What this is
What is a lone worker check-in record?
What is a lone worker check-in record?
It's the record, completed for a specific lone working shift, that captures the agreed check-in arrangement — interval, alarm device, escalation plan — and then logs whether each scheduled check-in was actually received. It exists so a missed check-in is caught against a pre-agreed plan, not noticed by accident.
How is this different from a lone working risk assessment?
The risk assessment decides whether a task can be done alone at all and what controls it needs. This record is what runs during an actual shift under that assessment — the live arrangement and the check-in log, not the underlying judgement about the task.
Who is the 'nominated contact' and why does the record depend on them?
The nominated contact is the named person responsible for expecting each check-in and acting when one is missed or late. The whole value of the arrangement sits with them — a check-in system with no one actively watching for a miss is just a log nobody reads until after the fact.
Scope
When is a lone worker check in record required?
This is a live operational record for a single shift, not the risk judgement behind lone working and not a general security control. Using it to do the risk assessment's job, or to log a security incident, produces a record that answers the wrong question later.
Use this template when
- A worker is about to start, or has started, a period of lone working that a risk assessment has already approved
- The workspace needs a per-shift arrangement — interval, alarm device, escalation plan — agreed and recorded before the shift begins
- You are running the Lone Working and Security programme and this is the record that proves an arrangement was followed
- A linked record needs this one to exist: links Lone Working Risk Assessment
- A check-in has been missed or a concern raised and the resulting escalation and any action need to be documented
Do not use it for
- Lone Working Risk Assessment, which assesses tasks done alone, out of hours or out of sight, and decides how the person would raise an alarm.
- Security Risk Assessment, which assesses the site against theft, unauthorised access, sabotage and product tampering.
- Violence and Aggression Assessment, which assesses roles exposed to aggression from the public, hauliers or colleagues, and the controls in place.
- Security Incident Investigation, which investigates what actually happened after a security event, rather than logging routine check-ins.
- Anything outside KnowSafe, which belongs in the workspace that owns that process
Compliance mapping
Which ISO 45001 cl.8.2 requirements does this satisfy?
ISO 45001 cl.8.2 covers emergency preparedness and response, which is the operational home for lone working arrangements; this record is the evidence that a specific instance of that arrangement was followed.
| Clause | Requirement | Where it lands |
|---|---|---|
| ISO 45001:2018, cl.8.2 | Establish and maintain a process to prepare for and respond to emergency situations, including those arising from workers operating alone | Arrangement |
| ISO 45001:2018, cl.8.1.1 | Plan and control operational processes needed to meet requirements, including who is responsible for a given activity | Header |
| ISO 45001:2018, cl.8.2 | Test the response arrangement, not just plan it — an alarm device that hasn't been tested before use is an untested emergency response | Arrangement |
| ISO 45001:2018, cl.9.1.1 | Monitor the extent to which the planned arrangement is actually implemented, check by check | Check ins |
| ISO 45001:2018, cl.8.2 | Provide for the actual response when the emergency situation — a missed check-in — occurs | Check ins |
| ISO 45001:2018, cl.10.2 | Where a check-in was missed or a concern raised, determine whether corrective action is needed and record it | Closure |
| ISO 45001:2018, cl.5.3 | Confirm the arrangement was closed out by an accountable person, not left open when the shift ends | Closure |
What it does not cover
- Escalation Agreed marked 'Yes' with Escalation Time Defined left blank, which means there's an agreement in name only and no actual trigger point for anyone to act on
- a Check In Received of 'Missed' with Action If Missed left blank, which means the one moment the record exists to capture went unanswered
- Any Missed Check Ins recorded as zero when the check-in log above shows at least one 'Missed' or 'Late' entry, which means the closing summary doesn't match its own evidence
- Escalation Activated left as 'Not needed' alongside a missed check-in with no Action If Missed text, which means nobody can tell whether escalation genuinely wasn't required or simply didn't happen
- a Device Tested Before Start of 'No' next to an Alarm Device Issued of 'Yes', which means the worker went out with a device nobody confirmed would actually work
Global
Lone Worker Check In Record requirements by country
Lone working itself isn't universally regulated by name, so the jurisdictions that matter most are the ones where a regulator or a specific duty has made the check-in arrangement, rather than just the underlying risk assessment, something an employer has to be able to show.
Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, reg.3
No lone-working-specific regulation, but the risk assessment duty extends to how a lone worker would be found or helped if something went wrong
A UK employer's defensibility rests on being able to show the check-in arrangement was actually followed for the shift in question, not just that a policy exists.
Model WHS Regulations plus state Codes of Practice on remote or isolated work
Several states have specific Codes of Practice on remote or isolated work that expect a documented communication system with defined response times
Australian sites are the most likely to be asked directly for the escalation time and evidence it was tested, not just described.
ISO 45001:2018, cl.9.1.1 — monitoring and measurement
Certification audits sample operational records, and a lone working process with no completed check-in evidence behind it is a straightforward nonconformity
For certified sites, this record is frequently the exact document an external auditor asks to see against the stated emergency-response process.
How to complete it
How to complete a lone worker check in record, step by step
A fully ticked arrangement section produces a complete-looking record. Whether it would hold up if a check-in were actually missed turns on four judgement calls.
Escalation Agreed and Escalation Time Defined are single-tick fields, which makes them trivially easy to answer 'Yes' without the nominated contact and the worker having actually discussed what happens and by when. The test is whether the nominated contact could state the escalation time limit without checking the form.
Every-30-minutes and start-and-end-only are both legitimate answers, but only if the interval matches how quickly things could deteriorate for the specific task and location, not a default the site always uses. A high-risk confined task on a start-and-end-only interval is a mismatch worth challenging.
This is the one free-text field the whole record exists to justify. A missed check-in with a vague note is functionally the same as a blank one — the field needs to say who was contacted, when, and what confirmed the worker was safe.
Any Missed Check Ins, Escalation Activated and Outcome all need to agree with what the repeating check-in entries actually show. A closure that says 'All check ins completed' over a log with a 'Late' entry hasn't been checked against its own evidence.
What auditors find
Most common lone worker check in record findings
Patterns that recur when lone worker check-in records are reviewed after the fact, usually once a missed check-in has already happened.
| Finding | Clause | What fixes it |
|---|---|---|
| Escalation Time Defined ticked 'Yes' with no evidence the time limit was ever communicated to the worker | ISO 45001:2018, cl.8.2 | Require the escalation time to be stated as a value somewhere in the record, not just confirmed as agreed. |
| Check In Received logged 'Missed' with Action If Missed left blank | ISO 45001:2018, cl.9.1.1 | Make Action If Missed mandatory whenever Check In Received is 'Missed', and chase incomplete records the same shift, not at the next audit. |
| Alarm Device Issued 'Yes' but Device Tested Before Start 'No', with no record of why the shift proceeded anyway | ISO 45001:2018, cl.8.2 | Treat an untested device as equivalent to no device, and either test it before the shift starts or record the compensating arrangement explicitly. |
| Any Missed Check Ins recorded as zero against a check-in log that shows one or more 'Missed' or 'Late' entries | ISO 45001:2018, cl.9.1.1 | Derive the closure count from the check-in log rather than allowing it to be entered independently, or add a reconciliation step before sign-off. |
| Escalation Activated marked 'Not needed' on shifts with a documented missed check-in | ISO 45001:2018, cl.10.2 | Require a short justification whenever Escalation Activated is 'Not needed' alongside any 'Missed' check-in in the log. |
| Check In Interval set to 'Start and end only' for tasks the linked Lone Working Risk Assessment rated as higher risk | ISO 45001:2018, cl.8.1.1 | Pull the required interval from the risk assessment's control recommendation rather than leaving it as a free choice on the day. |
Case in point
Case in point: the escalation time nobody had actually set
A maintenance worker doing a solo isolation task missed a scheduled 90-minute check-in. The record showed Escalation Agreed as 'Yes' and Escalation Time Defined as 'Yes', but neither the worker nor the nominated contact could later say what the agreed time limit for raising an alarm actually was.
The nominated contact waited a further 40 minutes, assuming the worker had simply lost signal, before escalating. The subsequent review found the escalation fields had been ticked off as part of the standard shift start-up routine, with no actual number ever agreed between the two people the record depended on.
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.
4 sections
- Reference
- SAF-145
- Archetype
- Record
- Record ID
- LWC-2026-000
- Scoring
- Missed check ins
- Direction
- Low is good
- Singleton
- Yes
- Basis
- ISO 45001 cl.8.2
- Links
- Links Lone working assessment
- Tags
- Lone working
- Sections
- 4
- Fields
- 43
- Follow up fields
- 4
- Repeating sections
- 1
- Links out
- 4
Header
14 fieldsRecord ID*
Auto sequence. Format LWC-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
Area
The area within the site.
Exact Location
Drop a pin for anything hard to find.
Worker*
Person ID*
Format PER-0000.
Links to FDN-003 Person ID
Assessment ID
Links to SAF-144 Assessment ID
Task*
Nominated Contact*
A Missed Check In Starts A Search
The value of a check in system is entirely in what happens when one is missed. Agree that in advance, because the person who notices will otherwise wait and hope.
Arrangement
9 fieldsStart Time*
Expected Finish*
Check In Interval*
- Every 30 minutes4 pts
- Hourly3 pts
- Every 2 hours1 pt
- Start and end only0 pts
Alarm Device Issued*
- Yes3 pts
- Not required2 pts
- No0 pts
Device Tested Before Start*
- Yes3 pts
- No0 pts
Contact Aware And Available*
- Yes3 pts
- No0 pts
Location Known To Contact*
- Yes3 pts
- Approximately1 pt
- No0 pts
Escalation Agreed*
- Yes3 pts
- No0 pts
Escalation Time Defined*
- Yes3 pts
- No0 pts
Check ins
Repeats5 fieldsScheduled Time*
Actual Time
Check In Received*
- Yes3 pts
- Late1 pt
- Missed0 pts
Worker Reported All Well
- Yes3 pts
- Concern raised1 pt
Action If Missed
Closure
15 fieldsFinal Check Out Received*
- Yes3 pts
- Late1 pt
- No0 pts
Time Checked Out
Any Missed Check Ins*
Escalation Activated*
- Not needed3 pts
- Yes1 pt
Outcome
Case ID
Thread key
Device Returned
- Yes3 pts
- Not applicable3 pts
- No0 pts
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
Nominated Contact*
Signature*
Supervisor*
Second Signature*
SAF-145 · record IDs look like LWC-2026-000 · Links Lone working assessment
Open in KnowellaRun it with agents
From a document you fill in to a programme that runs itself
The form is the easy part. Keeping it current, routing it to the right owner and holding the evidence together is the work that actually slips.
Holds the check-in record against the linked lone working risk assessment, flags when the interval or device requirement don't match what the assessment specified, and keeps escalation history visible.
Rolls missed and late check-ins into the same reporting view auditors ask for, so a certification review of cl.8.2 doesn't start from a blank search.
Extends the same check-in arrangement to contractors working alone on site, so lone working coverage doesn't quietly stop at the employee boundary.
Coordinates the crew, rolls completion and exceptions into one view, and holds every write for your approval before it touches a record.
This template lives in KnowSafe — safety and compliance. Incidents, hazards, permits, inspections and the critical controls behind them.
Meet KnowSafe→Glossary
Lone Worker Check In Record definitions and key terms
- Lone working
- Work carried out by someone without direct supervision or the ability to be seen or heard by a colleague, where help would not arrive quickly if something went wrong.
- Check-in
- A scheduled contact between a lone worker and their nominated contact, confirming the worker is safe, at an interval set by the risk of the task.
- Nominated contact
- The named person responsible for expecting each check-in during a shift and for acting — escalating — when one is missed or late.
- Escalation
- The predefined sequence of actions triggered when a check-in is missed, starting with a time limit for raising concern and ending, if unresolved, in a search or emergency response.
- Emergency preparedness and response
- The ISO 45001 process (cl.8.2) requiring an organisation to plan for, and be able to actually execute, its response to situations including a worker in difficulty while working alone.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions about lone worker check in record
How often should check-ins happen during a lone working shift?+
Whatever interval the linked lone working risk assessment recommends for that specific task and location — options here range from every 30 minutes to start-and-end only, and the choice should follow the task's risk, not a site-wide default.
What should happen the moment a check-in is missed?+
Whatever was agreed and time-limited before the shift started under Escalation Agreed and Escalation Time Defined. If those weren't genuinely settled in advance, the nominated contact ends up improvising under pressure, which is the exact failure this record exists to prevent.
Does every lone worker need an alarm device?+
Not if the risk doesn't warrant one — Alarm Device Issued includes a 'Not required' option. But where a device is issued, it needs to be tested before the shift starts; an untested device is not a meaningfully different position from no device at all.
Who closes out a lone worker check-in record?+
The nominated contact confirms the final check-out, but Closure also carries a supervisor sign-off with a second signature, so accountability for reconciling the shift doesn't rest with one person alone.
What if a check-in is late but not missed?+
Late is scored better than Missed but worse than on-time, and it's still worth a note — a pattern of late check-ins on the same task or with the same worker is often the earlier warning sign before an actual miss.
How does this record relate to the Lone Working Risk Assessment?+
The risk assessment decides whether the task can be done alone and what the arrangement should be. This record is the evidence, shift by shift, that the arrangement decided there was actually followed.
Keep going
Related templates and programmes
Industries this is written for
Programmes this belongs to
Used together in Lone Working and Security
Food Defense Plan
Assesses where product could be deliberately contaminated and sets out how that is prevented
Security Risk Assessment
Assesses the site against theft, unauthorised access, sabotage and product tampering
Violence and Aggression Assessment
Assesses roles exposed to aggression from the public, hauliers or colleagues, and the controls in place
Lone Working Risk Assessment
Assesses tasks done alone, out of hours or out of sight, and how the person would raise an alarm
Security Incident Investigation
Records theft, break in, unauthorised access, tampering or threat
Access Control Review
Reviews who holds access to which areas and whether that is still justified
More in Security and Lone Working
Security Risk Assessment
Assesses the site against theft, unauthorised access, sabotage and product tampering
Violence and Aggression Assessment
Assesses roles exposed to aggression from the public, hauliers or colleagues, and the controls in place
Lone Working Risk Assessment
Assesses tasks done alone, out of hours or out of sight, and how the person would raise an alarm
Security Incident Investigation
Records theft, break in, unauthorised access, tampering or threat
Access Control Review
Reviews who holds access to which areas and whether that is still justified
CCTV and Monitoring Review
Reviews camera coverage, recording retention, image quality and who can view footage
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.8.2 — emergency preparedness and response
- ISO 45001:2018, cl.9.1.1 — monitoring, measurement, analysis and performance evaluation
- Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 (UK), reg.3 — risk assessment
- ISO 45001:2018, cl.10.2 — incident, nonconformity and corrective action
This page is general guidance, not legal advice. Confirm requirements with your jurisdiction’s regulator.