Printable template
Local Listings & NAP Consistency Audit
Business: [Business name]
Website: [Website address]
Primary location: [Address]
Directories checked: [Google, Apple Maps, Bing, Yelp, Facebook, TripAdvisor, Yahoo, industry directories]
Audit date: [Date]
NAP Consistency Score: [Score]/100
Executive Summary
[Whether public listings show consistent business identity, contact details, map information, hours, and category signals.]
Score Breakdown
| Name consistency | 10 | [ ] | [Evidence] | [Business impact] | [Recommendation] |
| Address consistency | 15 | [ ] | [Evidence] | [Business impact] | [Recommendation] |
| Phone consistency | 15 | [ ] | [Evidence] | [Business impact] | [Recommendation] |
| Website URL consistency | 10 | [ ] | [Evidence] | [Business impact] | [Recommendation] |
| Business hours consistency | 10 | [ ] | [Evidence] | [Business impact] | [Recommendation] |
| Category consistency | 10 | [ ] | [Evidence] | [Business impact] | [Recommendation] |
| Map and citation accuracy | 10 | [ ] | [Evidence] | [Business impact] | [Recommendation] |
| Duplicate and missing listings | 10 | [ ] | [Evidence] | [Business impact] | [Recommendation] |
| Directory coverage and local trust signals | 10 | [ ] | [Evidence] | [Business impact] | [Recommendation] |
Evidence Standard
Every finding must include Weight, Score, Evidence, Business Impact, Recommendation, Priority, Estimated Effort, Expected Benefit, and Evidence Confidence.
Critical Issues
[NAP or listing errors most likely to reduce calls, visits, directions, and local trust.]
High Priority
[Directory, map, category, or duplicate-listing problems.]
Quick Wins
[Low-effort corrections such as normalising phone format, fixing old URLs, or claiming missing listings.]
30-Day Action Plan
[Week-by-week listing cleanup, citation correction, and verification plan.]
Final Recommendation
[Whether local listing data is ready to support customer trust and local discovery.]