Occupants of WELL-certified buildings were satisfied with their building 94% of the time, against 73% in a matched sample of LEED-certified buildings, and sound privacy was the single item where the two groups differed most (Kent, Parkinson and Schiavon, Scientific Reports 2024). That result lands on top of a decade of evidence that a green label alone does not buy acoustic comfort: in 144 office buildings, LEED and non-LEED occupants differed by less than 6% on every indoor environment item (Altomonte and Schiavon, Building and Environment 2013). Meanwhile the certified stock keeps growing, with more than 7,500 LEED commercial projects certified in 2025 (USGBC and GBCI, Top 10 Countries and Regions for LEED 2026) and over 6 billion square feet engaged with WELL (IWBI, July 2025). Acoustics is also where general office complaints concentrate, as our open-plan office noise and distraction statistics show. We aggregated data from the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), the International WELL Building Institute (IWBI), the Center for the Built Environment (CBE) at UC Berkeley, Canadian Acoustics, Building and Environment, and a dozen other primary sources.
TL;DR
- More than 127,000 LEED-certified projects exist across 195+ countries and territories (USGBC, LEED v5 product page 2026).
- More than 7,500 commercial projects earned LEED certification in 2025, covering more than 147 million gross square meters (USGBC and GBCI, Top 10 Countries and Regions for LEED 2026).
- WELL passed 6 billion square feet across nearly 100,000 locations in 137 countries (IWBI, WELL adoption press release 2025).
- The LEED v4.1 Acoustic Performance credit is worth 1 point and requires 2 of 3 acoustic categories (USGBC, LEED v4.1 BD+C EQc9).
- LEED v4 for Schools makes acoustics a prerequisite, capping HVAC background noise at 40 dBA in classrooms (USGBC, LEED v4 Schools EQp3).
- LEED v5 replaces the acoustic credit with a Sound Environment option worth 1 to 2 points, inside a credit where lighting can earn up to 6 (USGBC, LEED v5 BD+C EQc2).
- WELL v2 Tier I allows 45 dBA background noise in private offices, where LEED v4.1 allows 35 dBA (Roy, Canadian Acoustics 2022).
- WELL performance testing samples background noise at 1 point per 581 square meters plus 1 in spaces up to 9,290 square meters (IWBI, WELL Performance Verification Guidebook 2024).
- In a UK study, BREEAM occupants in open spaces were far less satisfied with sound privacy than non-BREEAM peers, r = -0.60 (Altomonte, Saadouni and Schiavon, PLEA 2016).
- 94% of WELL occupants were satisfied with their building versus 73% in matched LEED buildings (Kent, Parkinson and Schiavon, Scientific Reports 2024).
- Satisfaction with speech privacy remained relatively low even in WELL-certified offices in Japan (Panasonic and IWBI, Effects of WELL Certification in Japan 2026).
1. The Certified Footprint: How Much Space LEED and WELL Now Cover
Scale is no longer the question for green and healthy building labels. More than 127,000 LEED-certified projects now sit in the USGBC directory, and 2025 alone added more than 7,500 certified commercial projects (USGBC and GBCI, Top 10 Countries and Regions for LEED, February 2026). WELL, which is organized around occupant health rather than resource use, reports more than 6 billion square feet engaged.
The size matters for acoustics because, outside schools, both programs treat measured acoustic targets as optional points rather than entry requirements. A label on 147 million square meters of new certified space in one year says nothing, by itself, about how loud or private those floors are. Healthcare is a good example: it is one of the settings where LEED adds sector-specific acoustic requirements, and it already accounts for thousands of projects (USGBC, Applying LEED to healthcare projects, 2026).
| Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| LEED-certified projects worldwide | 127,000+ | USGBC, LEED v5 product page 2026 |
| Countries and territories with LEED | 195+ | USGBC, LEED v5 product page 2026 |
| LEED-certified commercial projects in 2025 | 7,500+ projects, 147 million+ gross square meters | USGBC and GBCI, Top 10 Countries and Regions for LEED 2026 |
| U.S. LEED-certified space in 2025 | 50 million+ gross square meters | USGBC and GBCI, Top 10 Countries and Regions for LEED 2026 |
| LEED healthcare projects (certified and registered) | 4,232 projects, about 942 million sq ft (87 million m2), September 2026 | USGBC, Applying LEED to healthcare projects 2026 |
| Real estate engaged with WELL | 6 billion+ sq ft, nearly 100,000 locations, 137 countries (July 2025) | IWBI, WELL adoption press release 2025 |
| WELL share of GRESB certified and rated floor area | 9% (third most used platform) | IWBI, WELL adoption press release 2025 |
| Projects on the joint LEED and WELL pathway | 750+ projects, nearly 250 million sq ft, 47 countries; 100+ projects (15 million sq ft) dual-certified | IWBI, LEED and WELL streamlined pathway release, June 2025 |
Context note: mainland China ranked first outside the U.S. for LEED in 2025, followed by India and Canada, and Vietnam entered the top 10 for the first time. IWBI’s own certification page currently shows two different adoption totals (see Methodology).
2. LEED’s Acoustic Credit: Points on Offer and the v5 Rewrite
Acoustics has always been a small line on the LEED scorecard. Under LEED v4.1 BD+C New Construction it is worth a single point, and only if a project clears two of three hurdles: HVAC background noise, sound transmission and reverberation time (USGBC, LEED v4.1 BD+C EQc9 Acoustic Performance). Interiors projects got more weight, 2 points under LEED v4 Commercial Interiors.
LEED v5 dissolves the stand-alone credit into a broader Occupant Experience credit. Sound becomes one of five options, worth at most 2 points, next to a lighting option worth up to 6. The second path asks for proof (calculations, modeling or measurements) that acoustic criteria hold in at least 75% of occupied spaces, which pushes the burden from a checklist toward documented performance (USGBC, LEED v5 BD+C EQc2 Occupant Experience).
| Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| LEED v4.1 BD+C NC Acoustic Performance credit | 1 point; meet 2 of 3 categories, all 3 earns an exemplary performance point | USGBC, LEED v4.1 BD+C EQc9 |
| LEED v4 Commercial Interiors Acoustic Performance | 2 points | USGBC, LEED v4 ID+C EQc9 |
| LEED v5 Occupant Experience credit (total) | 1 to 7 points | USGBC, LEED v5 BD+C EQc2 |
| LEED v5 Sound Environment option | 1 point (Path 1, mapping) or 2 points (Path 2, criteria) | USGBC, LEED v5 BD+C EQc2 |
| v5 Path 2 coverage requirement | At least 75% of occupied spaces plus all classrooms and core learning spaces | USGBC, LEED v5 BD+C EQc2 |
| Competing v5 options | Lighting Environment 1 to 6 points; Biophilic Environment 1 to 4 points | USGBC, LEED v5 BD+C EQc2 |
| LEED v5 timeline | Ratified March 28, 2025; sole option for new commercial registrations from July 1, 2027 | USGBC Support, LEED v5 2026 |
Outlier note: the option maximums in v5 Occupant Experience add up to more than the 7-point cap, so a project cannot stack every option. In practice, sound competes directly with lighting and biophilia for the same pool of points.
3. Schools: The One Place LEED Makes Acoustics Mandatory
Classrooms are the exception to LEED’s optional treatment of sound. In LEED v4 for Schools, acoustics is a prerequisite: no school project can certify unless HVAC background noise in core learning spaces stays at or below 40 dBA (USGBC, LEED v4 Schools EQp3 Minimum Acoustic Performance). The v4.1 Schools credit then pays a point for reaching 35 dBA, the same ceiling the national classroom standard sets.
That alignment matters because a certification target puts classroom acoustic criteria into design documents that a standing standard alone may never reach (USGBC, LEED v4.1 Schools EQc9).
| Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| LEED v4 Schools prerequisite, HVAC background noise | 40 dBA maximum in classrooms and core learning spaces | USGBC, LEED v4 Schools EQp3 |
| LEED v4.1 Schools credit, HVAC background noise | 35 dBA or less (1 point) | USGBC, LEED v4.1 Schools EQc9 |
| Exterior window rating in v4.1 Schools credit | STC 35 or higher, unless noise levels justify less | USGBC, LEED v4.1 Schools EQc9 |
| High-noise site trigger | Peak-hour Leq above 60 dBA during school hours | USGBC, LEED v4 Schools EQp3 |
| Exterior noise exemption distance | At least 800 m (one-half mile) from a significant noise source | USGBC, LEED v4 Schools EQp3 |
| Prescriptive absorption path (rooms under 566 m3) | Absorptive finishes of at least 100% of ceiling area, NRC 0.70 or higher | USGBC, LEED v4 Schools EQp3 |
| ANSI S12.60 classroom criteria | 35 dBA background, reverberation not above 0.6 s, adaptable to 0.3 s | American Academy of Audiology, Classroom Acoustics Position Statement 2011 |
Most recent available data: the Academy of Audiology summary dates from 2011 and describes the ANSI S12.60-2010 edition of the standard.
4. What “Quiet Enough” Means: LEED and WELL Criteria Side by Side
LEED and WELL do not agree on how quiet an office must be. WELL v2’s entry tier allows 45 dBA in a private office, 10 dB above LEED v4.1’s 35 dBA, and even WELL’s higher tier stops at 40 dBA (Roy, 2022 Comparison of the Acoustic Design Requirements of LEED, WELL and Green Globes, Canadian Acoustics vol. 50). On partitions the relationship flips: WELL asks for a stronger wall between private offices than LEED does.
HVAC is the usual culprit behind background noise limits; for the physics of low-frequency transmission through ducts and structure, see our low-frequency HVAC noise statistics. LEED also lets designers trade wall performance for sound masking, as the last row of the table shows.
| Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Private office background noise (dBA/dBC) | LEED v4.1 35/60; WELL v2 Tier I 45/65; Tier II 40/60 | Roy, Canadian Acoustics 2022 |
| Open-plan office background noise (dBA/dBC) | LEED v4.1 45/65; WELL v2 Tier I 50/70; Tier II 45/65 | Roy, Canadian Acoustics 2022 |
| Conference room background noise (dBA/dBC) | LEED v4.1 35/60; WELL v2 Tier I 40/60; Tier II 35/55 | Roy, Canadian Acoustics 2022 |
| Private office to private office isolation (STCc/NIC) | LEED v4.1 45/40; WELL v2 50/45 | Roy, Canadian Acoustics 2022 |
| Sound reinforcement, rooms seating more than 50 | STI of at least 0.60, minimum 70 dBA, coverage within +/-3 dB | USGBC, LEED v4 ID+C EQc9 |
| Reverberation time, private office and conference room | LEED v4.1 under 0.6 s; open-plan office under 0.8 s | USGBC, LEED v4.1 BD+C EQc9 |
| Reverberation time, open-plan office in WELL v2 | Not regulated (open plan excluded from the RT60 requirement) | Roy, Canadian Acoustics 2022 |
| LEED v4.1 sound masking | Caps of 48 dBA open offices, 45 dBA enclosed offices, 42 dBA conference rooms; masking of 40 dBA or more cuts required STCc/NIC by 5 points | USGBC, LEED v4.1 BD+C EQc9 |
Context note: in the WELL v2 standard sound sits in its own concept, with Sound Mapping (S01) as the only precondition among the original five acoustic features (Bessey and Roy, Canadian Acoustics vol. 46, 2018). A 2021 Ingenio analysis of the WELL v2 Q2 2021 pilot counted up to 18 Sound points for owner-occupied projects and 17 for WELL Core (most recent available data: Ingenio, 2021), and the 2022 review lists three further beta features (Impact Noise Management, Enhanced Audio Devices, Hearing Health Conservation).
5. Verification and the Compliance Gap
The main structural difference between the programs is proof. WELL sends a performance tester into the finished building, and IWBI’s guidebook spells out how many sound samples a project owes: 1 per 581 square meters plus 1, for floor plates up to 9,290 square meters (IWBI, WELL Performance Verification Guidebook, December 2024). LEED v4.1 accepts calculations or measurements in representative rooms, or design documentation from an acoustics professional.
Design intent and measured reality diverge often enough that the gap has been studied. In a refurbished Italian accommodation building, five rooms were assessed against both programs: the LEED target was reached for only 62% and the WELL target for 65%, with most of the shortfall in sound transmission (Fiorini et al., Forum Acusticum 2023). The rating systems’ authors know it: a 2022 review notes that recent revisions were partly a response to “low interest in the pursuit of the acoustic-related features, due to challenges with achieving” them (Roy, Canadian Acoustics 2022).
| Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| WELL S02 background noise measurement | Leq and L10 over 5 minutes, slow weighting | IWBI, WELL Performance Verification Guidebook 2024 |
| WELL S02 tolerance on thresholds | +4 dB on Leq, +9 dB on L10 (A- and C-weighted) | IWBI, WELL Performance Verification Guidebook 2024 |
| WELL multifamily noise test | One dwelling unit, Leq over at least 12 hours including 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. | IWBI, WELL Performance Verification Guidebook 2024 |
| WELL S03 sound insulation test | Loudspeaker at 90 dBA or more, each sample at least 30 seconds | IWBI, WELL Performance Verification Guidebook 2024 |
| WELL S04 reverberation sampling | 1 per 1,858 m2 plus 1 (up to 9,290 m2), 3 measurements per sample | IWBI, WELL Performance Verification Guidebook 2024 |
| Office reverberation after refurbishment (case study) | 1.30 s down to 0.40 s | Fiorini et al., Forum Acusticum 2023 |
| Refurbishment case study: share of target reached | LEED 62%, WELL 65% | Fiorini et al., Forum Acusticum 2023 |
| Share of shortfall linked to sound transmission | About 81% (LEED), about 79% (WELL) | Fiorini et al., Forum Acusticum 2023 |
Outlier note: the office reverberation result shows absorption is the cheap win, while partition upgrades are where certifications stall. WELL testers must also use a Type 1/Class 1 meter with a 31.5 Hz to 8 kHz bandwidth, calibrated within the prior year. The case covers a single building and five rooms, so it illustrates the gap rather than measuring its prevalence.
6. Satisfaction in LEED and BREEAM Buildings vs Conventional Ones
The occupant evidence for LEED is consistent and sobering. Across 21,477 CBE survey responses from 144 office buildings, differences in mean satisfaction between LEED and non-LEED buildings stayed below 6% for every indoor environment item, with negligible effect sizes (CBE, Occupant Satisfaction in LEED Buildings). A follow-up on 93 LEED buildings found that more IEQ points, specific IEQ credits, higher certification levels or newer LEED versions did not substantively raise satisfaction either.
Time also erodes the halo. Newcomers to LEED buildings rated them much higher than long-term occupants did (Schiavon and Altomonte, CBE presentation of 2014 Building and Environment results). In the UK, BREEAM occupants were less satisfied with sound privacy than non-BREEAM occupants, and the gap widened sharply in open spaces (Altomonte, Saadouni and Schiavon, PLEA 2016).
| Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| CBE LEED vs non-LEED sample | 144 buildings (65 LEED, 79 non-LEED), 21,477 responses | Altomonte and Schiavon, Building and Environment 2013 |
| LEED vs non-LEED satisfaction difference | Below 6% on all IEQ items, negligible effect size | Altomonte and Schiavon, Building and Environment 2013 |
| LEED-only follow-up | 11,243 responses, 93 LEED buildings; no substantive gain from points, credits, level or version | Altomonte et al., Building Research and Information 2019 |
| Building satisfaction gap (LEED minus non-LEED), under 1 year in workspace | +0.59 (N = 1,864), rho = 0.22 | Schiavon and Altomonte, Building and Environment 2014 |
| Same gap, over 1 year in workspace | +0.12 (N = 3,859), rho = 0.06 | Schiavon and Altomonte, Building and Environment 2014 |
| Sound privacy, BREEAM vs non-BREEAM | M = -0.84 vs M = -0.31; p ≤ 0.05, r = -0.18 (N = 121) | Altomonte, Saadouni and Schiavon, PLEA 2016 |
| Sound privacy in open spaces, BREEAM vs non-BREEAM | Median difference -2.50, p ≤ 0.001, r = -0.60 | Altomonte, Saadouni and Schiavon, PLEA 2016 |
| Noise satisfaction, occupants over 24 months in building | Median difference -2.00, p ≤ 0.01, r = -0.35 | Altomonte, Saadouni and Schiavon, PLEA 2016 |
Most recent available data: the CBE LEED comparisons are from 2013 to 2019 and the BREEAM study from 2016, and the BREEAM sample is small (121 online responses). No newer large-sample LEED-versus-conventional acoustic comparison was found.
7. WELL-Certified Buildings and the Sound Privacy Gap
WELL has the strongest occupant evidence of the labels reviewed here, and acoustics is part of that story. In a matched comparison drawn from the CBE database, sound privacy showed the largest difference and largest effect size of 14 satisfaction items, with every comparison significant at p ≤ 0.005 (Kent, Parkinson and Schiavon, Scientific Reports 2024). The authors could not isolate the cause, and the workspace mix did not differ significantly between the two samples.
The improvement is not universal. A relocation study of three WELL buildings found no change in noise satisfaction after the move (Licina and Yildirim, Building and Environment 2021), and a Japanese study of 41 office projects found speech privacy satisfaction stayed relatively low even in WELL offices (Panasonic and IWBI, Effects of WELL Certification and Office Factors in Japan 2026). That persistent gap is why enclosed rooms keep appearing in certified fit-outs, as our acoustic office pod and phone booth statistics track.
| Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Matched WELL vs LEED sample | 1,634 responses each; 20 WELL buildings vs 44 LEED buildings | Kent, Parkinson and Schiavon, Scientific Reports 2024 |
| Satisfied with building overall | 94% WELL vs 73% LEED | Kent, Parkinson and Schiavon, Scientific Reports 2024 |
| Satisfied with workspace | 87% WELL vs 71% LEED | Kent, Parkinson and Schiavon, Scientific Reports 2024 |
| Effect sizes across 14 IEQ items | 13 small (0.20 ≤ rho < 0.50), 1 negligible (amount of space) | Kent, Parkinson and Schiavon, Scientific Reports 2024 |
| Japan WELL study sample | 41 projects, 4,237 respondents (11 WELL projects: 10 Platinum, 1 Gold) | Panasonic and IWBI, Effects of WELL Certification in Japan 2026 |
| Japan well-being score, WELL vs offices not renovated in 3+ years | 68 vs 57 (+19.2%) | Panasonic and IWBI, Effects of WELL Certification in Japan 2026 |
| Relocation into WELL buildings | Workspace satisfaction up in 2 of 3 building pairs; no change in noise satisfaction | Licina and Yildirim, Building and Environment 2021 |
| Acoustic weight in green hotel guest satisfaction (Malaysia) | Beta = 0.305, p < 0.001 (largest predictor), 384 valid responses | Abdulaali et al., Frontiers in Built Environment 2025 |
Context note: a separate pre- versus post-occupancy evaluation of more than 1,300 responses across six North American companies found most satisfaction gains after moving into WELL offices were statistically significant (Ildiri et al., Building and Environment 2022), though its abstract does not break out acoustics.
Summary: LEED and WELL Building Acoustics by the Numbers
| Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| LEED-certified projects worldwide | 127,000+ in 195+ countries and territories | USGBC, LEED v5 product page 2026 |
| LEED-certified commercial projects in 2025 | 7,500+ (147 million+ GSM) | USGBC and GBCI, Top 10 Countries and Regions for LEED 2026 |
| Real estate engaged with WELL | 6 billion+ sq ft, 137 countries | IWBI, WELL adoption press release 2025 |
| Projects on joint LEED and WELL pathway | 750+ in 47 countries | IWBI, LEED and WELL pathway release 2025 |
| LEED v4.1 Acoustic Performance credit | 1 point, 2 of 3 categories | USGBC, LEED v4.1 BD+C EQc9 |
| LEED v5 Sound Environment option | 1 to 2 points (lighting up to 6) | USGBC, LEED v5 BD+C EQc2 |
| LEED v4.1 reverberation, private office / open plan | Under 0.6 s / under 0.8 s | USGBC, LEED v4.1 BD+C EQc9 |
| LEED v4 Schools HVAC noise prerequisite | 40 dBA maximum | USGBC, LEED v4 Schools EQp3 |
| LEED v4.1 Schools HVAC noise credit | 35 dBA or less | USGBC, LEED v4.1 Schools EQc9 |
| Private office background noise, WELL v2 Tier I vs LEED v4.1 | 45 dBA vs 35 dBA | Roy, Canadian Acoustics 2022 |
| WELL S02 sampling density | 1 per 581 m2 plus 1 (up to 9,290 m2) | IWBI, WELL Performance Verification Guidebook 2024 |
| Refurbished building, share of acoustic target reached | LEED 62%, WELL 65% | Fiorini et al., Forum Acusticum 2023 |
| LEED vs non-LEED satisfaction difference | Below 6%, negligible effect | Altomonte and Schiavon, Building and Environment 2013 |
| Sound privacy in open spaces, BREEAM vs non-BREEAM | r = -0.60, p ≤ 0.001 | Altomonte, Saadouni and Schiavon, PLEA 2016 |
| Building satisfaction, WELL vs LEED | 94% vs 73%; sound privacy the largest item gap | Kent, Parkinson and Schiavon, Scientific Reports 2024 |
| Japan well-being, WELL vs non-renovated offices | +19.2% | Panasonic and IWBI, Effects of WELL Certification in Japan 2026 |
Methodology and Sources
- U.S. Green Building Council and GBCI: Top 10 Countries and Regions for LEED, February 2026 (as republished by ISSA)
- U.S. Green Building Council: LEED v5 product page, LEED v5 support article, Applying LEED to healthcare projects
- U.S. Green Building Council credit language, read through LEEDuser (BuildingGreen): LEED v4.1 BD+C EQc9, LEED v4 ID+C EQc9, LEED v5 BD+C EQc2, LEED v4 Schools EQp3, LEED v4.1 Schools EQc9
- International WELL Building Institute: WELL adoption press release, July 2025, LEED and WELL streamlined pathway release, June 2025, WELL v2 certification page, WELL Performance Verification Guidebook, December 2024
- Panasonic Electric Works and IWBI: Effects of WELL Certification and Office Factors in Japan, 2026
- Canadian Acoustics: Roy, 2022 Comparison of the Acoustic Design Requirements of LEED, WELL and Green Globes, vol. 50 no. 3; Bessey and Roy, Evaluating Acoustical Performance of Existing Offices as Part of a WELL Feasibility Service, vol. 46 no. 4, 2018
- American Academy of Audiology: Classroom Acoustics Position Statement, 2011
- Center for the Built Environment, UC Berkeley: Occupant Satisfaction in LEED Buildings research page (Altomonte and Schiavon, Building and Environment 2013; Schiavon and Altomonte, Building and Environment 2014; Altomonte et al., Building Research and Information 2019) and LEED vs non-LEED presentation
- Altomonte, Saadouni and Schiavon: Occupant Satisfaction in LEED and BREEAM-Certified Office Buildings, PLEA 2016
- Kent, Parkinson and Schiavon: Indoor environmental quality in WELL-certified and LEED-certified buildings, Scientific Reports 2024
- Licina and Yildirim: Occupant satisfaction before and after relocation into WELL-certified office buildings, Building and Environment 2021; Ildiri et al., Impact of WELL certification on occupant satisfaction, Building and Environment 2022
- Fiorini, Di Matteo, Tarsitano and Vallati: Acoustic outcome of refurbishing an accommodation building toward LEED and WELL certifications, Forum Acusticum 2023
- Abdulaali et al.: Guest comfort and satisfaction with IEQ in former GBI-certified green hotels, Frontiers in Built Environment 2025
- Data watch: we found no public achievement rate for the Acoustic Performance credit (LEEDuser shows the figure only to premium subscribers), so this roundup reports credit rules, not uptake; two peer-reviewed analyses of LEED-CIv4 and LEED-NCv4 scorecards (Pushkar, Sustainability 2019 and Applied Sciences 2020) describe acoustic achievement only as low at all four certification levels. IWBI’s certification page currently shows two adoption totals (over 5.87 billion sq ft in more than 137 countries, and 6.48 billion sq ft across 100,000+ locations in 130 countries); we cite the July 2025 press release (6 billion+ sq ft, 137 countries). The WELL background noise tiers come from Roy’s 2022 reading of WELL v2 (2022 Q2), and WELL Sound point totals are from the 2021 pilot, so both may have shifted in later quarterly versions. Most occupant studies are office-only and several predate 2020. Healthcare project counts are certified plus registered, not certified only.
Last updated: October 18, 2026. We update this roundup quarterly, and the next refresh is expected when USGBC and GBCI publish the Top 10 Countries and Regions for LEED for 2026 (early 2027).