This Word template contains prepared headings, tables, project fields and completion notes. Add your information, review the completed document and remove the notes before issue.
The form prepares a separate brief; it does not fill the Word or Excel file.
Read product descriptions in your language. The Word and Excel template files are in English.
Selected page preview · DOCX
Only selected pages are shown. This is not the complete template. The full editable Word or Excel file is supplied with purchase.
Learning
How to use this template
When you need it
Raise a corrective action request when an authorized finding requires more than immediate correction and the responsible organization must address its underlying cause. Use it after the problem and initiating record are sufficiently defined.
What it helps you decide
It creates a controlled request for a reasoned response and effectiveness evidence. Management can assess whether the proposed action addresses recurrence rather than simply repairing the item that exposed the weakness.
How to complete it
Link the originating finding or NCR, validate the problem statement and record containment status so the requested response addresses the confirmed issue and scope.
Use reviewed root-cause information to define the requested action evidence, assigning owners and dates without pre-approving the process owner's proposed technical solution.
Agree verification and effectiveness methods through the relevant review route, then retain evidence and specialist assessment before the request receives an authorized closure status.
Who prepares and reviews it
The quality or assurance lead normally prepares the request with the finding owner. The responsible process owner develops the response; specialist reviewers and the authorized closure role assess its suitability and demonstrated effectiveness.
A mistake to avoid
Do not label retraining an effective corrective action without a supported cause and a way to verify that the original failure mechanism changed.
Illustrative example
Illustrative example: repeated survey discrepancies appear in several foundation records. A CAR references the confirmed findings and requests investigation of the checking process. The process owner proposes changes, and later independent checks provide evidence for deciding whether those changes reduced recurrence.