Free tool · ISO/IEC 17025:2017 · about two minutes
Ten questions between your lab and its ISO/IEC 17025 assessment.
Answer yes, partly or no. Each question is a clause an assessor will check. You get a score, the gaps in plain words, and the work that closes each one. Your answers stay in your browser.
Score it by hand. Count 2 points for each yes, 1 for each partly and 0 for each no. A score of 17 or more, with no “no” answers, is ready to schedule; 11 to 16 is close; 10 or less means significant gaps. Every partly or no is a gap to close before the assessment.
Your answers stay in this browser. Nothing is sent anywhere.
Score
0/ 20
Band
Result
Your answers describe a lab that can book its assessment. A readiness assessment checks the evidence behind each yes before the assessor does.
A few specific gaps stand between you and a clean assessment. Close them before you book it; each one below names the work.
Plan the work before you book the assessment. Start with the questions you answered no: a missing requirement is a finding.
Your score is high, but you answered no at least once, and a missing requirement is a finding.
Gaps found
- 6.2
Personnel
Competence isn’t fully documented. Some analysts run methods without a training record or a signed authorization.
We write the training program and build the records with your team. Accreditation & compliance →
- 6.4
Equipment
Instrument records have holes: calibration status, maintenance or intermediate checks can’t be shown for every instrument.
We set up the schedule and the checks, instrument by instrument. Instruments & methods →
- 6.5
Metrological traceability
The traceability chain breaks somewhere: a reference material without its certificate, or a calibration without a competent provider.
We trace each result back to its references and close the breaks. Instruments & methods →
- 7.2.2
Validation of methods
Some methods aren’t validated for every matrix you report, or the validation data never made it into a signed report.
We develop, validate and write up methods that hold up in review. Instruments & methods →
- 7.6
Evaluation of measurement uncertainty
Measurement uncertainty isn’t estimated for every test, or the arithmetic behind it can’t be shown.
We build the estimate from the validation and QC data you already have. Lab data & LIMS →
- 7.7
Ensuring the validity of results
Result validity isn’t monitored end to end: proficiency tests are missing for some tests, or QC data isn’t trended.
We plan the proficiency tests and set up the control charts. Accreditation & compliance →
- 7.11
Control of data and information management
Data control is weak: the LIMS isn’t validated, access isn’t controlled, or edits leave no trail. Results retyped by hand count here too.
We validate the LIMS, or connect instrument to certificate so nobody retypes a result. Lab data & LIMS →
- 8.3
Control of management system documents
Document control has gaps: unapproved or outdated SOPs are in use, or there’s no master list.
We write or restructure the SOP system and put it under control. Accreditation & compliance →
- 8.7
Corrective action
Corrective actions stop at the fix. Root causes and effectiveness checks aren’t recorded.
We set up the corrective action process and work through the open ones with you. Accreditation & compliance →
- 8.8 · 8.9
Internal audits and management reviews
The internal audit or the management review hasn’t happened, or its findings are still open. The internal audit has to come before the assessment.
We run the internal audit against the standard and help you close the findings. Accreditation & compliance →
No gaps in your answers. The assessor will still ask for the evidence behind each yes, so check it’s all in one place.
Next step
Talk it through on a free 30-minute call. The readiness assessment that follows is a fixed fee, quoted on the call.
Next stepFree, no pitch deck
Talk through your gaps on a free 30-minute call.
Bring your score, or the clause that worries you most.