Run14 Audit & health check · 3 of 3

What you do with the answers

The sweep produces a sheet, not a slide. And the SQL for everything past week one already exists — this handbook does not restate it.

Stand 29.07.2026

#The findings sheet, and where the SQL lives

What

One row per finding, no row without a number. These columns are the whole format: it fits in a spreadsheet, it survives being forwarded, and it is what the next phase gets scoped from.

The findings sheet

Column	Contains	Bad if
Area	cost / compute / jobs / storage / governance	a sixth category appears — the sweep grew
Finding	one sentence, past tense, no recommendation	it contains the word 'should'
Number	the measured value and its window	it is a rating rather than a measurement
Query	the exact SQL, or its slug in the library	'from the audit' — nobody can re-run it
So what	the consequence in the client's terms	it restates the number in other words
Owner	a named person on the client side	a team name — or you
Effort	config change / one sprint / phase two	blank, so everything looks equally urgent

This route says what to look at in week one and why those five questions; the library says how to ask them. Pruning ratios, spill, per-recipient sharing, network egress — all library, none of it repeated here.

Why

A sheet with a query slug in every row is re-runnable after you leave, which is the difference between an audit and an audit capability. The handover version of this engagement is not a document; it is the team running the same ten queries without you. The format also protects the sweep from how it usually degrades: a findings sheet that fills with recommendations becomes a proposal, and a proposal gets negotiated. Numbers do not.

Doing it

Write the sheet during the sweep, not afterwards from notesA finding written three days later has lost the query and gained an opinion.
Put the library slug in the Query column so any row can be re-run by someone who was not in the room
Assign every row to a named client-side owner in the readout itself, while everyone is present

Embedding it

Have the team fill the last two areas themselves while you watchThey will write a recommendation into the Finding column and correct themselves once, which teaches the distinction better than the rule does.
Book the handover re-run in week one with a client name against it, not yours
At handover, check that one finding was closed by someone who was not in the original sweepThat is the evidence the capability transferred.

Defaults

One row per finding, with a number and a re-runnable query in every row
Library slugs as the citation format, so the sheet stays short and reproducible
The same sheet re-run at handover and diffed against the baseline

Gotchas

A findings sheet with no Query columnSix weeks later a number is challenged, nobody can reproduce it, and the whole sheet loses authority over one row.
Owners assigned afterwards by emailEverything ends up owned by the platform lead, who has no time, and the sheet stops moving in week three.
Presenting the sweep and never re-running itWithout the handover comparison nobody can tell whether the engagement improved anything or merely coincided with it.