with limited alternatives. The penalty is calibrated to this entity's severity rather than assigned automatically to the whole category. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence PG&E's public record makes Surveillance Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [16]
Ideological Disavowal ? Concealed ideology presented as neutrality, expertise, professional necessity, public-service administration, market inevitability, or non-ideological common sense while exercising power. Range: -3 to 0.	-2	PG&E's public record makes Ideological Disavowal relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. PG&E's public record makes Ideological Disavowal relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. This warrants a Ideological Disavowal penalty because the evidence shows harm or risk tied to the institution's actual role: housing, tax, utility, healthcare, storage, or childcare power over people with limited alternatives. The penalty is calibrated to this entity's severity rather than assigned automatically to the whole category. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence PG&E's public record makes Ideological Disavowal relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [17]

Bonus Credits

No bonus credits applied in this version.

Confidence Basis

Confidence is computed from the evidence trail and review state, not typed into the profile by hand.

High 80/100

17 verified linked claims 17 direct axis claims 0 disputed claims 17/17 components covered

This confidence label measures the source-backed evidence trail. AI-scaffolded scores remain tentative until human review.

Claim confidence 16/20

17 verified linked claims

Source quality 12/18

Best source per verified claim, weighted by institutional reliability

Direct axis-specific claims 14/18

17 direct claims across 17 active components

Dispute load 12/12

0 disputed claims on this entity

Recency 10/10

Newest accepted timestamp: May 13, 2026

Reviewer status 7/12

Human-reviewed components score higher than AI scaffolding

Component coverage 10/10

17/17 evidence-bearing components have direct support

Evidence State

Profile stateAI draft / human-pending

VerificationUnverified

ConfidenceHigh confidence (AI)

ThoroughnessDeveloped (AI)

Correction routeUse “Challenge this rating” for factual errors, missing counterevidence, source problems, or calculation mistakes.

Company responseCompany representatives can submit source-backed corrections; payment never changes scores or reviewer authority.

Claims and Sources

Claims are the evidence record. Each claim needs a source link, axis category, status, confidence level, and timestamp before it can support a score.

* Tentative scaffolding score. Not human-checked or final.

1PG&E's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category.

Ownership Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

PG&E company informationGeneral web source · 58%

2PG&E's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers.

Governance Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

PG&E company informationGeneral web source · 58%

3PG&E's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery.

Extraction Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

PG&E company informationGeneral web source · 58%

4PG&E's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution.

Labor Sovereignty Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

PG&E company informationGeneral web source · 58%

5PG&E operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power.

Solidarity Unemployed Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

PG&E investor reportsOfficial self-description · 68%

6PG&E's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise.

Loss Bearing Fidelity Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

PG&E company informationGeneral web source · 58%

7PG&E operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice.

Market Conduct Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

PG&E investor reportsOfficial self-description · 68%

8PG&E's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability.

Product Integrity Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

PG&E company informationGeneral web source · 58%

9PG&E's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities.

Scale Integrity Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

PG&E investor reportsOfficial self-description · 68%

10PG&E's public record makes Human Harm relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Human Harm Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

PG&E investor reportsOfficial self-description · 68%

11PG&E's public record makes Ecological Harm relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Ecological Harm Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

PG&E investor reportsOfficial self-description · 68%

12PG&E's public record makes Policy Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Policy Capture Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

PG&E investor reportsOfficial self-description · 68%

13PG&E's public record makes High-Carbon Products relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

High Carbon Products Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

PG&E investor reportsOfficial self-description · 68%

14PG&E's public record makes Subscription Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Subscription Capture Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

PG&E investor reportsOfficial self-description · 68%

15PG&E's public record makes Accountability Opacity relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Accountability Opacity Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

PG&E investor reportsOfficial self-description · 68%

16PG&E's public record makes Surveillance Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Surveillance Capture Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

PG&E investor reportsOfficial self-description · 68%

17PG&E's public record makes Ideological Disavowal relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Ideological Disavowal Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

PG&E investor reportsOfficial self-description · 68%

Alternatives

Competitors

AGOOD50 SMUD community-owned electric utility · same market BQUALIFIED46 Connexus Energy member-owned electric distribution cooperative · same market BQUALIFIED46 Pedernales Electric Cooperative member-owned electric distribution cooperative · same market DEXTRACTIVE6 Xcel Energy public electric and gas utility · same market DEXTRACTIVE5 NextEra Energy / Florida Power & Light public utility and renewable-energy holding company · same market DEXTRACTIVE4 National Grid U.S. investor-owned electric and gas utility network · same market DEXTRACTIVE3 Con Edison public electric, gas, and steam utility · same market FMALIGNANT-2 Duke Energy public electric and gas utility holding company · same market

Help Improve This Profile

Submit source-backed evidence or challenge a specific claim, source, axis value, or calculation below.

How This Page Is Maintained

Evidence comes in through contributors, is checked by verifiers, and is synthesized by reviewers. Founder authority remains narrow and visible; scores recalculate when verified claims or the rubric change.

Civic Note

Incorporation, limited liability, market access, and other institutional privileges are public grants. Good Companies Directory treats those privileges as conditional on accountability to workers, users, communities, and the public.

Submit evidence for PG&E Add one source-backed fact for review.

Challenge this rating Point to a specific score, claim, source, or calculation problem.

Audit Log

Recent public changes for this company or group. The full audit log is part of the Transparency record.

No company-specific audit entries have been published yet.

View Full Audit Log