What this is
What is a training effectiveness review?
What is a training effectiveness review?
A training effectiveness review is a periodic check on whether a specific course produced the behaviour it was meant to produce, using knowledge-check pass rates, assessment outcomes, observation data and incident involvement, rather than whether any one person passed it.
Who carries it out and how often?
The training coordinator, run yearly per course as a baseline, and pulled forward whenever a trigger event suggests an earlier look: a cluster of incidents involving recently trained workers, a knowledge check that failed unusually widely, or a first-time pass rate drifting down over successive cohorts.
How is this different from tracking who is competent?
Every other template in this programme, the competency matrix, skills assessment, certification register, licence verification, answers whether a named individual currently holds a valid credential. This review answers a programme-level question: is the course, as designed and delivered, producing competent, safer workers, or attendance records that happen to have a pass mark attached.
Scope
When is a training effectiveness review required?
This review sits one level above the records that track individual people. Using it to record attendance, or to check one worker's competence, answers the wrong question and leaves effectiveness unasked.
Use this template when
- A course has completed a full delivery cycle at a site, or across all sites, and its effectiveness has not been checked separately from completion rate
- The stated review interval for a mandatory or safety-critical course has come round
- An incident or near miss involves a worker trained within the review's recent window, and the course's adequacy needs examining, not just the individual's action
- Knowledge checks or competency reassessments for a course have thrown up a common failure topic across several people
- A training effectiveness input is due for management review, and this record supplies it
Do not use it for
- Recording who attended a session, which belongs in the Training Attendance Record (TRN-064)
- Tracking one worker's status across a skills grid, which is the Competency Matrix (TRN-020)
- Confirming an individual credential or licence is current, which is the Certification Register (TRN-028) or Licence Verification (TRN-030)
- Deciding what training is needed going forward, which is the Training Needs Analysis (TRN-022) that this review feeds, not replaces
- Assessing one worker's practical skill, which is the Skills Assessment (TRN-021)
Compliance mapping
Which ISO 45001 cl.7.2 requirements does this satisfy?
ISO 45001 cl.7.2 is the anchor: it does not stop at providing training, it requires evaluating whether the actions taken to achieve competence actually worked, and keeping that evaluation as evidence.
| Clause | Requirement | Where it lands |
|---|---|---|
| ISO 45001 cl.7.2(a) | Determine the competence necessary for roles affecting OH&S performance | Header |
| ISO 45001 cl.7.2(b) | Ensure workers are competent on the basis of appropriate education, training or experience | Delivery |
| ISO 45001 cl.7.2(c) | Where applicable, take actions to acquire necessary competence and evaluate the effectiveness of those actions | Effectiveness |
| ISO 45001 cl.7.2(d) | Retain appropriate documented information as evidence of competence | Header |
| ISO 45001 cl.9.1.1 | Determine what needs monitoring and measuring, and evaluate OH&S performance against it | Gaps and risk |
| ISO 45001 cl.10.2 | React to nonconformity, take action to control and correct it, and eliminate the cause | Outcome |
| ISO 45001 cl.10.3 | Continually improve the suitability, adequacy and effectiveness of the OH&S management system | Outcome |
What it does not cover
- Training Attendance Record (TRN-064), which records who attended a session, when and who delivered it, with no claim about whether it worked.
- Competency Matrix (TRN-020), which tracks one worker's status against a skills grid rather than a course's effectiveness across everyone who took it.
- Skills Assessment (TRN-021), which is a single worker's practical assessment, not an aggregate check on the training behind it.
- Certification Register or Licence Verification (TRN-028, TRN-030), which confirm a credential is current, not that the course changed behaviour.
- Training Needs Analysis (TRN-022), which decides what training happens next; this review feeds it rather than substitutes for it.
Global
Training Effectiveness Review requirements by country
The obligation to check that training actually worked, rather than just happened, is framed differently across regimes: an explicit management-system requirement, an implication of a general training duty, or evidence expected after the fact.
OSHA standard-specific training requirements; General Duty Clause
Numerous OSHA standards require training on specific hazards, but few mandate a formal effectiveness evaluation distinct from delivery.
An employer relying on training as a control is expected to show it addressed the recognised hazard, and a documented effectiveness review is the practical way to do that.
Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, reg.13
Employers must ensure employees receive adequate health and safety training, which HSE guidance treats as including a check that it worked.
"Adequate" is tested against outcome, not attendance; inspectors routinely ask what happened after training, not just who attended.
ISO 45001
Clause 7.2 requires evaluating the effectiveness of actions taken to achieve competence, and retaining that evaluation as documented information.
Auditors look for the evaluation step; a training matrix showing courses completed with no effectiveness evidence behind it is a common nonconformity.
How to complete it
How to complete a training effectiveness review, step by step
The form prompts for the numbers. The judgement is in reading them together, not filing each section as its own answer.
Sessions Planned, Sessions Delivered and Completion Percent answer whether the programme ran. First Time Pass Rate, Assessment Pass Rate and Observation Data Shows Improvement answer whether it worked. Strong numbers in the first group with a thin second is attendance, not effectiveness.
The same topic failing across many people points at the training, not the people. That means revisiting course content or delivery before the next cycle, and recording what changed.
A cluster of incidents shortly after training is diagnostic, whether or not training is named as a cause. It usually means the course did not cover the conditions the work presents.
The form's own help text flags this figure as usually the weakest and the one auditors go to first. A healthy blended percentage that hides a low agency figure conceals real exposure.
What auditors find
Most common training effectiveness review findings
The review almost always exists and almost always contains delivery numbers. The findings concern whether the effectiveness half was actually done, or filled in to close the record.
| Finding | Clause | What fixes it |
|---|---|---|
| Effectiveness section is thin or estimated while delivery and completion percentages are precise. | ISO 45001 cl.7.2(c) | Require knowledge-check and observation data before a review is marked Complete. |
| Common failure topics are recorded but not traced back to a change in course content or delivery. | ISO 45001 cl.10.3 | Route a recorded common failure topic to the course owner as a required action, not a note. |
| Incidents involving recently trained workers logged with no check on whether the course covered the conditions. | ISO 45001 cl.9.1.1 | Cross-reference the incident against the course content before closing the review. |
| Agency and contractor compliance percent is materially lower than the workforce figure and not separately escalated. | ISO 45001 cl.9.1.1 | Report agency and contractor compliance as its own line with its own action. |
| Trainer Capacity Adequate is marked Stretched or No, and the review closes with no action against it. | ISO 45001 cl.7.2(b) | Treat inadequate trainer capacity as a finding in its own right; a stretched trainer degrades every course. |
| Action Required is marked Yes with no CAPA ID or owner, or the linked action is never verified as effective. | ISO 45001 cl.10.2 | Do not close a review with an open action lacking an owner, date and verification step. |
Case in point
Case in point: the course with a 98% pass rate and a growing incident count
A logistics operator's manual handling course ran for two years with strong numbers on paper: completion at 96%, first time knowledge-check pass rate at 98%, signed off each year as effective, no action required.
A cluster of three back-strain incidents in one quarter, all involving workers trained within the previous four months, forced a closer look. The knowledge check tested lifting technique from a diagram; the actual work involved lifting from awkward, low-level positions in a live aisle the diagram did not resemble. The fix was rebuilding the assessment around the observed task, not raising the pass mark or repeating the course.
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
- TRN-065
- Archetype
- Review
- Record ID
- TER-2026-000
- Scoring
- Effectiveness percent
- Direction
- High is good
- Singleton
- No
- Basis
- ISO 45001 cl.7.2
- Links
- Links Course, Observations
- Tags
- Training, Governance
- Sections
- 5
- Fields
- 52
- Follow up fields
- 3
- Repeating sections
- 0
- Links out
- 4
Header
15 fieldsReport ID*
Auto sequence. Format TCR-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*
Delivered By*
Site*
Site ID*
Format SITE-000.
Links to FDN-001 Site ID
Course
Course ID
Format CRS-000.
Links to FDN-007 Course ID
Delivery Method*
Duration Minutes*
Trainer Qualified*
- Yes3 pts
- Subject expert, not trainer trained1 pt
- No0 pts
Period Covered*
Scope*
Compiled By*
Delivered Is Not The Same As Effective
Completion percentage tells you sessions happened. Knowledge check pass rates and observed behaviour tell you whether they worked. Report both.
Delivery
9 fieldsSessions Planned*
Sessions Delivered*
Delivery Percent*
People Requiring Training*
People Trained*
Completion Percent*
Mandatory Training Compliance Percent*
Legal Requirement Compliance Percent*
Agency And Contractor Compliance Percent*
Usually the weakest number and the one auditors go to first.
Effectiveness
9 fieldsKnowledge Checks Completed*
First Time Pass Rate Percent*
Common Failure Topics
The same topic failing across many people points at the training, not the people.
Competency Assessments Completed*
Assessment Pass Rate Percent*
Reassessments Failed*
Incidents Involving Recently Trained Workers*
An incident shortly after training means the training did not cover the real conditions.
Incidents Where Training Was A Cause*
Observation Data Shows Improvement*
- Yes3 pts
- No change1 pt
- Worse0 pts
Gaps and risk
6 fieldsPeople Working Without Required Training*
Expired Certifications*
Single Point Failure Competencies*
Overdue Refreshers*
Trainer Capacity Adequate*
- Yes3 pts
- Stretched1 pt
- No0 pts
Budget Utilised Percent
Outcome
13 fieldsTrend Versus Last Period*
- Improving3 pts
- Stable2 pts
- Worsening0 pts
Top Three Priorities*
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
Feeds Training Needs Analysis*
Analysis ID
Links to TRN-022 Analysis ID
Reported To Management Review
Training Coordinator*
Signature*
Site Manager*
Second Signature*
TRN-065 · record IDs look like TER-2026-000 · Links Course, Observations
Open in KnowellaRun it with agents
From a document you fill in to a programme that runs itself
The review itself is a snapshot. What it means depends on whether incident data, knowledge-check results and observation data actually reach it, and whether a weak finding becomes a routed action rather than a filed note.
Holds the course library against delivery and knowledge-check records, flags a course whose common failure topic keeps recurring, and routes the review to the coordinator on schedule and on trigger.
Surfaces incidents involving recently trained workers against the course content, so the review isn't reading incident data cold.
Tracks the CAPA raised from Action Required through to verified closure, rather than an effectiveness finding sitting as an open reference with no owner.
Coordinates the crew, rolls effectiveness and outstanding actions into one view for management review, and holds every write for your approval before it touches a record.
This template lives in KnowTrain — training and credentials. Induction, competency, toolbox talks, refreshers and expiry tracking.
Meet KnowTrain→Glossary
Training Effectiveness Review definitions and key terms
- Training effectiveness
- Whether a course produced a measurable change in knowledge, behaviour or outcome, distinct from whether sessions took place and were attended.
- Knowledge check
- A short test of what was taught, used to gauge whether the content was understood, not to certify competence on its own.
- Observation data
- Evidence that trained behaviour is actually being performed on the job, gathered independently of the training event itself.
- Single point failure competency
- A skill or authorisation held by only one person at a site, so its loss removes the capability entirely rather than degrading it.
- Mandatory training compliance
- The proportion of people required to hold a given course who currently do, tracked apart from voluntary or supplementary training.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions about training effectiveness review
How is this different from the Training Attendance Record?+
The attendance record answers who was in the session, when, and who delivered it. This review answers whether the course changed behaviour, using knowledge-check pass rates, assessment outcomes, observation data and incident involvement. A high attendance figure and a weak effectiveness review can both be true of the same course.
What triggers a review outside the yearly cycle?+
An incident involving a recently trained worker, a knowledge check that fails unusually widely, a first time pass rate drifting down across cohorts, or a trainer capacity problem serious enough to affect delivery.
Why does the form separate delivery, completion and effectiveness fields?+
Because they can move independently. Sessions can run on schedule and attendance can be complete, yet the course still fails to change behaviour if the content doesn't match the task. Reporting only the first two and calling that effectiveness is the most common failure.
Why is agency and contractor compliance tracked separately?+
It is consistently the weakest figure and carries the most risk: agency and contractor workers frequently do higher-risk, less-supervised work with the least visibility into their training status.
What does a single point failure competency mean for this review?+
It flags a skill held by only one person, so that person's absence or departure removes the capability rather than reducing it. The review records the count so it feeds training needs analysis and cross-training decisions.
Does a clean effectiveness review mean the course never needs to change?+
No. A review with no issues this cycle is a snapshot, not a guarantee. A change to the task, equipment, or workforce can make a previously effective course inadequate, which is why it runs yearly per course rather than once at launch.
Keep going
Related templates and programmes
Industries this is written for
Programmes this belongs to
Used together in Worker Competency and Credentials
Competency Framework Register
Holds the competencies the organisation recognises, with what each one means and how it is assessed
Driver Licence and Entitlement Check
Checks driver licence validity, categories, endorsements and any restrictions with the issuing authority
Electrical Competency Authorisation
Authorises a named person to carry out defined electrical activities on this site, with the limits stated
Competency Matrix
Shows which skills and training each role requires and who currently holds them
Skills Assessment
Assesses whether a worker can actually perform a task to standard, by watching them do it
Training Needs Analysis
Works out the gap between the skills a role needs and the skills people have
More in Training Records
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 clause 7.2, Competence
- ISO 45001:2018 clause 9.1.1, Monitoring, measurement, analysis and performance evaluation
- ISO 45001:2018 clause 10.2, Incident, nonconformity and corrective action
- Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, regulation 13 (GB)
This page is general guidance, not legal advice. Confirm requirements with your jurisdiction’s regulator.