Saturday, February 6, 2016

Conclusions of Stage 1 Audits

With respect to purpose & intent of Stage 1 audits, one of the requirement of ISO 17021 and BMS is -
Stage 1 audit shall be performed -….

1. To review the allocation of resources for stage 2 and agree with the client on details of the stage 2.
Evidence of this review shall be available
2. An audit report is produced at the end of stage 1 and is communicated to the client, including the
identification of findings that could be nonconformities during the stage 2 audit.
With respect to Point 1 above -
• During the ICC File Reviews & also from the audit reports sampled during the last UKAS & ANAB audits, it was seen that the Stage 1 audit reports do not demonstrate whether & how the audit team has reviewed the allocation of resources for stage 2 and agreed with the client on details of the stage
2.
• Somewhere in the Stage 1 audit report it needs to be clearly evident that there has been a "review of the allocation of resources for stage 2 audit and agreement with the client on the details of the stage 2 audit." That's one of the reason for a 2-stage audit process.
• All team leaders for Stage 1 need to ensure that the Stage 1 audit reports captures this requirement explicitly – something like "OK to progress to Stage 2 with the identified team competence and the person-days as per the approved contract review".

With respect to Point 2 above -
• It is not necessary to raise NCRs at a Stage 1 (however, if done, then accreditation bodies expect they are properly closed out with proper correction, root cause analysis & corrective actions. Normally it is seen that for Stage 1 NCRs, the root causes are more than often either ‘missed out’, ‘overlooked’, etc or all Stage 1 NCRs would have a common root cause as ‘unawareness’, which would not be acceptable).
• As communicated earlier, effective 01st Nov 2014, do not raise NCRs during the Stage 1 audits.
• However, Stage 1 audit reports to clearly indicate 'Concerns which could be NCRs during Stage 2 if not satisfactorily addressed'......these concerns can be raised under the 'Observations' tab in the xml file and the audit conclusion (in the Executive Summary).
• Stage 1 report should explicitly state that the "Concerns which are listed under Observations, would be verified for effective implementation during the Stage 2 and would be raised as NCRs during Stage 2 if not satisfactorily addressed by then".
• Since NCRs would not be raised during Stage 1, it should not be, by default, assumed that Stage 1 can be always cleared, by raising certain concerns. As a guideline, if there are no such concerns which may become a Major NC during Stage 2, then we can say stage 1 is through, otherwise not.
• According to BMS, Maximum Gap allowed between stage 1 and stage 2 is 180 days, which is sufficient time for client to address concerns/observations. It is advisable to agree upon a time line with client for confirming completion of actions for identified concerns/observations during stage 1.
• Please note that this practice of raising concerns (which can be NCRs) is applicable only for stage 1 audits. For all subsequent audit events, NCRs to be raised in case of deviations seen from the requirements of the standard, organization's procedures or applicable legal/other requirements. 

No comments: