Other schemes may define their own certification criteria, status labels and verification channels. The Ethical Supply Chain Program audit checklist<\/a> describes its own program requirements, while its Supplier Lookup<\/a> says buyers can check program certification status or validate certain certificates and audit reports. That lookup applies to the named program; it is not a universal registry for all suppliers or audits.<\/p>\n The useful buyer question is therefore not simply, \u201cDoes the supplier have an audit?\u201d Ask: \u201cWhat did this assessment cover, which site and people were within scope, what criteria were applied, and does that answer the question our program requires us to answer?\u201d If the supplier sends a summary page only, ask for enough controlled information to verify scope and findings through the proper channel. Avoid requesting worker-level personal data when aggregated or redacted evidence can address the decision.<\/p>\n Start with the legal entity named in your contract or purchase documentation. Compare it with the entity shown in the report, the address of the facility assessed, the supplier’s stated manufacturing location, and the site that will actually produce or finish your hardware. Names may differ because of a group structure, local-language spelling, operating entity or approved subcontracting arrangement. A difference is not automatically evidence of a problem, but it must be explained and documented before you rely on the report.<\/p>\n For a custom wire basket, towel rack, bathroom shelf or metal storage rack, the relevant site may perform only some operations. One location could form and weld components while another applies a finish or assembles and packs the product. A social audit of one workplace does not automatically cover every facility involved in the order. Ask the supplier to map the contracted entity to the production, finishing, assembly and packing sites that apply to the specific SKU. Where an operation is subcontracted, record which site performs it and whether the buyer’s program requires that site to be assessed.<\/p>\n Check whether the report’s company name, facility identifier and address are consistent across the report cover, audit details and any official program record. Confirm the audit firm or auditor through the method the relevant program provides. If a scheme provides a report-validation platform, use its official lookup rather than relying on a forwarded PDF screenshot. If the scheme has no public lookup, request confirmation through the program’s authorized channel or from the issuing audit organization, following your company’s confidentiality and consent rules.<\/p>\n A buyer should also confirm whether the report is allowed to be shared and whether access is controlled. Audit records can contain commercially sensitive details and information about workers. Do not circulate an unredacted report beyond colleagues or partners who need it for the decision. Keep a record of the document version, date received, source, verification steps and any missing information so a later reviewer can understand what was actually assessed.<\/p>\n First identify the name and version of the audit program or buyer code. Then record the audit type, site covered, announced or other arrangement if stated, audit date, report issue date, criteria, language and any stated limitations. These fields help you decide whether the report is relevant; they do not create a universal expiration rule. Audit cycles and acceptance windows vary by retailer, program, risk classification and contract, so ask the buyer or program owner which version and timing apply.<\/p>\n Compare the audit scope with your own requirements. A report covering labor and health-and-safety topics may not cover environmental or business-ethics topics; a wider scope may also depend on the selected program and audit. Conversely, a site may have been assessed under an independent buyer code rather than a named social-audit platform. Do not assume that two reports with similar titles assessed identical topics or used equivalent rating systems. Request the criteria or scope page when it is missing.<\/p>\n Retailer examples demonstrate why buyer-specific rules matter. Kingfisher’s published Ethical Sourcing Requirements<\/a> describe its own supplier and employment-site expectations, including distinctions among relevant sites. Treat that document as an example of a retailer’s program, not a requirement for every importer. Your own brand, retailer, jurisdiction and supplier agreement determine what evidence is required. If expectations conflict or are unclear, obtain written direction from the responsible compliance or procurement owner before requesting a new audit or making a commitment to a particular scheme.<\/p>\n Check the time relationship between the audit and the purchase. A recent report can still refer to a different facility or scope; an older report may remain relevant only if the buyer program accepts it and there has been no material change requiring a review. Ask whether the facility moved, the legal entity changed, production was transferred, a subcontractor was added, or major corrective actions remain open. There is no single report date that proves the current state for every program.<\/p>\n Read each finding with its program definition, supporting evidence, required action, owner, target timing and closure status. Severity terms such as minor, major, critical or business-critical are not interchangeable across programs. Use the definitions in the applicable scheme or buyer code instead of ranking findings by a label taken from another system. If the report uses a score, determine what the score measures and whether the buyer program sets a threshold; never infer a universal pass mark.<\/p>\n A corrective action plan should connect an observed issue to a specific response. Buyers can ask what was corrected, who owns the action, what objective evidence supports closure, whether verification was remote or on-site, and whether the program or customer has accepted the evidence. A supplier statement that an item is \u201cfixed\u201d is useful as an update but may not equal verified closure under the relevant process. Keep open items visible in the onboarding or purchase file rather than burying them in an email thread.<\/p>\n Look for whether the report distinguishes immediate containment from a lasting corrective measure. For example, a record may show a document update while leaving the underlying training, supervision or timekeeping control unresolved. The buyer should ask for evidence appropriate to the finding and its risk\u2014not invent a new audit test or demand unnecessary personal records. Some issues may require a program specialist, retailer compliance team or qualified auditor to interpret.<\/p>\n Record the decision and owner for every unresolved point. Possible decisions include accepting the report for a defined buyer program, requesting clarification, seeking an authorized authenticity check, asking for a follow-up assessment, or pausing onboarding until the required information is available. These are procurement workflow choices; this article does not set a legal threshold or determine whether a factory is compliant.<\/p>\n A social compliance audit is not a product test. It does not establish that a shower basket meets a load requirement, that a coating resists corrosion, that a weld is fit for use, or that a packaging configuration will survive transit. Those questions require product specifications, appropriate technical evidence and quality controls. Keep workplace due diligence and product-quality acceptance in separate records so one cannot accidentally substitute for the other.<\/p>\n An audit is also a snapshot bounded by its site, scope, criteria and date. It cannot guarantee that every shift, worker, subcontractor, future order or later operating condition was observed. It does not prove that a supplier has no undiscovered issue or that conditions will remain the same. Treat results as one input into ongoing supplier engagement and risk review, not as a permanent approval badge.<\/p>\n Program terms matter. Sedex explicitly states that SMETA is not a pass\/fail certification. Other programs may offer certification under their own rules and status definitions; those labels should be attributed to that program and verified through its channels. A buyer should not translate a SMETA finding into \u201ccertified,\u201d nor treat a certificate from one scheme as automatic approval under another retailer’s code.<\/p>\n Finally, do not confuse an audit with legal advice or a full supply-chain investigation. The report may not cover every upstream material source, labor provider or business relationship relevant to a buyer’s separate obligations. Where legal or regulatory duties apply, consult current official guidance and qualified counsel. The practical role of the importer checklist is narrower: establish whether the evidence matches the decision you need to make and what follow-up remains.<\/p>\n Use the questions below as a review record. The \u201cbuyer action\u201d column means what to do next, not an automatic pass\/fail determination. Adapt it to your contract, retailer program and internal risk process.<\/p>\n Keep the original document or controlled link, verification note and buyer decision together. If a customer only needs a status confirmation, do not send an entire confidential report by default. If a supplier cannot share the report, ask whether the program can provide a controlled status confirmation or whether your buyer team has another approved evidence route.<\/p>\n A simple decision record can capture the question, evidence reviewed, source of verification, missing fields, open corrective actions, owner and next review date. Make clear who accepted the evidence and for which program or order. \u201cReviewed\u201d should never silently become \u201capproved for every customer, product or future shipment.\u201d<\/p>\n No. A social compliance audit examines workplace and related management criteria under a defined program. A product or process quality audit looks at matters such as specifications, workmanship, inspection methods, records or production controls. A buyer may need both, but neither replaces the other.<\/p>\n No. Sedex says SMETA is not a certification body and does not impose a pass\/fail model. Review the findings and corrective actions within the applicable program context, and follow your own customer’s acceptance criteria.<\/p>\n Not automatically. Check whether the report covers the same legal entity, production site, scope and criteria, and whether your program allows sharing or reuse. Ask your compliance or retailer contact when acceptance rules are unclear.<\/p>\n There is no universal age rule that applies to every scheme and buyer. Use the current requirement from the retailer, brand or program that controls your purchase, and consider whether the site or operating scope changed after the audit.<\/p>\n Ask what that document represents, which site and program it refers to, and whether an official system can validate its status. If your buyer requirement needs findings or corrective-action details, a summary alone may not answer it.<\/p>\n For a bathroom or home-storage hardware project, keep workplace due-diligence requests distinct from product specifications and quality acceptance. Koitor’s fabrication sur mesure de quincaillerie de salle de bains<\/a> et OEM home-storage hardware<\/a> pages describe the product-sourcing scope. Share your product drawing, sample, finish, packaging needs and the buyer-program evidence you require when discussing a project.<\/p>\n Send Koitor your product drawing, sample, specification, finish and packaging questions. Our team can discuss the hardware manufacturing scope while you manage the separate buyer-program and workplace due-diligence requirements.<\/p>\nDoes the report identify the contracted supplier and actual production site?<\/h2>\n
![\"Hardware](\"https:\/\/koitorhardware.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/k1005-process-audit-report-review.webp\")
How should buyers compare the audit program, date and scope?<\/h2>\n
What do findings and corrective-action status tell an importer?<\/h2>\n
What can an audit report not prove?<\/h2>\n
Buyer checklist before accepting a supplier report<\/h2>\n
\n\n
\n \nReview item<\/th>\n Ce qu'il faut v\u00e9rifier<\/th>\n Buyer action if unclear<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n \n Contracting entity<\/td>\n Legal name and relationship to the supplier named on the order<\/td>\n Ask for a documented entity\/site explanation<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Production site<\/td>\n Address and operations covered; include finishing, assembly or packing sites where relevant<\/td>\n Map sites and confirm whether subcontractors are within scope<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Program and version<\/td>\n Scheme, buyer code, version, audit type and criteria<\/td>\n Compare against the current customer requirement<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Date and scope<\/td>\n Audit date, report date, covered workplace and stated limits<\/td>\n Ask the program owner whether the timing and scope are acceptable<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Issuer and authenticity<\/td>\n Audit firm, auditor or program reference; available validation method<\/td>\n Use the official scheme or issuer channel<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Findings<\/td>\n Definitions, evidence, severity and open items<\/td>\n Request clarification using the program’s terminology<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Corrective action<\/td>\n Action owner, evidence, status and verification method<\/td>\n Keep unclosed or unverified points assigned and tracked<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Change since audit<\/td>\n Site, legal entity, process or subcontractor changes<\/td>\n Ask whether updated evidence or review is required<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Record handling<\/td>\n Permission to share, redaction and document version<\/td>\n Store securely and limit access to people who need it<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n ![\"Hardware](\"https:\/\/koitorhardware.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/k1005-checklist-social-audit-review.webp\")
Foire aux questions<\/h2>\n
Is a social compliance audit the same as a factory quality audit?<\/h3>\n
Does a SMETA report mean the supplier is certified?<\/h3>\n
Can I accept a report issued for another retailer?<\/h3>\n
How recent must the report be?<\/h3>\n
What if the supplier provides only a certificate or summary page?<\/h3>\n
Collaborez avec Koitor Hardware<\/h2>\n
Discuss Your Hardware Sourcing Requirements<\/h3>\n