What this is
What is a continual improvement project record?
What is a continual improvement project record?
It is a structured record, built against ISO 45001 cl.10.3, that carries an improvement project from a written problem statement through a defined method to a measured, sustained result. It is a singleton per workspace — set up and maintained as the standing record of that programme, rather than raised once per event.
How is this different from a corrective action?
A corrective action responds to a specific nonconformance and closes when the root cause is fixed. This record is proactive and typically broader in scope — a process, a repeated near-miss pattern, or a cost driver — and it does not close on the fix; it closes on the fix being sustained and measured months later.
Why does the record require a baseline before any work starts?
Because 'improvement' is a comparison, not a description. Without a Baseline Value captured before the change, the Result Value and Improvement Percent fields have nothing credible to compare against, and the project's benefit becomes a claim rather than a number.
Scope
When is a continual improvement project record required?
This record is one step in a larger programme. Using it for work that belongs to a neighbouring template produces records that are hard to report on later, and running a full project structure around something that was really a quick fix wastes the project lead's time.
Use this template when
- The improvement needs more structure than a corrective action — a defined problem statement, a baseline, a piloted solution
- The workspace is being set up, or the register needs the existing project entry updated
- You are running the Management System Governance programme and this is one of its steps
- A suggestion or audit finding has outgrown the record that raised it and needs a project lead and a baseline
- A linked record needs this one to exist: links Lessons Learned, Objectives
Do not use it for
- Improvement Suggestion Record, which captures an improvement idea from anybody, with what it would change and who could own it — use that first, and only promote to this record once the idea needs a measured baseline.
- Corrective Action Effectiveness Trend, which reviews whether corrective actions across the site actually prevent recurrence by tracking repeat events, not for planned improvement work with no prior nonconformance.
- Kaizen Event Record, which is built for a short, time-boxed workshop-style improvement event rather than a project running over weeks or months with a formal sponsor.
- Benchmarking Record, which compares performance against another site or an industry figure — a useful input to a problem statement here, but not a substitute for this record.
- Anything outside KnowComply, which belongs in the workspace that owns that process.
Compliance mapping
Which ISO 45001 cl.10.3 requirements does this satisfy?
ISO 45001 cl.10.3 requires organisations to determine and implement opportunities for improvement as part of continual improvement — this record is the structured, sustained-result path through that requirement, as distinct from the lighter-weight suggestion intake.
| Clause | Requirement | Where it lands |
|---|---|---|
| cl.10.3 | Define the problem and set a sponsor and a target completion date before work begins | Header |
| cl.10.3 | Write a problem statement, measure a baseline, quantify a target, and bound the scope | Definition |
| cl.10.3 | Include front-line workers in the project team, consistent with the requirement for worker participation | Definition |
| cl.10.3 | Carry out root-cause analysis, generate solutions with the team, and pilot before full rollout | Method |
| cl.10.3 | Assess the risk of the proposed change and apply change management before implementing | Method |
| cl.10.3 | Document the new method, deliver training, and assign a long-term owner | Sustaining |
| cl.10.3 | Check the result at six months and confirm the benefit is still present, not just achieved at go-live | Sustaining |
| cl.10.3 | Record the baseline and result values, calculate improvement, and link to lessons learned and objectives | Outcome |
What it does not cover
- Baseline Measured marked No but a Baseline Value is entered anyway, which means the number exists without the discipline behind it and cannot be trusted as a true starting point.
- Target Achieved marked Yes with no Result Value entered, which leaves the claim of achievement with nothing to check it against.
- Checked At Six Months left blank on a project marked Complete, which means the record is claiming a sustained benefit it has not actually verified.
- New Method Documented marked No on a project moving to Sustaining, which means the improvement depends on people remembering rather than a controlled procedure.
- Feeds Objectives marked Yes with no corresponding entry on the objectives register, which breaks the link this record is supposed to establish.
Global
Continual Improvement Project Record requirements by country
ISO 45001 sets the same clause everywhere it is adopted, but what a certification body, a regulator or a customer audit actually expects to see behind a claimed improvement varies by jurisdiction and by who is relying on the record.
ISO 45001:2018 cl.10.3 and ISO 19011 audit guidance
Auditors sampling continual improvement records specifically look for a measured baseline and a follow-up check, because a project record with only a start and an end date is treated as anecdotal, not evidenced.
A site with several projects marked Complete but no Baseline Value or six-month check risks a minor nonconformance against cl.10.3 even where the underlying work was genuinely good.
Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, s.2(1) general duty and HSE guidance on management systems
HSE inspectors reviewing a site's management system treat a documented, measured improvement record as stronger evidence of a functioning system than a policy statement alone.
In an enforcement context following an incident, a live continual improvement programme with real baselines can support an argument of reasonably practicable control; a paper-only programme carries far less weight.
OSHA Recommended Practices for Safety and Health Programs and voluntary VPP criteria
US regulation does not mandate a formal improvement project record, but VPP and similar recognition programmes specifically ask for evidence of measured, sustained improvement rather than one-off fixes.
A site pursuing or maintaining VPP status will be asked to produce exactly this kind of baseline-to-sustained-result record as part of the site evaluation.
How to complete it
How to complete a continual improvement project record, step by step
Filling in each field is straightforward. The judgement calls are what determine whether the finished record would survive a sceptical read months after the project closed.
A baseline taken after the team already knew a change was coming is contaminated — people adjust behaviour under observation. The defensible baseline is measured before the project is announced, or as close to it as practically possible.
Scope Bounded = Yes should mean the team could describe, in a sentence, what is explicitly out of scope, not just what is in. A project that keeps absorbing adjacent problems as it runs is the main reason target dates slip.
A sponsor's name on the record is not the same as committed resources. This should only score Yes where time, budget or people have actually been allocated — a verbal endorsement with no allocation is Partly, not Yes.
If Checked At Six Months shows the benefit did not hold, the honest record is Benefit Sustained = No, with the project either reopened or explicitly closed as a lesson learned — not quietly left at Complete because the paperwork was already filed.
What auditors find
Most common continual improvement project record findings
Most audit findings against structured improvement projects trace back to one of six gaps between what the project actually did and what the record claims it did.
| Finding | Clause | What fixes it |
|---|---|---|
| Projects marked Complete with no Baseline Value recorded | cl.10.3 | Require Baseline Value before Status can move past Planned, not just before the project is marked Complete. |
| Target Achieved and Improvement Percent are filled in inconsistently with the Baseline and Result values | cl.10.3 | Cross-check the calculated improvement against the stated percentage during review, rather than accepting free-text entry at face value. |
| Six Month Check Due passes with no Checked At Six Months entry | cl.10.3 | Report on Six Month Check Due as an overdue item, the same way an action or a CAPA due date would be tracked. |
| New Method Documented and Training Delivered are marked Yes with no reference to the documentation or training record | cl.10.3 | Require a document or training reference alongside those fields rather than accepting a bare Yes. |
| Transferable Elsewhere is marked Yes but the improvement is never actually shared to other sites or areas | cl.10.3 | Route Transferable Elsewhere = Yes into the management review agenda so a genuinely transferable result gets acted on, not just flagged. |
| Lessons Learned ID is left blank on projects that did not achieve their target | cl.10.3 | Make the Lessons Learned ID field required whenever Target Achieved is No or Partly, so an unsuccessful project still produces something usable. |
Case in point
Case in point: the target that was hit and then quietly lost
A packing line ran a project to cut product giveaway, with a clear baseline, a piloted change to portioning, and a Result Value that beat the target within a month. The project was marked Complete, the sponsor signed off, and the record looked like a success story — right up until nobody filled in the six-month check.
A customer audit later asked to see sustained improvement evidence, and this project was held up as the example — the six-month field was still blank, eight months after go-live. A check found the giveaway figure had drifted back near the original baseline once the pilot operator moved shift. The fix hadn't failed; it had never been checked, and the record couldn't tell sustained from forgotten.
The template
The template, field by field
The form exactly as it installs. Every field, option, score and conditional rule is editable, and the links to other templates come with it.
5 sections
- Reference
- CMP-051
- Archetype
- Record
- Record ID
- CIP-2026-000
- Scoring
- Benefits sustained
- Direction
- High is good
- Singleton
- Yes
- Basis
- ISO 45001 cl.10.3
- Links
- Links Lessons learned, Objectives
- Tags
- Improvement, Project
- Sections
- 5
- Fields
- 48
- Follow up fields
- 3
- Repeating sections
- 0
- Links out
- 3
Header
13 fieldsProject ID*
Auto sequence. Format CIP-2026-000.
The record's own ID. Other templates point at this value.
Status*
Drives who this goes to next.
- Planned2 pts
- In progress2 pts
- Complete3 pts
- Deferred0 pts
- Open0 pts
- Closed3 pts
- Overdue0 pts
Date and Time*
Completed By*
Site*
Site ID*
Format SITE-000.
Links to FDN-001 Site ID
Project Title*
Domain*
Project Lead*
Start Date*
Target Completion*
Sponsor Assigned*
- Yes3 pts
- No0 pts
Improvements Nobody Measured Are Opinions
Without a baseline and a measure afterwards, an improvement project produces a feeling that things are better and no way to defend it.
Definition
6 fieldsProblem Statement Written*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Baseline Measured*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Target Set And Quantified*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Scope Bounded*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Team Includes Front Line Workers*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Sponsor Committed Resources*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Method
6 fieldsRoot Cause Analysis Carried Out*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Solutions Generated With The Team*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Solution Piloted Before Rollout*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Control Level Assessed*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Risks Of The Change Assessed*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Change Management Applied*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Sustaining
6 fieldsNew Method Documented*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Training Delivered*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Measure Continued After Closure*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Owner Assigned For The Long Term*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Checked At Six Months*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Benefit Sustained*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Outcome
17 fieldsBaseline Value*
Result Value*
Improvement Percent*
Target Achieved*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Benefit Sustained*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Transferable Elsewhere*
- Yes3 pts
- No1 pt
Lessons Learned ID
Links to FDN-031 Record ID
Feeds Objectives*
Six Month Check Due
Action Required*
Raise the action record, then enter its reference here.
- No2 pts
- Yes0 pts
Priority
- High0 pts
- Medium1 pt
- Low3 pts
CAPA ID
Format CAPA-2026-00000.
Links to FDN-014 CAPA ID
Action Owner
Project Lead*
Signature*
Sponsor*
Second Signature*
CMP-051 · record IDs look like CIP-2026-000 · Links Lessons learned, Objectives
Open in KnowellaRun it with agents
From a document you fill in to a programme that runs itself
The record captures the discipline. What actually protects a project from quietly losing its result is someone chasing the six-month check months after everyone has moved on to the next priority.
Watches projects scoped as Quality or Food safety through to their six-month check, and flags where a result reported at go-live has drifted by the time it's actually verified.
Tracks project status against target completion dates across the register, and surfaces projects stalled at Planned or In progress well before the sponsor is asked for an update.
Picks up projects in the Safety or Occupational health domain and checks whether risk assessment of the change itself was actually completed before rollout, not just the underlying problem.
Rolls overdue six-month checks, missing baselines and unresolved action links into one view across every project, and holds any write it proposes for your approval before it touches a record.
This template lives in KnowComply — audit and governance. Audit programmes, legal register, management review, risk and certification.
Meet KnowComply→Glossary
Continual Improvement Project Record definitions and key terms
- Baseline
- The measured state of the problem before any change is made, captured specifically so a later result can be compared against something real rather than a recollection.
- Root cause analysis
- A structured method for identifying the underlying driver of a problem, rather than the symptom closest to the surface, used here before solutions are generated.
- Change management
- The discipline of assessing and controlling the risk introduced by a change itself, separate from the risk the change is meant to reduce.
- Sustained benefit
- An improvement that is still present at a defined check point after go-live — typically six months — as distinct from an improvement only observed immediately after the change.
- Singleton record
- A record type set up once per workspace and maintained over time, rather than raised repeatedly per event — used here because the improvement methodology itself doesn't change project to project.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions about continual improvement project record
Why is this a singleton when Improvement Suggestion Record is not?+
The suggestion record is raised per idea, one entry per suggestion. This record captures the structured methodology and standing governance around improvement projects at the workspace level, which is set up once and referred back to, even though individual projects still have their own project IDs within it.
What happens if the six-month check shows the improvement didn't hold?+
Benefit Sustained is marked No or Partly, and the honest path is either to reopen the project with a revised method or to close it with a Lessons Learned entry explaining what didn't stick. Leaving it marked Complete with a failed six-month check is the exact gap auditors look for.
Does every field need a baseline number, even a qualitative improvement?+
Baseline Value and Result Value are numeric, which forces even a qualitative-feeling improvement to be expressed as something measurable — a count, a rate, a score. Where a project genuinely resists quantification, that is itself a sign it may not be scoped tightly enough for this record.
How does this connect to Lessons Learned and Objectives?+
Lessons Learned ID captures what should be retained regardless of outcome, and Feeds Objectives flags whether the result should influence the next objective-setting cycle — both are meant to stop a completed project's insight from disappearing once the record is closed.
How is this scored, and why does it favour sustained results over quick wins?+
Scoring is benefits sustained, high is good. A project that hits its target at go-live but isn't checked or drifts back scores lower than one with a modest but confirmed six-month result, because the record is designed to reward durability, not a good number on the day it launched.
Can a project raised here later need a CAPA?+
Yes — the Action Required field exists for that, with a CAPA ID entered once the action is raised. Projects commonly surface a specific nonconformance partway through that needs formal corrective action alongside the broader work.
Keep going
Related templates and programmes
Industries this is written for
Programmes this belongs to
Used together in Management System Governance
Legal and Other Requirements Register
Lists every law, regulation, permit and commitment that applies to your operation
Compliance Obligation Assessment
Assesses how each legal requirement applies to you and what you do to meet it
Compliance Evaluation Record
Records the periodic evaluation of whether you actually comply with each obligation
Regulatory Change Record
Records a change in law or regulation and what it means for you
Regulatory Inspection Record
Records a visit by a regulator, including what was inspected, what was said and any orders issued
Management Review Record
Records the periodic review of the management system by senior leadership, covering performance, risks, resources and improvement
More in Improvement
Improvement Suggestion Record
Captures an improvement idea from anybody, with what it would change and who could own it
Benchmarking Record
Records a comparison of performance or practice against another site, a peer or an industry figure
Corrective Action Effectiveness Trend
Reviews whether corrective actions across the site actually prevent recurrence, by tracking repeat events
Management System Integration Review
Reviews how well the safety, quality, environmental and energy systems work as one rather than in parallel
Written and reviewed by
Siddarth Singh
Founder & Chief Executive Officer, Knowella
Certified Safety Professional and industrial and systems engineer with more than a decade inside food supply chain, freight and manufacturing operations. This page was written against the current text of the standards it cites, not against secondary summaries of them.
- Certified Safety Professional (CSP), Board of Certified Safety Professionals
- MBA, University of Chicago Booth School of Business
- MS and BS, The Ohio State University, Industrial and Systems Engineering
- Six Sigma Black Belt
Sources and last review. Reviewed 16 August 2026 against:
- ISO 45001:2018 — cl.10.3 Continual improvement
- Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 — s.2(1)
- ISO 19011:2018 — Guidelines for auditing management systems
- OSHA Recommended Practices for Safety and Health Programs
This page is general guidance, not legal advice. Confirm requirements with your jurisdiction’s regulator.