ICS System Health Self-Assessment Guide
Most control systems don't break all at once. They drift.
Configuration becomes inconsistent. Architecture gets patchy over time. Changes pile up without enough documentation to know what the system actually looks like anymore. And before long, the whole thing is harder to manage than it should be even when nothing has technically failed.
This guide gives your team a structured way to have an honest conversation about where your control system actually stands.
What's Inside
The ICS System Health Self-Assessment Guide walks your team through 36 questions across three dimensions: configuration, architecture, and change governance, with space to capture observations and notes as you go.
Part 1: Configuration Health (12 questions) Covers asset consistency, alarm philosophy gaps, user permissions, HMI coherence, naming standards, programming practices, and more.
Part 2: Architecture Health (12 questions) Covers system mapping, design logic, target architecture, lifecycle mismatches, remote access, vendor-owned islands, and system ownership accountability.
Part 3: Change Governance Health (12 questions) Covers change traceability, emergency change frequency, contractor documentation, backup verification, approval authority, and as-built drawing currency.
What to Do With Your Findings: Guidance for prioritizing what you find, including how to sort findings into quick wins, tactical improvements, and structural work, plus advice on sequencing and how to bring findings to leadership without creating defensiveness.
Who This Is For
ICS/OT engineers, senior technicians, maintenance leads, and anyone responsible for managing or improving a control system. It's especially useful for teams that sense something is off but haven't had a structured way to talk about it.
You don't need a formal audit process or a big budget to use it. You need a few hours and a team willing to be honest about what they find.
What You'll Receive
A professionally formatted PDF document (.pdf).
This guide is for informational and educational purposes only. It is not a substitute for engineering judgment or site-specific analysis. Every control system environment is different. This is a thinking tool, not a compliance instrument or engineering deliverable.
