Office review and QA for asbestos survey reports
The office review stage is where most quality issues are caught — and where most of the unrecoverable ones slip through. A structured review surface, separate from client-facing content, changes how reviewers and surveyors interact.
Review-ready reports as a default
When the on-site workflow enforces the fields HSG264 expects, the report arriving at the reviewer's desk is already complete in shape. The reviewer's role shifts from filling gaps to validating decisions.
Internal notes that never reach the client
Structured review notes live on the survey record, separate from the client-facing report content. Reviewers flag specific items; surveyors see exactly what needs to change and address it in place.
Crucially, review notes are not exported to the client PDF — a guardrail against the perennial problem of internal commentary being baked into a report by accident.
Survey integrity checks
Automated integrity checks scan the survey for predictable problems before a report is exported. Critical issues block sign-off; warnings prompt explicit acknowledgement.
- Missing product types or locations on ACM items
- Duplicate sample references within a survey
- High-risk ACMs without a documented recommendation
- Empty rooms or areas left inspected but unrecorded
- Items flagged as duplicated from another area but not yet reviewed
Operational visibility
An operational workflow status — Draft, Needs Review, Ready for Office Review, Ready to Issue, Issued — gives the team a shared view of where each survey sits without anyone having to ask.
Office managers can see what's waiting on whom; surveyors can see what's been signed off and what's been bounced back.
Auditability
Every survey carries its own structured history — what was recorded, what was amended, what was flagged and addressed. When a client questions a finding months later, the trail is intact and queryable.