Skip to main content

We are trying to find a solution to ensure Site Audits are being completed and in a timely manner and to ensure properties aren’t skipped. Essentially we are trying to find a way to have 20 SAs per property open/available to complete at the start of each season. Then those would be completed over time and if they are still open we know where we are falling short.

  1. Is there a way to bulk create Site Audits which would be completed at a later date?
  2. Has anyone achieve the result in a different way?
  3. We have built a list that shows last SA date to create a list of properties missing a site audit within a reasonable timeframe.

Any other tips/tricks/helpful reports/lists?

Hi Lisa,

One option I’ve seen work very well is to create a service on the Opportunity specifically for Site Audits, with the number of occurrences set to reflect how many you’d like to complete throughout the year. The service should include a labor item, but you’ll want to override the Service Cost to $0, as these are non-billable visits.

Each Account Manager can then have their own route, allowing them to schedule their site audits in advance. As audits are completed, they’ll be responsible for closing out the corresponding work tickets. You can easily track progress using a work ticket list filtered by this service.

Let me know if you’d like help getting this set up.

Thank you for the response. We have considered this option in the past, but were concerned if this would affect MH or job costing for the contract. For example, does completing 20 work tickets at 0.5 MH each for the site audits affect the overall job costing for the contract?

Thank you for the response. We have considered this option in the past, but were concerned if this would affect MH or job costing for the contract. For example, does completing 20 work tickets at 0.5 MH each for the site audits affect the overall job costing for the contract?

Hi Lisa, 

If the site audit will be done by your salary employee. It won’t add cost to the direct job. 

If the site audit will be done by your hourly employee. It will add cost to the direct job. 

 

We have site audit done by account owner. So the cost is overhead cost, not direct job cost. 

Thanks, 

Lisa,

The man hours for this service can be adjusted down to 0.01, if you'd like. When the Account Manager closes out the tickets, they won’t need to assign any time to them. This approach will show a higher margin for the service, but since there’s no estimated time, no actuals, and the service is set to $0, it will essentially act as if nothing is there from a financial standpoint.

If you're using earned revenue, no revenue will be recognized for these tickets. Similarly, for invoiced revenue, nothing will show on the invoice since the service is set to $0—it won’t be included in the monthly billing. In both cases, this outcome is ideal for what we’re trying to achieve.

Another benefit of handling site audits this way is that clients will clearly see the audits included as part of their contract. This allows you to position them as a value-added service, helping to differentiate your company from competitors.

Community GuidelinesCookie settingsAccessibility statement