If a main contractor or council has asked you to "get prequalified" and you're trying to work out whether that means SiteWise, Tōtika, or something run by Site Safe, the honest starting point is this: SiteWise and Tōtika are not the same scheme, and — unlike the UK's SSIP mutual-recognition setup — we could not verify that a SiteWise grade is currently accepted as satisfying a Tōtika requirement, or the reverse. Get this wrong and you can end up paying for, and maintaining, two separate prequalifications when your clients only ever needed one.
Here's what each one actually is, who asks for which, and how to avoid paying twice.
Site Safe, SiteWise — one organisation, two things
First, a mix-up worth clearing up before anything else: Site Safe and SiteWise are not two competing schemes. Site Safe New Zealand is the organisation; SiteWise is Site Safe's contractor prequalification product.
Site Safe New Zealand is a not-for-profit focused on building a culture of safety in construction and related trades. It runs training, a membership programme (over 5,700 Kiwi businesses are members), an online H&S management tool called SiteSmart — and SiteWise, its contractor prequalification and grading system. If a client says "we need you to be Site Safe accredited," what they almost always mean, in practice, is a SiteWise grade. There is no separate "Site Safe scheme" sitting alongside SiteWise that you need to pay for on top.
SiteWise — the percentage-graded prequalification
SiteWise is an online system, run by Site Safe, that grades a contractor's health and safety capability as a percentage and publishes a traffic-light result in a searchable database that main contractors and principals can check before awarding work.
How it's graded (from Site Safe's own published thresholds):
| Grade | Score | What it signals |
|---|---|---|
| Gold | 90% or above | Exceptional, well-evidenced H&S systems |
| Green | 75–89% | Quality H&S systems in place — the level most clients require |
| Amber | 50–74% | Systems need work, or lack the evidence to prove they're operating |
| Red | 0–49% | Systems not in place, or not evidenced |
Most clients want at least Green before they'll award you work; some specify Gold.
The assessment itself: a 13-step online questionnaire covering nine areas — insurance, H&S policy and procedures, H&S meetings, accident/incident reporting and investigation, hazard management, inspections, training and qualifications, worker and subcontractor engagement, and health monitoring. You upload evidence against each question, and it has to be less than 12 months old. A qualified H&S assessor reviews your submission, with a stated turnaround of 5–10 working days.
Cost: SiteWise runs three membership levels. Level 3 (sub-contractors) is from $250+GST a year, with three assessment attempts included in your first year and one per year after that (extra attempts cost $100+GST). Level 2 (main and sub-contractors) is $795+GST a year, and unlocks once a Level 3 member scores over 75%. Level 1 (principals and main contractors) is priced on application. Reassessments must happen within three months of a failed attempt, or you're back to a full annual assessment.
Who asks for it: principals, main contractors, councils and infrastructure clients — commonly in construction, civil and trades tendering. It's a frequent tender prerequisite even where your workmanship isn't in question, because it gives the client independent proof your safety systems are real.
Tōtika — the national standard, not a single assessor
Tōtika works differently. It isn't itself an assessment body you apply to directly — it's a common national standard, developed by CHASNZ (Construction Health and Safety New Zealand), an industry body set up to lift H&S performance across construction and related sectors. (Note the name: CHASNZ is not related to the UK's CHAS beyond the coincidental acronym — separate organisation, separate country, separate scheme.)
Tōtika exists to solve the same problem SSIP solves in the UK: contractors were repeating near-identical H&S assessments for every client, each with its own forms and renewal dates. Tōtika's aim is that you prequalify once, against one national standard, and that result is recognised by multiple clients.
How you actually get assessed: you don't go to Tōtika/CHASNZ directly. You choose one of the currently listed Tōtika-aligned assessment organisations and complete your assessment through them. As of this research, CHASNZ's own site names four: PreQual (IMPAC), SHE Pre-Qual, Qualify365, and Avetta.
Tōtika categories and pricing (published by PreQual/IMPAC, one of the four providers — confirm current pricing with whichever provider you choose, as fees can vary between them):
| Category | Who it's for | Cost | Validity |
|---|---|---|---|
| S — Sole Trader | Independent contractor, no staff | $298+GST (~$149/yr) | 24 months |
| 1 | Up to 20 staff, contracts ≤ NZ$2.5m | $598+GST (~$299/yr) | 24 months |
| 2 | Up to 200 staff, contracts ≤ NZ$20m, excludes very high-risk work | $999+GST | 12 months |
| 3 | 200+ staff, contracts over NZ$20m, or very high-risk work | $1,499+GST | 12 months |
Grading: Tōtika doesn't use a percentage scale like SiteWise. Instead, you're assessed as either "Performing" or "Developing" against a set of core criteria — to reach "Performing" you have to meet the minimum requirement on every core criterion, not average across them.
Cross-recognition: Tōtika also recognises certain existing certifications instead of requiring a full assessment from scratch — specifically ISO 45001, WorkSafe NZ's SafePlus on-site assessment, and Q-Safe certification. If you already hold one of those, ask your chosen Tōtika provider whether it covers you before you pay for a duplicate assessment.
Registering the result: once assessed, your Tōtika result is listed on the national register at totika.org. Registration is free for contractors and suppliers. Clients who want to search that register (Buyers, or Suppliers running their own supply chain) pay $2,000+GST a year for access — a cost that sits with your clients, not with you.
Who requires it: NZTA/Waka Kotahi's physical-works prequalification supplier information pack lists a Tōtika assessment among the organisational certifications it looks for. Wellington Water requires all its contractors and consultants to meet the Tōtika standard. CHASNZ's own published case studies name Downer New Zealand and KiwiRail among organisations that have built Tōtika into their contractor management. Independent H&S advisors describe it as increasingly the preferred route for large construction and civil contractors, and gaining ground with regional councils.
Where the money actually gets wasted
This is the part that matters most, and it's the part we could not fully settle: whether a SiteWise grade is currently treated as a valid Tōtika-aligned assessment.
Some third-party H&S advisory sites describe SiteWise as offering a "Totika-aligned" pathway. But on CHASNZ's own site, the list of Tōtika-aligned assessment organisations names four providers — PreQual, SHE Pre-Qual, Qualify365 and Avetta — and SiteWise isn't among them. Neither sitewise.co.nz nor sitesafe.org.nz mentions Tōtika anywhere on their own pages. Given that inconsistency, don't assume either direction. If a client specifically asks for Tōtika and you only hold SiteWise (or vice versa), confirm directly with the client, and with CHASNZ or Site Safe, before assuming one covers the other — don't take a consultant's blog post (including this one) as the final word on a live mutual-recognition question.
What we can say with confidence: SiteWise and Tōtika are graded completely differently (a percentage score versus a Performing/Developing pass), run by different organisations, cost different amounts, and are asked for by different kinds of client. Treat them as two separate products until a specific client tells you otherwise.
So which one do you actually need?
The least glamorous answer is still the fastest one: ask your most important client, or the tender document, which scheme they name.
As a general pattern from what we could verify: infrastructure clients, NZTA-adjacent work, water utilities like Wellington Water, and large civil/construction principals such as Downer and KiwiRail increasingly point to Tōtika by name. Main contractors on building sites — the likes of Fletcher, Hawkins and Fulton Hogan among others — commonly ask subcontractors for a SiteWise Green grade specifically. If you're tendering broadly across both infrastructure and building work, you may genuinely need both — in which case, keep your evidence organised once and reuse it for both assessments, since the underlying proof (policy, RAMS-equivalent risk assessments, training records, incident history) overlaps heavily.
If you only work for one or two repeat clients, don't buy both "just in case." Ask first.
What an assessment actually wants to see
Regardless of scheme, assessors are checking the same underlying things: a health and safety policy with clearly assigned responsibilities; hazard and risk registers with task- and site-specific detail; incident, accident and near-miss records — including what corrective action you actually took; worker induction, training and competency records; toolbox talks and safety meeting records; worker engagement and participation; how you manage subcontractors; and site inspections and monitoring.
The most common reason contractors score badly on either scheme isn't a missing policy — it's missing or stale evidence. Assessors grade what you can currently prove is operating, not what your documents say in principle. Evidence that's more than a few months old, even if it was accurate at the time, reads as a system that isn't actually running day to day.
The renewal trap
Both schemes are annual or near-annual. SiteWise reassesses every 12 months without exception. Tōtika validity runs 12 months for Categories 2 and 3, and up to 24 months for Category S and Category 1 — and if you renew within three months of expiry, the extra time carries over onto your new validity period rather than being lost.
The failure mode is the same one that costs UK contractors work: the renewal notice lands in a general inbox, nobody owns it, the deadline passes, and a client's routine check turns up a lapsed grade right when a contract was on the table. A named owner and staged reminders — 30, 14 and 7 days out — closes that gap.
Glossary
- CHASNZ (Construction Health and Safety New Zealand) — the industry body that developed the Tōtika standard. Not related to the UK's CHAS beyond the shared acronym.
- Tōtika — New Zealand's national H&S prequalification standard; delivered through approved assessment organisations (currently PreQual, SHE Pre-Qual, Qualify365 and Avetta), rather than a single assessor.
- SiteWise — Site Safe New Zealand's contractor prequalification product, graded as a percentage (Red/Amber/Green/Gold).
- Site Safe — the not-for-profit organisation that runs SiteWise, plus training, membership and the SiteSmart H&S tool.
- Performing / Developing — Tōtika's pass/fail-style grading, based on meeting minimum requirements across core criteria rather than a weighted score.
- SafePlus — WorkSafe NZ's on-site H&S performance improvement tool, recognised by Tōtika as an alternative to a full assessment.
- PreQual — IMPAC's own prequalification product, and separately, one of the organisations that delivers Tōtika-aligned assessments.
FAQ
Is SiteWise the same as Tōtika? No. SiteWise is run by Site Safe and grades you as a percentage. Tōtika is a national standard developed by CHASNZ, delivered through separate approved assessment organisations, and graded Performing/Developing. Whether one currently satisfies a client asking for the other isn't something we could confirm — check directly with the client and the scheme.
Is "Site Safe" a different accreditation to SiteWise? No — Site Safe is the organisation; SiteWise is its prequalification product. If a client says "Site Safe accredited," they almost always mean a SiteWise grade.
What score do I need for SiteWise Green? 75% or above. 90% or above earns Gold. Most clients require at least Green before awarding work.
How much does SiteWise cost? From $250+GST a year for sub-contractors (Level 3), rising to $795+GST a year once you're operating as both a main and sub-contractor (Level 2). Principal/main-contractor level (Level 1) is priced on application.
How much does Tōtika cost? It depends on your category and which of the four approved providers you use. PreQual's published pricing runs from $298+GST for a sole trader (Category S, 24-month validity) up to $1,499+GST for a large or very-high-risk supplier (Category 3, 12-month validity).
Does holding ISO 45001 or SafePlus mean I skip Tōtika assessment? Tōtika recognises ISO 45001, SafePlus and Q-Safe as alternatives to a full assessment. Confirm with your chosen Tōtika provider whether your existing certification covers you before paying for a duplicate assessment.
Which councils or agencies specifically ask for Tōtika? NZTA's physical-works prequalification information pack references a Tōtika assessment. Wellington Water requires it of its contractors and consultants. CHASNZ's own case studies name Downer and KiwiRail as organisations using it.
What's the single biggest reason contractors score badly? Missing or out-of-date evidence, not a missing policy. Assessors grade what you can currently prove your system is doing — keep evidence current year-round rather than rebuilding it before each assessment.
Deplexify manages SiteWise accreditation for NZ contractors end to end — the policies, the portal, the assessor liaison — for a flat $595 NZD fee. See how Deplexify handles SiteWise, or get in touch to check which scheme your specific clients actually require before you pay for the wrong one.