© Crown copyright 2011
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: email@example.com.
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/site-assessment-risk-scoring-guide/site-assessment-risk-scoring-guide
This Guide is a reference document designed to provide support regarding the completion of the VT56 Site Assessment Report (SAR). The SAR is a critical component of the overall VTS scoring process that the VE uses both as an aide memoire and to allocate risk scores against specific questions. This should be used in conjunction with the document A Guide to MOT Risk Reduction and provides additional guidance documents to assist the AE to implement systems that may reduce the VTS risk score.
How to use this document
The document structure complements the SAR in terms of section layout and question flow. All the risk-based questions and instructions are supported by the risk assessment criteria in this Guide; the VE will use this as a reference to ensure accurate and consistent scoring.
Not all the questions require verbal confirmation. If the response would be self-evident from visual references the VE can opt to use this evidence to risk score the question.
The example below shows a question taken from section four of this document.
Customer Areas is question five of that section. The VE uses the SAR, which lists specific questions in the order of the natural flow of an assessment around the VTS, as an aide memoire.
Moving through the example question, the key features that support the Customer Areas question are:
- ‘look for’ Statement: the text identifies the specific aspects to which the assessor will allocate a risk response
- ‘evidence’: this is the heading for the scale of risk responses that are shown below
- risk scale and supporting text: this shows the assessor an increasing scale of risk from low risk (risk score 1), to high risk (risk score 5). The text reminds the assessor of key examples of evidence that justify and validate the chosen risk rating
The evidence criteria shown in the tables which may also be an example of non-compliance with MOT scheme requirements are identified with a (X).
The Guide to MOT Risk Reduction provides additional guidance and contains documents to assist the AE to implement systems that may reduce the VTS risk score.
These documents will usually require tailoring to suit individual business needs and to include business contact details. They are not mandatory and may be used to supplement any existing systems that the AE may be operating.
Completing the Site Assessment Report
The Site Assessment Report (SAR) is used to prepare for the site visit and to record the answers given and evidence provided by staff during the site visit.
A copy of this form should be left with the AE’s representative at the end of the visit with the green copy retained on the VTS file at the local DVSA Area Office.
Potential areas of non-compliance with MOT scheme requirements are identified by a grey shaded box on the form.
The Site Preparation Report together with other MOT reports, enquiry screens and information from both the VTS and NT files will enable the VE to gain an overview of the MOT operation at a VTS before conducting a site assessment. The VE should discuss identified anomalies with the site staff.
- anomalies between site or personal data and the national average
- recent changes in quantities or volumes
- differing statistics between testing staff
Use the available space on the rear of the VTS File copy of the SAR to write a brief description of issues identified as an aide memoir. For example if the NT has an abnormally high fail rate compared to the national average or if Person Events show a significant variation on failure rates between NTs at the same VTS.
Advice or potential disciplinary action must be recorded using a VTS Advisory Form (VT59). A copy of this form should be left with the AE’s representative at the end of the visit (if applicable).
1 VTS Details
Record the VTS and AE number together with the VTS trading name and visit date in the appropriate box.
2 Disciplinary Events History
Record when the two most recent AE Formal Warnings and Short Term Cessations were issued for this VTS as a result of incorrect test standards/procedures or administration shortcomings in the appropriate row.
- examine the Site Preparation Report and the VTS/NT files for unspent Formal Warning or Short Term Cessation letters issued to the AE (and/or previous AE with continuity for this VTS) and note what type and when they occurred
Example: An AE formal warning for test standards that occurred 2 years 4 months ago would be marked in the less than 3 years box.
|1||Event occurred less that 5 years, but more than 4 years ago|
|3||Event occurred less that 3 years, but more than 2 years ago|
|5||Event occurred less that 1 year ago|
A disciplinary history assessment (including a nil assessment) must be carried out as part of the pre-visit preparation. If no history exists mark the N/A box.
3 Satisfactory Activity History
Record when the three most recent satisfactory enforcement events occurred at this site, starting with the most recent, one in each row of the form. A satisfactory activity outcome is an enforcement activity that does not result in either an ‘Advisory Warning Letter’ or a ‘Disciplinary Action Required’ outcome.
Look for: Examine the VTS file for satisfactory activities related to this VTS (whilst linked to the current AE and/or previous AE if continuity exists) resulting from any of the following activities at this site:
- mystery shopper
- mystery shopper with defects
- re-examination of a recently test vehicle
- re- examination of a recently test vehicle at a randomly selected VTS
- statutory appeal test
- Inverted Appeal Test or Special Investigation
Example: A site with the following events:
- re-examination of a recently tested vehicle 6 months ago
- mystery shopper 14 months ago
- statutory appeal test 4 years and 1 month ago
These were all satisfactory and would score:
- activity 1 year-box 1
- activity 2 year-box 2
- activity 3 year-box 5
|1||Event occurred less that 1 year ago|
|3||Event occurred less that 3 years but more than 2 years ago|
|5||Event occurred less that 5 years but more than 4 years ago|
A satisfactory activities assessment (including a nil assessment) must be carried out as part of the pre-visit preparation. If no history exists mark the Nil box.
Risk Assessment Questions
4.1 Average Vehicle Age (MAN)
What is the average age of vehicle tested at this site?
- average vehicle age data available from test logs with MOT testing service
You should look far enough to satisfy yourself of the average age of the vehicle tested at that site.
|1||Average age less than 6 years|
|3||Average age greater than 8 but not more than 10 years|
|5||Average age greater than 12 years|
This question may be completed prior arrival on site.
4.2 Authorised Examiner (AE) Details (Compliance) (MAN)
Does the Certificate of Authorisation (VT9) display the correct details?
- Compliant public display of a VT9 that correctly identifies the current authorised business entity
This can only be scored either 1 or 5. A score of 5 will require further investigation.
4.3 Registered Test (Compliance) (MAN)
Is the vehicle that is registered for test on the MOT testing service under examination?
Look for evidence that vehicles currently registered for test are either:
- on site
- undergoing or awaiting repairs under PRS
- completing a decelerometer/road test
|1||Yes, or no vehicle registered at the time of the visit|
This can only be scored either 1 or 5. A score of 5 will require further investigation.
4.4 System security
Are user passwords, Pin numbers and personnel information secure?
- location of user passwords, Pin numbers and personnel data
- VTS approach to personnel passwords and data security and evidence of regular review
- compliance with MOT scheme requirements
|1||Evidence of a good understanding and recognition of the importance of DVSA’s policy.|
|Evidence of a robust approach to system security that includes regular reviews.|
|Evidence that all users comply with current policies.|
|No evidence of a breach in system security.|
|3||Evidence of some awareness of policy and its importance.|
|Evidence of passwords or pin numbers stored in a secure location (X).|
|Evidence of a casual approach to system security.|
|Loose description given of the scheme requirements.|
|Passwords and pin numbers not held in accordance with MOT scheme rules (X).|
|5||Evidence of passwords or pin numbers disclosed or written down (X).|
|No awareness of DVSA system security policy.|
|Evidence of password and pin numbers left in an unsecured location (X).|
|Evidence of losses.|
4.5 Customer Areas (CUS)
Are the customer areas clean, tidy and well maintained?
- cleanliness of the facilities (including the customer waiting and viewing areas)
- ownership of maintenance
- clear evidence that this is effectively managed
- ease of access
|1||Customer Areas are clean, tidy and well maintained.|
|Access to customer areas are clear and well marked.|
|Evidence of maintenance and repair of these facilities.|
|3||Customer Areas are dirty, untidy or poorly maintained.|
|Access to areas are obstructed.|
|A lack of documented evidence of maintenance and repair of these facilities.|
|5||Customer Areas are obstructed or unusable (X).|
|Access to areas are blocked/unusable (X)|
4.6 Test Fee Discount (MAN)
What is the percentage discount on the initial test fee?
- evidence of test fees displayed and links to other offers such as ‘free MOT with a service’
|1||Evidence that the test fee is discounted by less than 25%|
|3||Evidence that the test fee is discounted by more than 25% but less than 50%|
|5||Evidence that the test fee is discounted more than 50%|
4.7 Notices and Public Information (CUS)
Are DVSA’s mandatory posters, notices and signs together with other company information documents accurate, up-to-date and visible?
- up to date mandatory notices
- customer information and signs readily available and is there
- evidence of a review process
|1||Evidence of a regular review of notice boards, mandatory posters and signs.|
|Content of notice boards is publicly visible, accurate and complies with the scheme requirements.|
|All information displayed complies with the Business Names Act (if applicable).|
|3||Content of notice boards and posters is visible but contains minor inaccuracies or is incomplete.|
|Customer signage illegible or damaged.|
|Some information displayed complies with the Business Names Act (if applicable).|
|5||Content of notice boards is not publicly available and/or is inaccurate (X).|
|The ‘three triangles’ sign is not displayed in a prominent position (X).|
|Information displayed does not comply with the Business Names Act (if applicable) (X).|
4.8 Workload Management (MAN)
Is there evidence that a workload management system is actively used?
- records of recent workshop activities are comparable with MOT records
- booking in systems account for staff levels and the nature of the work required
- there is the ability to record details of vehicles presented without a current MOT certificate
|1||Clear evidence of workshop management system in use for all workshop activities.|
|Activity volume conducted matches bookings. Records retained.|
|3||Some evidence of workshop management system in use or only covers some activities such as the MOT test.|
|Activity volume conducted is similar to bookings.|
|Some records retained.|
|5||No evidence of workshop management system in use (X).|
|Activity volume conducted does not match bookings.|
|No records retained.|
4.9 Vehicle Documents and Hand Over (CUS)
Is there evidence of a process to ensure that all the documents relating to a specific vehicle are kept together for returning to a customer or for filing?
- a system for retaining, retrieving and issuing vehicle related documentation including the V5C, emissions printouts and all test documentation
- staff compliant with process
|1||Evidence of a specific documented system in use.|
|Evidence that Exhaust Gas Analyser and/or Diesel Smoke Meter printouts cross match with retained documents.|
|Evidence of a comprehensive vehicle handover process.|
|All documentation retained in a single readily retrievable location, including garage copies.|
|3||Some evidence that Exhaust Gas Analyser and/or Diesel Smoke Meter printouts generally match MOT documentation.|
|Ineffective vehicle handover process.|
|Some documentation retained in a readily retrievable location.|
|5||No system for retaining Exhaust Gas Analyser or Diesel Smoke Meter printouts (X).|
|No evidence of a process or system to ensure documents are kept together.|
|Documents are not retain in a readily retrievable system.|
|No vehicle handover process.|
4.10 Scheme Changes (MAN)
What recent MOT Scheme changes have affected your VTS? Show me how you would obtain the most up-to-date information about the MOT Scheme standards and procedures.
- whether the MOT testing service is being used as a reference source
- if paper copies are used, are the MOT Testing Guide (6th Edition), relevant Inspection Manuals available and up to date
Amendments made to the electronic copy may be printed off
|1||Clear demonstrable understanding of recent scheme changes and the impact on the VTS.|
|The MOT testing service observed in use as a source of information.|
|User confidently refers to the MTS as a source of information.|
|AND (if hard copies used);|
|Evidence of a robust system for making temporary and permanent updates to paper copies.|
|Evidence that paper copies are orderly, up-to-date with the electronic copy, clearly used.|
|3||Vague understanding of recent scheme changes and the impact on the VTS.|
|Reference to the MOT testing service only made after prompting.|
|AND (if hard copies used);|
|Evidence of an informal system for making temporary and permanent updates to paper copies, not robust.|
|Evidence that the paper copies are in poor condition, amendments to keep in line with electronic copy made inconsistently (X).|
|5||No recollection of recent scheme changes or the potential impact on the VTS.|
|User lacks confidence in the use of the MOT testing service as a source of information.|
|Reference to the MOT testing service resisted after prompting.|
|AND (if hard copies used);|
|No evidence of a system for making temporary and permanent amendments to paper copies.|
|Evidence that paper copies are difficult to locate or not available (X).|
|Evidence that paper copies are incomplete, temporary amendments not made, clearly not used (X).|
4.11 Codes of Practice (MAN)
Does the VTS hold a current subscription to a recognised Code of Practice?
- evidence that the subscription is a Code recognised by the Trading Standards Institute and that it is currently active
4.12 Staff Retention (EMP)
What is the policy to attract and retain experienced NTs and VTS staff?
- evidence that the site is fully staffed
- the ability for the site to recruit and retain staff
- information from the AE-VTS link – Site Role Details screen
|1||Limited staff turnover; NT work force stable for more than two years.|
|No difficulties in retaining or recruiting staff.|
|3||Regular staff turnover; NTs stay for less than two years but more than several months.|
|Using temporary staff to fill full time vacancies.|
|5||Regular and frequent staff turnover; NTs only stay for a few months.|
|Reliance on temporary staff as the norm – staff shortages apparent.|
4.13 Incentives (EMP)
Does the VTS operate sales drives or bonus schemes?
- explore significant changes in the VTS key metrics and statistics abnormal to the scheme average from the MOT reports and VTS Test Log, if used
- whether NT(s) or other key staff are on contracts with bonus or incentive arrangements that could negatively affect behaviours in respect of the MOT scheme
|1||NT or key staff basic pay is unaffected by MOT scheme or related work.|
|Statistics within VTS key metrics baseline and/or MOT scheme norms.|
|3||NT or key staff pay is supplemented by payment for MOT scheme or related work.|
|Evidence of sales drives related to MOT test item spares.|
|Statistics outside VTS key metrics baseline and/or MOT scheme norms, plausible explanation provided.|
|5||NT or key staff pay is based on MOT test throughput or related work such as rate per test completed.|
|Statistics outside VTS key metrics baseline and/or MOT scheme norms, explanation suspect.|
4.14 Quality Management (QM) Systems (EMP)
Is there evidence of a pro-active approach to quality management at this VTS?
- documented evidence that NT’s and VTS staff are subject to regular review to ensure that correct testing methods and management procedures are applied including any remedial and correction action taken
|1||Third Party carries out regular audits of test and site management.|
|Third Party carries out additional unannounced visits.|
|2||Third Party carries out regular audits of test and site management.|
|QM system reflects the volume and all types of work undertaken.|
|3||Evidence of regular checks of NT test standards.|
|Evidence of regular site audits carried out.|
|4||Minimum quality checks carried out of NT test standards.|
|Evidence that each NT has a check at least every 2 months.|
|5||No evidence of quality management checks.|
4.15 Staff Training (EMP)
Is there evidence of a regular staff training/improvement programme?
Look For: Records of regular, staff training covering:
- new/replacement equipment
- changes in scheme requirements
- new/revised working practices
- competency assessments
|1||Fully documented continuous training/improvement system covering all staff.|
|Evidence of routine continued use.|
|All technical staff are ATA accredited (or equivalent).|
|3||Some documented evidence of a training/improvement system or the system does not cover all staff.|
|Evidence of ad hoc use.|
|All MOT staff ATA accredited (or equivalent)|
|5||No documentary evidence.|
|No staff ATA accredited (or equivalent).|
4.16 Workplace Throughput (VTS)
Is the workplace layout consistent with the level of throughput recorded from data within the MOT testing service?
- clearly defined work areas with a lack of overlap and conflict
- that the premises can actually support the average number of tests reported. Factors include site layout and access, number, type and class of test bays, test outcomes, location of other equipment
This is an assessment of the VTS facility and should not be influenced by the current staffing levels.
|1||Layout consistent with MOT test throughput, areas clearly marked up, management prevents conflict.|
|Layout enables other services; shown and explained.|
|Tools, equipment and consumables complete; layout well organised.|
|3||Layout raises some doubts about VTS capability matching actual throughput.|
|Some interference/conflict between ongoing garage activities and MOT test duties (X).|
|Tools or equipment generally complete, but not laid out to support activities.|
|5||Clear mismatch between actual MOT test volume and realistic VTS capability.|
|Conflict between MOT test and other services; interfering activities or noise, trailing leads or airlines (X).|
|Chaotic queuing or waiting observed. Sense of workplace stress.|
4.17 Workshop Appearance (VTS)
Are the workshop areas kept free from hazards and in a clean and tidy manner?
- a high standard of general housekeeping
- the condition of storage facilities for workshop waste, recyclables, spares and consumables
- the workshop equipment is free from a build up of dirt and the general prevalence of safe working practices
|1||Evidence of a cleaning schedule with ownership; high standards self evident.|
|Evidence of a waste and recycling approach; effectiveness self evident.|
|Evidence that consumables or spares storage is maintained to a high standard.|
|All bays operational.|
|3||Ad-hoc approach to cleaning or area ownership; variable tidiness or order evident.|
|Ad-hoc approach to waste and recycling; variable tidiness or order evident.|
|Ad-hoc approach to consumables or spares storage; items misplaced or untidy evident.|
|Some bays or facilities obstructed e.g. with parts or materials.|
|5||Evidence that waste or waste containers are untidy or hazardous.|
|Evidence that consumables or spares are untidy or hazardous.|
|MOT test bay obstructed and/or unusable (X).|
4.18 Equipment Management
Is there evidence of a systematic approach to the maintenance, repair and calibration of all workshop equipment?
- evidence of defined roles and responsibilities to regularly check, maintain and calibrate all workshop equipment and the retention of required certification
|1||Evidence of regular equipment maintenance checks.|
|All equipment operating instructions retained in a readily retrievable manner.|
|Routine equipment defect reporting or rectification; auditable trail for repairs available.|
|Calibration records available for all equipment.|
|3||Ad-hoc checking procedures; procedures not documented, but some observed.|
|Staff appear competent with equipment; no documented evidence.|
|Equipment service reliant on third party involvement.|
|5||Concerns relating to staff competence and focus on maintenance.|
|Equipment in generally poor state or inoperative (X).|
|MOT Equipment Calibration Certificates missing or inaccurate (X).|
4.19 Garage Hand Tool Management (VTS)
Are the garage hand tools and workshop equipment stored in a systematic fashion?
- evidence that equipment and tools stored tidily and in a readily accessible manner when not in use in appropriate storage facilities e.g. toolboxes, racking and/or shadow boards used, tool retention is monitored
|1||All tools available; demonstrates approach to ensure availability.|
|All tools stored appropriately; system is owned and maintained.|
|Tools clearly used for intended purpose, cleaned and stored when not in use.|
|3||Some MOT tools not readily available, not able to show approach to ensure availability (X).|
|Some tools stored appropriately. No ownership, tools scattered.|
|Tools missing, not used for intended purpose or not cleaned and stored after use|
|5||Missing or defective MOT tools; no confidence that the test is carried out using correct tools and/or equipment (X).|
|No structured approach to tool care or storage; tools scattered or in poor condition.|
|Serious concerns about how or if tasks are carried out i.e. without tools.|
5 AE Representative Questions
Ask the AE Representative five pre-defined questions from the VT57 (NT and AE pre-defined questions). Record the question identification number in the reference number column and risk score the number of correct answers. The questions probe the knowledge of the staff and their proactive and unprompted use of reference material (if required).
- number of correct answers
|1||5 correct answers|
|3||3 correct answers|
|5||1 or less correct answers|
If the person requests the use of reference material then the VE should note whether relevant and up-to-date material is quickly located and correctly used.
6 Nominated Tester (QC) Questions
Ask the Nominated Tester (NT) ten pre-defined questions (no more than two from each section) from the NT and AE Pre-Defined Questions (VT57). Record the question identification number in the reference number column and risk score the number of correct answers. The questions probe the knowledge of the Nominated Tester and their proactive and unprompted use of reference material (if required).
- number of correct answers
|1||9 or more correct answers|
|3||5 or 6 correct answers|
|5||2 or less correct answers|
If the Nominated Tester requests the use of reference material then the VE should note whether relevant and up to date material is quickly located and correctly used.
7 AE Representative and VE Signatures
At the end of the visit the site staff should ask the AE Representative to sign this document and the VE must leave a copy at the site together with an Advisory Form (if applicable).
Onsite assessment questions aide memoire
On-site assessment questions aide memoire
|4.1||What is the average age of vehicle tested at this site?|
|4.2||Does the Certificate of Authorisation (VT9) display the correct details? (X)|
|4.3||Is the vehicle that is registered for test on MOT Computerisation still on site? (X)|
|4.4||Are user passwords, pin numbers and personnel information secure?|
|4.5||Are the customer areas clean, tidy and well maintained?|
|4.6||What is the percentage discount on the full and retest test fees?|
|4.7||Can the site staff demonstrate that they conduct a regular review of DVSA’s mandatory posters, notices and customer information leaflets together with other company documents?|
|4.8||Is there evidence that a workload management system is actively used?|
|4.9||Is there evidence of a process to ensure that all the documents relating to a specific vehicle are kept together for returning to a customer or for filing?|
|4.10||What recent MOT Scheme changes have affected your VTS?|
|4.11||Is there evidence of a clear understanding of contingency testing procedures?|
|4.12||What is the policy to attract and retain experienced NTs and VTS staff?|
|4.13||Does the VTS operate sales drives or bonus schemes?|
|4.14||Is there documented evidence of a proactive quality management system in place at this VTS?|
|4.15||Is there evidence of a regular staff training/improvement program?|
|4.16||Is the workplace layout consistent with the level of throughput recorded on the MOT Scheme Performance Report?|
|4.17||Are the workshop areas kept free from hazards and in a clean and tidy manner?|
|4.18||Is there evidence of a systematic approach to the maintenance, repair and calibration of all workshop equipment?|
|4.19||Are the garage hand tools and workshop equipment stored in a systematic fashion?|
|5||Ask the AE Representative five pre-defined questions from the VT57 (NT and AE pre-defined questions)|
|6||Ask the Nominated Tester (NT) ten pre-defined questions (no more than two from each section) from the NT and AE Pre-Defined Questions (VT57)|