Pricing About Contact Start free training Book a demo Sign in
Assessment

EHS program health check

Twenty-eight questions about what actually happens at your workplace — not what the policy says. You get a maturity read on nine areas, and one thing to do next.

Regulatory status A structured self-assessment for your own planning. Not an audit, not a compliance determination, and not connected to any OSHA requirement or program.

Most self-assessments ask whether you have a policy. That is the wrong question: almost everyone has a policy, and having one predicts very little. These questions ask what happens — when someone spots a hazard, when an action passes its date, when the month gets busy.

Every question offers four descriptions rather than a rating. Pick the sentence that matches, including when the honest answer is the first one. An assessment answered aspirationally tells you nothing you did not already believe.

Nothing you answer leaves your browser. Your answers and your results are not transmitted to EHSTEC, not saved on this device, not written into the address bar, and not included in any analytics — not even as a summary band, because a band is worked out from what you told us. Refresh the page and it is gone, so if you want to keep the result, print it or write it down before you leave.

There is no signup, no email, and no part of the result held back. What you see when you finish is the whole thing.

The questions

Management leadership and resources

What good looks like: Someone senior owns safety by name, it has budget and time that are not the first things cut, and the people doing the work can see that.

Who is responsible for safety at your organisation?
What happens when safety work needs money or time?
How do the people doing the work know safety matters to leadership?
Worker participation and reporting

What good looks like: Anyone can raise a hazard without asking permission or fearing blame, and they find out what happened to it.

When someone spots a hazard, what typically happens?
Can someone raise a concern without worrying about the consequences?
How are the people doing the work involved in safety decisions?
Hazard identification and assessment

What good looks like: Hazards are found deliberately — before work, after change, and from your own history — rather than discovered by someone getting hurt.

How are hazards in a job identified before the work starts?
When something changes — new equipment, new process, new layout — what happens?
How do you decide which hazards to deal with first?
When you choose a control, how is it chosen?
Inspections

What good looks like: Inspections happen on a schedule you chose and can justify, findings leave with an owner and a date, and repeats are visible.

How often does a general workplace inspection happen?
Who carries out inspections?
What happens to what an inspection finds?
Corrective actions

What good looks like: Every action has one issue, one named owner and a real date, and someone other than the owner confirms it actually worked.

Where do corrective actions live?
Who is an action assigned to?
What do the due dates look like?
How do you know an action actually worked?
Training and competency

What good looks like: People are trained before the work, on the hazards they will actually meet, and you can tell who is current without asking around.

How do people learn the hazards of their own job?
Can you tell who is trained and current, right now?
What do short, regular safety talks look like?
Incident management

What good looks like: Incidents and near misses are investigated for cause rather than blame, and what you learn changes something.

What gets reported?
How is an incident investigated?
What changes after an incident?
Documentation and records

What good looks like: The records you are required to keep exist, are current, and can be found by someone other than the person who wrote them.

Can you find a safety record when you need it?
Are the records you are required to keep actually current?
When a procedure changes, what happens to the old one?
Measurement and improvement

What good looks like: You track a small number of things that tell you whether the programme is working, and you act on what they say.

What safety numbers do you look at?
What happens to what the numbers show?

How the scoring works

Published because a self-assessment that hides its arithmetic is asking to be trusted rather than understood.

  • Each question scores 0 to 3 in the order the options are shown, least to most developed.
  • Each of the nine areas gets a band from its own total: Not established below 25%, Emerging below 50%, Developing below 80%, Established at 80% and above. The bar for Established is deliberately high — answering “usually” to everything in an area is Developing, because the thing happens but not reliably.
  • Areas are weighted, but only for prioritising — never for banding. An area's band is a fact about that area. Leadership and worker participation carry the most weight when deciding where to focus, because a program fails there first and everything downstream inherits it.
  • An area you do not finish is not scored. It is reported as Not assessed and named. An unanswered question is never counted as zero — that would invent a finding about a workplace nobody described.
  • There is no overall score, and that is on purpose. One band across a whole program is a grade, and a grade ends your thinking exactly where it should start. Knowing that corrective actions are Emerging while inspections are Established tells you where Monday goes.

What this is not

  • Not an audit and not a substitute for one.
  • Not a compliance determination. Nothing here tells you whether you meet any OSHA requirement, and a program can score well here and still have a violation.
  • Not endorsed, approved or reviewed by OSHA, and not connected to any OSHA program.
  • Not a benchmark. You are not being compared with anyone; there is no peer data behind this and we are not pretending otherwise.
  • Not a prediction. It makes no claim about your injury rate, your insurance, or what any software would change.
  • Only as honest as the answers. The most useful version of this is answered by several people separately — a manager and a crew member often pick different sentences for the participation questions, and that gap is itself the finding.

Free resources, by area

The whole map, not just the areas your answers surface, so it is useful before you start as well as after you finish.

Management leadership and resources

Worker participation and reporting

Documentation and records

We do not have a free resource for this yet. Rather than point you at something that does not fit, the recommendation for this area is a practice — and the gap is on our list.

Sources

This is a self-assessment, not advice

The nine areas follow OSHA's Recommended Practices for Safety and Health Programs, which are recommendations and not a standard — they carry no legal requirement. Nothing here is endorsed or approved by OSHA, this is not legal advice, and completing this assessment does not establish compliance with anything. What applies to you depends on your industry, hazards and jurisdiction. See our editorial standards for how this content is written and reviewed.

EHSTEC

The platform behind these resources

Inspections, corrective actions, training records and credentials in one system. Book a demo to see it with your team.