What are different ways you review corrective action status required for management review? Also, what evidence does your ISO auditor look for to show this has been done "effectively"?

What are different ways you review corrective action status required for management review? Also, what evidence does your ISO auditor look for to show this has been done "effectively"?
How many open, pending and closed? Are investigations completed within the assigned due dates?
Are actions completed as scheduled, were they effective, were they appropriate to the risk? Did the investigations show any trends? i.e. if all the investigations pointed out training issues, then obviously we need to work on further developing our training program...actions arising from management review?
Really, I find that we review CA's differently depending on what is going on with them. We do not have a "set" method for reviewing them at the management review.

Sorry, one other question for the group: do you cover this during scheduled management review meetings or is this a breakout meeting that you would have more often? Or do you have email status reports?

We have our way of reviewing RC/CA, but I have found that you can find better, easier, and faster ways of doing things from all the good feedback from the folks here at the Cove.

we cover in management review, but I also update individual managers on the status of thos CA's that they have direct responsibility for, especially if I feel that someone is not paying close enough attention to them.:whip:

We review CA's every week in our core quality group. Activities/outputs of this review, feed into our "management review".

We follow-up corrective actions in the same way,if this has been done "effectively", there must be some objective evidence to show.

Only two ways really exist

The way that is ineffective, and the way that is effective.