Describe the site, security company, and standards to review. Makeform creates a focused form for rating guard visibility, response, communication, and professionalism, with room for follow-up.
Route evaluation results to email, Slack, Google Sheets, and Zapier.
Sample prompts for the builder
Choose a prompt, adapt it, and send it to the builder. Each example shows a practical structure, not a live result.
Audience
Facility managers reviewing contracted guards
Format
Monthly scorecard
Prompt size
342 chars
Example form structure
Monthly scorecard
Site, review period, and shift
Rate guard conduct and presentation
Rate patrols and access control
Observed strength or concern
Is manager follow-up required?
Suggested routing tags
Meets expectations
Follow-up needed
Urgent service issue
Define every rating with observable service, such as patrols completed with minor communication gaps.
Step 1
Observe
record site, shift, and interaction
Step 2
Rate
score observable standards
Step 3
Explain
add facts behind unusual scores
Step 4
Follow up
assign ownership and review
A clearer contractor review
Separate guard behavior, site execution, and response performance so one interaction does not become a vague overall score.
Use one defined scale for punctuality, visibility, courtesy, access control, response, and communication. Comments explain unusual ratings.
Capture property, post, date, time, and shift to find the relevant schedule or occurrence log.
Route concerns by severity, assign a reviewer and date, and share positive feedback with the contractor supervisor.
Flexible by setting
Start with common service criteria, then add duties from each site's post orders or service scope.
Review lobby attention, visitors, patrols, keys, and after-hours communication.
Evaluate gate records, badges, vehicle entry, patrols, escalation, and handover.
Measure courtesy, gatehouse consistency, patrols, parking response, and staff communication.
Rate planning, deployment, entry flow, guest interaction, supervision, and closeout.
Build the evaluation
Draft the structure, then align questions with the contracted scope and observable work.
Name the property, posts, evaluators, frequency, and duties. Specify whether the review covers an interaction, shift, event, or month.
Define each scale endpoint. Separate response speed from quality and professional conduct from appearance.
After a low score, collect date, place, factual observation, contact preference, and urgency. Never request door codes or credentials.
Send evaluations to the contract owner, flag urgent concerns, and export recurring scores to compare service periods.
Choose the right review method
Choose based on whether you are reviewing service or reporting an occurrence.
Field guide
These six sections keep reviews concise, specific, and useful in contractor discussions.
Evaluation context
Capture the assignment and review period. For specific feedback, ask for an interaction date and approximate time.
Evaluator details
Ask for the evaluator's role and contact preference. Offer anonymity only when follow-up can work without direct contact.
Guard professionalism
Rate visible behaviors: arrival, identification, attentiveness, respectful communication, site knowledge, and calm handling of questions.
Post performance
Match evaluation areas to post orders. Gate officers need visitor and log criteria; patrols need route, visibility, and escalation criteria.
Response quality
Rate acknowledgment, updates, escalation, and professionalism separately from speed. Allow approximate times.
Follow-up plan
Let evaluators request contact, classify urgency, and attach files. Record the action owner and next review date.
Related tools
Pair the scorecard with separate incident, supplier, access, or complaint forms.
FAQ
Practical answers for facility managers, property teams, operations leaders, and clients reviewing contracted guard services.
It is a scorecard for reviewing a security company's service over an interaction, shift, event, or contract period. It rates guard conduct, access control, patrols, response, communication, and professionalism, then records examples and follow-up.
Ask about observable behavior and assigned duties: readiness, identification, attentiveness, courtesy, visitor processing, patrols, logs, communication, response, escalation, and supervision. Include not applicable for duties the evaluator did not observe.
A five-point scale works when every point is defined. For example, 1 can mean a requirement was missed and 5 that it was consistently completed. Require factual comments for unusually low or high scores.
Collect when help was requested, acknowledged, and provided, allowing approximate times. Rate communication and escalation separately from speed, and compare results with your service scope.
It can be, especially for tenant or resident feedback. Explain that anonymity may limit follow-up. Named contract reviews make it easier to confirm context and agree on actions.
Yes. Makeform provides unlimited free forms and responses, so you can generate, edit, publish, and reuse the evaluation. The paid tier removes the Makeform badge.
Yes. Choose a site, post, or service type, then show its section with conditional logic. Gatehouse questions can cover visitors; patrol questions can cover routes, visibility, and escalation.
After a low score, ask what was observed, where and when, contact preference, urgency, owner, and review date. Use a separate incident report when a detailed timeline and attachments are needed.
Make every service review easier to act on.
