Skip to main content
    QHSEtech
    All templatesAudits · 3 pages · Updated 17 October 2026

    5S Audit Checklist Template

    Three-page 5S audit checklist: area, date, auditor and shift; twenty-five checks across sort, set in order, shine, standardise and sustain, each with a 0 to 5 score and a place for what was seen; a summary with averages by pillar, a red-tag and yellow-tag log, an action list and sign-off. 5S is a voluntary lean practice, not a legal requirement, and a good score does not show that you meet a safety rule.

    What's inside

    1. Audit details — area, line or workstation, date, shift, auditor, audit type (daily self-check, weekly, monthly, cross-area, after a change or other), checklist version, area leader, previous audit date and previous overall average
    2. Scoring — a 0 to 5 example scale with a one-line meaning for each score, and the rule that a check that does not apply is left blank and marked N/A
    3. Sort (seiri), set in order (seiton), shine (seiso), standardise (seiketsu), sustain (shitsuke) — five checks under each, twenty-five in all, each with a score column, a column for what you saw, and a pillar total with the number of checks scored
    4. Summary — for each pillar and overall: sum of scores, checks scored, average, previous average and change
    5. Findings — the lowest-scoring pillar and what is behind it, whether hazards were found, and their report or incident references
    6. Red-tag and yellow-tag log — item, location, reason tagged, hazard flag, decision, owner and date decided
    7. Action list — action, pillar, owner, due date and done date
    8. Sign-off — auditor, area leader, reviewing manager, date of the next audit and where the record is kept

    The scale, its definitions and the twenty-five checks are examples to replace with your own.

    What requires or shapes this record

    No law requires a 5S audit, and none of the pages opened for this one presents 5S as a legal requirement or sets a required checklist, score or certificate for it. It is a voluntary lean method. The records it touches sit under other rules and other wording: a duty to keep workplaces and walking-working surfaces clean, orderly and free of hazards where one applies to you, the reporting of hazards found, and the handling of waste that a clear-out produces. The sources below say what 5S is, where the 0 to 5 scale comes from and what housekeeping means for safety. A high 5S score is not a finding of compliance.

    • US EPA, Lean Thinking and Methods: 5S (page updated 8 September 2026)

      EPA describes 5S as a lean method for reducing waste and improving productivity through an orderly workplace and visual cues, and says it is typically the first lean method an organisation adopts. It lists five pillars under their Japanese names: sort (seiri), set in order (seiton), shine (seiso), standardise (seiketsu) and sustain (shitsuke). Under sort, unneeded items are red-tagged and moved to a holding area for disposal, recycling or reassignment; checklists are named as a standardise tool; sustain is called the hardest pillar. The five groups of checks and the red-tag log follow that order. The page gives no rating scale and does not present 5S as a legal requirement.

    • US EPA, Lean & Environment Toolkit, Chapter 5: 6S (5S plus safety) (page updated 13 July 2026)

      The toolkit adds a safety pillar to make 6S and adds yellow tags to red tags, to flag environmental, health and safety hazards, harmful materials and wastes. It says not to correct issues while tagging unless someone is in immediate danger, that an item both unneeded and hazardous should follow hazardous-waste procedures, and that yellow-tag data belongs in a log book or other tracking system, ideally with the red-tag data; the log on page 3 holds both. On scoring it says a company may use a simplified rating system, such as a 0 to 5 rating for each pillar, and says no more about the scale, so the one-line meaning of each score on the form is ours. The form keeps five pillars and handles safety through the hazard flag and the findings box. The toolkit's Appendix E has a sample 6S safety audit checklist.

    • 29 CFR 1910.22(a), General requirements: surface conditions (US OSHA)

      A US rule for general industry. Paragraph (a) asks employers to keep workplaces, passageways, storerooms, service rooms and walking-working surfaces in a clean, orderly and sanitary condition, to keep workroom floors clean and where feasible dry, and to keep walking-working surfaces free of hazards such as leaks, spills and loose boards. It does not use the word 5S. A tidy 5S area can support that duty, but a good score does not show that you meet it. Rules elsewhere differ, and this page does not say which apply to you. The standard's own text is not reproduced here.

    • CCOHS, Workplace Housekeeping: Basic Guide (fact sheet revised 4 June 2018)

      The Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety says housekeeping is not just cleanliness: it covers layout, aisles and floors, storage, maintenance, spills and waste, and its order is maintained, not achieved once. It names inspection as the final step of a housekeeping programme and the way to find its gaps. That is why the form asks for hazards found, gives each fix an owner and a date, and treats a falling score as a question for the team.

    Each source checked on 17 October 2026. Not legal advice; check the text in force for your site.

    Field by field

    The form has twenty-five checks, five under each S, and a 0 to 5 scale with a one-line meaning for each score. The checks and the meanings are examples written for a workshop or production area; reword, delete or add checks to match your own standard for the area, and keep the wording the same between audits so that scores can be compared. EPA's toolkit adds a sixth pillar, safety; this form keeps five and asks about hazards in the findings box and the tag log instead.

    Area, date, shift and auditor
    Why: A score belongs to one place, one day and one person. The shift matters because an area that is orderly on days can look different after nights.
    Common mistake: Auditing "the plant" in one pass, so one number hides a tidy line and a cluttered store.
    Audit type
    Why: A daily self-check shows the team's own habit; a weekly or monthly audit by the area leader and a cross-area audit by someone from outside bring fresh eyes. They answer different questions.
    Common mistake: Plotting self-check scores and cross-area scores on one trend line as if they measured the same thing.
    Checklist version and previous audit
    Why: A score is tied to the questions that were asked. The previous average on the same checklist gives the change that the summary shows.
    Common mistake: Rewording the checks between audits and still reading the scores as one trend.
    Scoring scale (0 to 5) and N/A
    Why: EPA's toolkit gives a 0 to 5 rating for each pillar as an example and nothing more, so the form writes a meaning for each score. A check that does not apply is left blank and marked N/A and is not counted.
    Common mistake: Entering 0 for a check that does not apply, which pulls the average down for no reason.
    Sort checks (1.1 to 1.5)
    Why: Whether unneeded items are tagged, whether tagged items are held or decided, whether only what the work needs is at the point of use, and whether broken, obsolete or expired items and hidden places were looked at.
    Common mistake: Looking at the work surfaces only, and not in cupboards or behind cabinets where old stock and forgotten containers sit.
    Set in order checks (2.1 to 2.5)
    Why: A defined place for every item, the most used items nearest, clear and marked aisles and exits with emergency equipment reachable, labelled containers, and the new-starter test: can someone new find an item and put it back without asking.
    Common mistake: Labels that name the item but not where it lives, so items come back to the wrong place.
    Shine checks (3.1 to 3.5)
    Why: Cleaning doubles as inspection. EPA says cleaning the area daily helps workers spot leaks, vibrations and misalignments early, so the form asks whether what was found while cleaning was recorded and passed on.
    Common mistake: Scoring how clean the area looks and recording nothing that was found.
    Standardise checks (4.1 to 4.5)
    Why: The standard is shown at the area, tasks are assigned and fit into normal working time, marking rules match across similar areas and shifts, the checklist is used on its schedule and a change to the area changes its standard.
    Common mistake: A standard that lives in the area leader's head or in a folder in an office.
    Sustain checks (5.1 to 5.5)
    Why: EPA calls sustain the hardest pillar. The checks ask whether audits happen on schedule, whether a fall in score was asked about, whether people can say what the standard is, whether actions are overdue and whether managers visit and reply to suggestions.
    Common mistake: Raising a low score to avoid a conversation, or using the number to rank people instead of asking the team what changed.
    What you saw, evidence
    Why: A short note turns a score into something the area leader can act on and the next auditor can compare. A photo number is enough.
    Common mistake: A score with no note, so a 2 cannot be explained a week later.
    Pillar total, summary and averages
    Why: Average = sum of scores divided by the number of checks scored, to one decimal place, for each pillar and for all scored checks together, shown beside the previous audit.
    Common mistake: Averaging the five pillar averages when the pillars had different numbers of N/A checks.
    Findings and hazards found
    Why: The lowest-scoring pillar is the place to start. A hazard such as a blocked exit or a spill goes to your hazard or incident process, and its reference is written here, so it is not held only as a score.
    Common mistake: Letting a blocked exit show up as a low mark under Set in order and nothing else.
    Red-tag and yellow-tag log
    Why: Item, location, reason, whether it is a hazard (yellow tag), decision, owner and date. An item that is both unneeded and hazardous follows your hazardous-waste procedure, with a disposal record.
    Common mistake: Moving items to the holding area with no decision date, so the holding area becomes the new store.
    Action list and sign-off
    Why: Each action says what will change so that it stays changed, with an owner and a due date. The date of the next audit and where the record is kept let the next auditor find this one.
    Common mistake: Actions that restate the score, such as "improve sustain", with no owner or date.

    Worked example

    IllustrativeA weekly 5S audit of a packing line (invented line, people and references)

    SectionEntry
    Audit detailsPacking line 3, weekly audit, day shift, by a supervisor from another area. Previous audit one week earlier with an overall average of 3.8.
    1 SortScores 4, 4, 4, 3, 4: sum 19, average 3.8. Obsolete labels and two broken pallet trucks were red-tagged and moved to the holding area (log lines 1 and 2). Check 1.4 scored 3 because of an unlabelled can of solvent behind a cabinet.
    Yellow tag and hazardThe solvent can was yellow-tagged and left unopened. The auditor reported it through the hazard process (reference HR-0412) and the log decision is dispose as hazardous waste, owner the EHS lead, with a disposal record to follow (log line 3).
    2 Set in orderScores 3, 4, 4, 4, 3: sum 18, average 3.6. Check 2.1 scored 3: tools are back on the bench and not on their outlines.
    3 ShineScores 4, 4, 4, 3, 5: sum 20, average 4.0. A small oil drip under conveyor 2, easy to see on a clean floor, was recorded and passed to maintenance (action 1).
    4 StandardiseScores 3, 3, 4, 4, 3: sum 17, average 3.4.
    5 SustainScores 3, 2, 3, 4, 3: sum 15, average 3.0, down from 4.0 last week. Check 5.2 scored 2. The auditor did not adjust the score; she asked the team why and heard that the outlines do not fit the new fixtures (action 2).
    6 SummaryOverall: 89 over 25 checks scored = 3.56, written as 3.6, against 3.8 last time, a change of minus 0.2. Lowest pillar: sustain.
    9 Actions1 Fix the conveyor 2 drip (maintenance lead, three days). 2 Remake the tool outlines for the new fixtures (area leader, two weeks). 3 Collect the solvent through the hazardous-waste route (EHS lead, three days).
    10 Sign-offSigned by the auditor, the area leader and the plant manager; next audit in a week; record kept in the line's audit folder.

    The score history is a prompt for questions, not a ranking of people. A fall from 3.8 to 3.6 sends the auditor to ask the team what changed; it is not a verdict. Scores can be compared only between audits that use the same checklist and the same scale. The figures are invented to show the method and are not benchmarks.

    When a spreadsheet stops being enough

    A paper or spreadsheet checklist works for one area and one auditor. It stops working when many areas and shifts are audited on a schedule, when each audit must be read against the last one on the same questions, when red-tag decisions and actions need owners and reminders, and when a hazard found during an audit has to reach the hazard or incident process instead of staying in a score.

    A software record versions the checklist so a score is tied to the questions used, shows the meaning of each score to the auditor, captures notes and photos on a phone, holds the tag log, routes a hazard to the incident process and trends scores by area and pillar. Ask what happens offline, because stockrooms and plant rooms often have no signal. The list below applies the inspection and audit rule used for the safety audit checklist template. Nothing in it shows that a product ships a 5S checklist or 5S scoring, so ask to have your own checklist and scale set up in a demonstration.

    Same rule for every product: tagged “Inspection Management”, “Audits & Inspections”, “Inspections”, “Offline Inspections”, “Mobile Inspections”, “Equipment Inspection”, “Audit Management”, “Internal Audit”, “Safety Management” or “EHS Management”, with a sourced inspection or safety-audit checklist capability in its record, or one the vendor stated to us, labelled as vendor-stated. Documented and conditional capabilities qualify; check the linked scope before treating a module as included.

    Tekmon pays for a sponsored placement (above); its place in this list follows the same rule as every entry. How lists are ordered

    All 79 matching profiles are shown. Documentation review, not hands-on testing or a claim of compliance.