Knowledge Base Broken Link Audit
Audit knowledge base and intranet pages for broken internal and external links, then route each deficiency to the right content owner with clear corrective actions.
Trusted by frontline teams 15 years of frontline software AI customization in seconds
Built for: Saas Customer Support · Healthcare Administration · Manufacturing Operations · Financial Services · Higher Education
Overview
This template is a structured audit for scanning knowledge base articles and intranet pages for broken internal links, broken external links, failed anchors, unintended redirects, and linked documents that no longer open correctly. It is designed for content teams that need a repeatable way to document link deficiencies, identify the page owner, and route fixes without losing track of what was found.
Use it when you are maintaining a help center, policy library, SOP repository, or internal wiki where link integrity affects usability, compliance, or employee workflow. It is especially useful after content migrations, URL changes, document library reorganizations, or periodic review cycles where links are likely to drift. The template also helps when a page contains compliance-related material and a broken link could hide required guidance, forms, or source documents.
Do not use this as a generic site crawl report if you need technical SEO diagnostics, server log analysis, or automated uptime monitoring. It is also not a substitute for a full accessibility review, though it can surface some user-facing navigation defects. The value of the template is in the audit trail: what was checked, what failed, who owns the fix, and whether a follow-up review is required.
Standards & compliance context
- For ISO 9001:2015 quality management systems, this template supports controlled review of documented information by showing what was checked, what failed, and who owns the correction.
- For OSHA-related internal procedures, broken links on safety or training pages can create a non-conformance if workers cannot reach the current instruction or required form.
- For NFPA- or fire-life-safety-related content, link failures on emergency procedures, evacuation maps, or inspection records should be treated as higher priority deficiencies.
- For FDA Food Code-related materials, broken links on food safety procedures, sanitation logs, or corrective action forms can undermine traceability and should be routed promptly.
- For ANSI/ASSP Z10-style occupational safety programs, the audit supports documented corrective action, follow-up review, and continuous improvement of controlled content.
General regulatory context for orientation only — verify current requirements with counsel or the relevant agency before relying on this template for compliance.
What's inside this template
Inspection Scope and Page Identification
This section defines exactly which page is being reviewed and who owns it, so the audit has a clear boundary and a responsible contact.
-
Content location identified
Record the page title, URL, article ID, or intranet path being audited.
-
Content owner identified
Identify the business owner or publishing team responsible for link maintenance.
-
Audit scope confirmed
Confirm whether the review covers internal links, external links, embedded documents, or all link types on the page.
-
Last review date recorded
Capture the most recent review or publication date if available.
-
High-risk or compliance content flagged
Mark whether the page contains policy, safety, regulatory, or procedure content where broken links could create compliance or operational risk.
Link Integrity Check
This section is the core walk-through where each internal link, external link, anchor, redirect, and linked document is verified against expected behavior.
-
Internal links resolve successfully
All internal hyperlinks open the intended destination without 404, permission error, or broken anchor behavior.
-
External links resolve successfully
All external hyperlinks open a valid destination and do not return 404, DNS failure, certificate error, or blocked page.
-
Anchors and jump links work as intended
In-page anchors, section links, and table-of-contents links jump to the correct heading or section.
-
Redirects are intentional and limited
Links do not rely on unnecessary redirect chains and any redirect leads to the intended current destination.
-
Linked documents open correctly
Linked PDFs, spreadsheets, forms, or other documents open without access errors and match the referenced content.
Broken Link Deficiency Details
This section captures the evidence of each failure so the issue can be triaged, tracked, and corrected without ambiguity.
-
Broken link count
Enter the number of broken, dead, or inaccessible links found on the page.
-
Affected link details captured
Record each affected link target, link text, and the page location where it appears.
-
Failure type documented
Identify the observed failure mode for each broken link.
-
Broken links include required compliance content
Determine whether any broken links point to policy, safety, regulatory, or mandatory procedure content.
Routing, Ownership, and Corrective Actions
This section turns findings into action by assigning the deficiency, setting the due date, and documenting any temporary workaround.
-
Deficiency assigned to owner
Assign the broken link issue to the content owner, page maintainer, or web team.
-
Corrective action selected
Select the action needed to resolve the link issue.
-
Due date set for correction
Capture the target date for remediation based on severity and content risk.
-
Temporary workaround documented
If the target cannot be fixed immediately, document any temporary navigation path, alternate source, or notice to users.
Audit Summary and Closure
This section records the final result of the review and confirms whether another pass is needed after corrections are made.
-
Overall audit result
State whether the page passed, passed with deficiencies, or failed the link audit.
-
Follow-up review required
Indicate whether a re-audit is needed after corrections are completed.
-
Inspector notes
Capture any additional observations, patterns, or systemic issues such as repeated dead links, outdated references, or broken navigation.
How to use this template
- 1. Enter the content location, page title or URL, content owner, last review date, and whether the page contains high-risk or compliance content.
- 2. Define the audit scope before you start so the reviewer knows which internal links, external links, anchors, and linked documents must be checked.
- 3. Walk the page in order and verify each link type, recording whether it resolves, redirects intentionally, or fails to open as expected.
- 4. For every broken link, capture the exact destination, failure type, affected page section, and whether required compliance content is missing or inaccessible.
- 5. Assign each deficiency to the responsible owner, set a due date, and document any temporary workaround that keeps users moving while the fix is pending.
- 6. Close the audit by recording the overall result, noting whether a follow-up review is needed, and adding inspector comments that explain any edge cases or exceptions.
Best practices
- Check linked PDFs, forms, and policy attachments with the same rigor as page links, because a working page link can still hide a broken document.
- Treat redirects as intentional only when the destination is current, relevant, and limited in number; repeated redirect chains should be logged as a deficiency.
- Flag compliance-critical pages first so broken links to required procedures, forms, or reference material are prioritized for correction.
- Record the exact failure type, such as 404, access denied, moved, or anchor mismatch, instead of writing a vague note like link broken.
- Assign every deficiency to a named owner before closing the audit so the review produces action, not just findings.
- Photograph or capture evidence only if your workflow needs it, but always save the destination URL and page context at the time of inspection.
- Use the same scope and review method each cycle so trend comparisons are meaningful and repeat breakage is easy to spot.
What this template typically catches
Issues teams running this template most often surface in practice:
Common use cases
Frequently asked questions
What does this broken link audit template cover?
It covers knowledge articles, intranet pages, linked documents, and jump links within a defined content scope. The template captures page identification, link integrity results, deficiency details, ownership, and closure notes. It is meant for content maintenance, compliance review, and routine QA.
How often should this audit be run?
Use it on a scheduled cadence for high-traffic or compliance-related content, and after major site migrations, CMS changes, or document library updates. Many teams run it monthly or quarterly for critical pages and ad hoc for release validation. The right frequency depends on how often links change and how much risk a broken link creates.
Who should complete the audit?
A content operations specialist, knowledge manager, compliance coordinator, or QA reviewer can run it, depending on your workflow. The inspector should be able to verify link destinations, identify ownership, and distinguish intentional redirects from defects. For regulated content, the reviewer should also know which pages are high-risk or compliance-relevant.
Does this template support compliance content?
Yes. The template includes a field to flag high-risk or compliance content so broken links on policy, safety, legal, or procedural pages are treated as higher priority. That helps teams protect content governed by internal controls or standards families such as ISO 9001, OSHA-related programs, or other formal review processes. It does not replace legal review, but it does create a traceable audit trail.
What are the most common mistakes when using this audit?
Common mistakes include checking only visible page links and missing linked documents, treating redirects as acceptable without confirming intent, and failing to record the exact failure type. Another frequent issue is not assigning the deficiency to a named owner, which leaves fixes untracked. The template is designed to prevent those gaps by forcing clear documentation.
Can I customize the template for different content types?
Yes. You can add fields for article type, site section, content system, language variant, or business unit if those help route fixes faster. You can also expand the scope section to distinguish public help center pages from internal SOPs or policy pages. Keep the core link integrity checks intact so results stay comparable over time.
How does this compare with ad hoc link checking?
Ad hoc checking usually finds obvious dead links but leaves out ownership, due dates, and closure tracking. This template turns link checking into a repeatable audit with documented deficiencies and follow-up actions. That makes it easier to prove review activity, prioritize fixes, and reduce repeat breakage.
Can this template be used with CMS or issue-tracking tools?
Yes. The corrective action and ownership fields map well to ticketing systems, content workflows, and task trackers. Many teams use the audit to create tickets in their CMS, project board, or help desk after the review is complete. The template works best when each broken link can be routed directly to a responsible owner.
Related templates
Go deeper on the topic
-
Predictive scheduling laws — also called fair workweek laws or secure scheduling — require employers in covered industries to publish employee schedules...
-
Overtime calculation is the process of applying federal, state, local, and contractual rules to hours worked to determine the correct pay — including...
-
A near-miss is an event that could have caused injury or damage but didn't — a slip that didn't fall, a load that shifted but didn't drop, a machine that...
-
Lockout/tagout (LOTO) is the procedure for controlling hazardous energy — electrical, hydraulic, pneumatic, mechanical, thermal, chemical — before...
-
Learn how targeted updates to onboarding, inspections, and worker safety create a defensible audit trail when regulators, attorneys, or insurers come calling.
-
Discover 7 common intranet platform failures that exclude frontline workers—and the specific capabilities that close the gap for deskless teams.
-
Discover the 5 essential communication platform features every start-up needs—from mobile-first access and security to employee engagement and real-time...
-
MangoApps AI now creates surveys, quizzes, and team structures in minutes, helping Ops, HR, and IT teams launch faster.
Ready to use this template?
Get started with MangoApps and use Knowledge Base Broken Link Audit with your team — pricing built for small business.
