|
|
 |
|

23rd May 2001, 10:26 AM
|
|
Inactive Registered Visitor
Registration Date: May 2001
Location: Iceland
|
|
Posts: 7
Thanks Given to Others: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Karma Power: 35 Karma: 10 
|
|
When to start a formal corrective action as a follow-up action after audits
We are reviewing our internal audit process. One thing to consider is when to start a formal corrective action as a follow-up action after audits. Is it advisable for all nonconformities, or just when a quick fix is not achievable? Comments?
Johann
Icelandic Aluminium Co. Ltd.
Iceland
|

23rd May 2001, 11:00 AM
|
 |
Semper Gumby
Registration Date: Apr 2001
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Age: 46
|
|
Posts: 287
Thanks Given to Others: 5
Thanked 13 Times in 12 Posts
Karma Power: 43 Karma: 181  
|
|
Hi Iceman,
We have a follow-up or "audit" on each Corrective and Preventative Action item brought up, no matter how minute. It is actually part of the Request for Action (RFA) form we use to log and track CAR's & PAR's. Upon completion of the CAR/PAR, the RFA is logged into the system and I assign a follow-up date. This follow-up date is based upon the nature of the CAR/PAR and is designed to be timely, yet allow enough time for the action to be properly and thoroughly tested. If, during the follow-up, further corrective/preventative action is required, the matter is brought back before the Management Team or individual assiged to develop the resolution to the situation for further action.
Hope this helps.
Cheers!
Mike
|

23rd May 2001, 11:19 AM
|
 |
Inactive Registered Visitor
Registration Date: Apr 2001
Location: Orillia, Ontario, Canada
Age: 34
|
|
Posts: 112
Thanks Given to Others: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Karma Power: 37 Karma: 20 
|
|
Iceman
I believe you are asking about findings from internal audits and how they are handled. For any findings from Internal Auditing we issue a CPAR. There is a (reasonable) proposed close-out date. The Corrective or Preventive Action is checked for effectiveness. If it is still ineffective, it goes back to the Quality Board for re-evaluation. My personal feeling is that if I find problems while I'm doing internal auditing, chances are it is a problem. You might as well deal with it while it is a small problem, rather than wait until it is huge and your registrar finds it!
Hope this helps!
|

23rd May 2001, 04:02 PM
|
|
|
Hi Iceman, I asked our external auditor the exact same question (do we have to write up "everything" esp. if it can be fixed immediately). His answer to me was, if you don't write up every one, how will you know whether or not you have a problem. I have informed my team of internal auditors to write up everything, in the hopes that as problems are corrected, we will eventually see a decrease in the amount of problems we have to write up.....
|

23rd May 2001, 04:35 PM
|
|
|
|
Fire Girl,
Can you give an example of an ineffective CPAR? Does this determination occur on the date the CPAR is due? I have always had a hard time explaining effectiveness of a Corrective Action, other than it was corrected. Are we talking about repeat N/C's?
energy
|

23rd May 2001, 06:40 PM
|
|
|
|
Iceman,
I've used a system where the lead auditor (generally the Management Rep) has discriminatory authority to either issue an NCR or a "notice of issue". The CAR followed the classic approach for corrective action, the notice of issue was documented in an audit report that the auditee signed but a formal documented resolution was not required. The MR kept track of the notices and made them available to the auditors for subsequent audits. In many cases, the audit frequency was adjusted if a notice was issued.
We used a major/minor classification system to decide whether an NCR or notice would be desireable.
I typically use this type of system early in an implementation to minimize the amount of paperwork that could flood the system as the system gets up to speed. Many times, after about a year or so, it's almost easier to issue an NCR for all findings.
An additional note: the discretionary system was accepted easily by one registration auditor, but a second registration auditor felt it left room for abuse; he suggested "a finding is a finding" and an NCR should be issued for all findings.
|

24th May 2001, 01:02 AM
|
|
|
Go for it Fire Girl!
ASD...
|

24th May 2001, 07:35 AM
|
 |
Inactive Registered Visitor
Registration Date: Apr 2001
Location: Orillia, Ontario, Canada
Age: 34
|
|
Posts: 112
Thanks Given to Others: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Karma Power: 37 Karma: 20 
|
|
Energy
How you doin'?
Have you ever seen my CPAR form? There is a place to write a corrective or preventive action. Below that is a space to have the department manager to sign off that the corrective or preventive action has been implemented. Under that I get the QA Manager to sign off that the action was effective. Essentially, if you go back to do a 'follow-up audit' and the problem still exists, your corr/preve action was not effective. Go back to the ol' drawing board and figure out something else. Why, haven't you ever had this happen to you?
|
Lower Navigation Bar
|
|
|
|
Visitors Currently Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 Registered Visitors and 1 Unregistered Guests)
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
| Display Modes |
Rate Thread Content |
Linear Mode
|
|
Posting Settings
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|