How many contacts should I monitor per agent?

Enough to hit your chosen confidence level and margin of error, not a round habit. The calculator uses the standard sample-size formula for a proportion with a finite-population correction.

Why isn't five a month enough?

A handful of contacts gives a score with so much sampling error that the gap between two agents can be pure chance. Sizing the sample to a stated margin of error makes the score defensible.

QA monitoring sample size

“Five contacts an agent a month” is a habit, not a method. If you want a quality score you can defend — one that means roughly the same thing for a busy agent as a quiet one — the sample has to be sized to a confidence level and a margin of error. This tool does that, then totals the monitoring load and the analyst hours it costs, so you can plan QA capacity instead of guessing it.

Your numbers

Agents to monitor

Contacts / agent / period

Confidence level

Margin of error (±%)

Expected pass rate (%)

Minutes to evaluate one contact

—

Contacts to monitor
per agent / period

—

Total evaluations
across the team

—

… share of
total volume

—

Analyst hours
/ period

Sample per agent vs the margin of error you ask for — precision gets expensive fast.

How the number is built

How it works

This is the standard sample-size formula for estimating a proportion. Start with n₀ = z² × p(1−p) ÷ E², where z is the confidence multiplier (1.64 at 90%, 1.96 at 95%, 2.58 at 99%), p is the expected pass rate and E is the margin of error. Because each agent only handles so many contacts in a period, we apply the finite-population correction n = n₀ ÷ (1 + (n₀−1)÷N), which pulls the sample down when the population N is small. The pass rate matters because variance is highest near 50%: if you genuinely don’t know the rate, leave it at 50% for the safest (largest) sample. The headline is per agent, because a fair score has to be defensible at the level you act on it — the individual. Total load, analyst hours and the share of volume follow from there. These are planning-grade figures to size the QA function, not a substitute for a statistician on a regulated programme.

Pair this with the quality scorecard & calibration tracker, read designing a meaningful QA programme, or learn the craft in the quality Academy track.