CAPA Officer
Corrective and Preventive Action (CAPA) management within Quality Management Systems, focusing on systematic root cause analysis, action implementation, and effectiveness verification.
Table of Contents
- CAPA Investigation Workflow
- Root Cause Analysis
- Corrective Action Planning
- Effectiveness Verification
- CAPA Metrics and Reporting
- Reference Documentation
- Tools
CAPA Investigation Workflow
Conduct systematic CAPA investigation from initiation through closure:
- Document trigger event with objective evidence
- Assess significance and determine CAPA necessity
- Form investigation team with relevant expertise
- Collect data and evidence systematically
- Select and apply appropriate RCA methodology
- Identify root cause(s) with supporting evidence
- Develop corrective and preventive actions
- Validation: Root cause explains all symptoms; if eliminated, problem would not recur
CAPA Necessity Determination
| Trigger Type | CAPA Required | Criteria | |--------------|---------------|----------| | Customer complaint (safety) | Yes | Any complaint involving patient/user safety | | Customer complaint (quality) | Evaluate | Based on severity and frequency | | Internal audit finding (Major) | Yes | Systematic failure or absence of element | | Internal audit finding (Minor) | Recommended | Isolated lapse or partial implementation | | Nonconformance (recurring) | Yes | Same NC type occurring 3+ times | | Nonconformance (isolated) | Evaluate | Based on severity and risk | | External audit finding | Yes | All Major and Minor findings | | Trend analysis | Evaluate | Based on trend significance |
Investigation Team Composition
| CAPA Severity | Required Team Members | |---------------|----------------------| | Critical | CAPA Officer, Process Owner, QA Manager, Subject Matter Expert, Management Rep | | Major | CAPA Officer, Process Owner, Subject Matter Expert | | Minor | CAPA Officer, Process Owner |
Evidence Collection Checklist
- [ ] Problem description with specific details (what, where, when, who, how much)
- [ ] Timeline of events leading to issue
- [ ] Relevant records and documentation
- [ ] Interview notes from involved personnel
- [ ] Photos or physical evidence (if applicable)
- [ ] Related complaints, NCs, or previous CAPAs
- [ ] Process parameters and specifications
Root Cause Analysis
Select and apply appropriate RCA methodology based on problem characteristics.
RCA Method Selection Decision Tree
Is the issue safety-critical or involves system reliability?
├── Yes → Use FAULT TREE ANALYSIS
└── No → Is human error the suspected primary cause?
├── Yes → Use HUMAN FACTORS ANALYSIS
└── No → How many potential contributing factors?
├── 1-2 factors (linear causation) → Use 5 WHY ANALYSIS
├── 3-6 factors (complex, systemic) → Use FISHBONE DIAGRAM
└── Unknown/proactive assessment → Use FMEA
5 Why Analysis
Use when: Single-cause issues with linear causation, process deviations with clear failure point.
Template:
PROBLEM: [Clear, specific statement]
WHY 1: Why did [problem] occur?
BECAUSE: [First-level cause]
EVIDENCE: [Supporting data]
WHY 2: Why did [first-level cause] occur?
BECAUSE: [Second-level cause]
EVIDENCE: [Supporting data]
WHY 3: Why did [second-level cause] occur?
BECAUSE: [Third-level cause]
EVIDENCE: [Supporting data]
WHY 4: Why did [third-level cause] occur?
BECAUSE: [Fourth-level cause]
EVIDENCE: [Supporting data]
WHY 5: Why did [fourth-level cause] occur?
BECAUSE: [Root cause]
EVIDENCE: [Supporting data]
Example - Calibration Overdue:
PROBLEM: pH meter (EQ-042) found 2 months overdue for calibration
WHY 1: Why was calibration overdue?
BECAUSE: Equipment was not on calibration schedule
EVIDENCE: Calibration schedule reviewed, EQ-042 not listed
WHY 2: Why was it not on the schedule?
BECAUSE: Schedule not updated when equipment was purchased
EVIDENCE: Purchase date 2023-06-15, schedule dated 2023-01-01
WHY 3: Why was the schedule not updated?
BECAUSE: No process requires schedule update at equipment purchase
EVIDENCE: SOP-EQ-001 reviewed, no such requirement
WHY 4: Why is there no such requirement?
BECAUSE: Procedure written before equipment tracking was centralized
EVIDENCE: SOP last revised 2019, equipment system implemented 2021
WHY 5: Why has procedure not been updated?
BECAUSE: Periodic review did not assess compatibility with new systems
EVIDENCE: No review against new equipment system documented
ROOT CAUSE: Procedure review process does not assess compatibility
with organizational systems implemented after original procedure creation.
Fishbone Diagram Categories (6M)
| Category | Focus Areas | Typical Causes | |----------|-------------|----------------| | Man (People) | Training, competency, workload | Skill gaps, fatigue, communication | | Machine (Equipment) | Calibration, maintenance, age | Wear, malfunction, inadequate capacity | | Method (Process) | Procedures, work instructions | Unclear steps, missing controls | | Material | Specifications, suppliers, storage | Out-of-spec, degradation, contamination | | Measurement | Calibration, methods, interpretation | Instrument error, wrong method | | Mother Nature | Temperature, humidity, cleanliness | Environmental excursions |
See references/rca-methodologies.md for complete method details and templates.
Root Cause Validation
Before proceeding to action planning, validate root cause:
- [ ] Root cause can be verified with objective evidence
- [ ] If root cause is eliminated, problem would not recur
- [ ] Root cause is within organizational control
- [ ] Root cause explains all observed symptoms
- [ ] No other significant causes remain unaddressed
Corrective Action Planning
Develop effective actions addressing identified root causes:
- Define immediate containment actions
- Develop corrective actions targeting root cause
- Identify preventive actions for similar processes
- Assign responsibilities and resources
- Establish timeline with milestones
- Define success criteria and verification method
- Document in CAPA action plan
- Validation: Actions directly address root cause; success criteria are measurable
Action Types
| Type | Purpose | Timeline | Example | |------|---------|----------|---------| | Containment | Stop immediate impact | 24-72 hours | Quarantine affected product | | Correction | Fix the specific occurrence | 1-2 weeks | Rework or replace affected items | | Corrective | Eliminate root cause | 30-90 days | Revise procedure, add controls | | Preventive | Prevent in other areas | 60-120 days | Extend solution to similar processes |
Action Plan Components
ACTION PLAN TEMPLATE
CAPA Number: [CAPA-XXXX]
Root Cause: [Identified root cause]
ACTION 1: [Specific action description]
- Type: [ ] Containment [ ] Correction [ ] Corrective [ ] Preventive
- Responsible: [Name, Title]
- Due Date: [YYYY-MM-DD]
- Resources: [Required resources]
- Success Criteria: [Measurable outcome]
- Verification Method: [How success will be verified]
ACTION 2: [Specific action description]
...
IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE:
Week 1: [Milestone]
Week 2: [Milestone]
Week 4: [Milestone]
Week 8: [Milestone]
APPROVAL:
CAPA Owner: _____________ Date: _______
Process Owner: _____________ Date: _______
QA Manager: _____________ Date: _______
Action Effectiveness Indicators
| Indicator | Target | Red Flag | |-----------|--------|----------| | Action scope | Addresses root cause completely | Treats only symptoms | | Specificity | Measurable deliverables | Vague commitments | | Timeline | Aggressive but achievable | No due dates or unrealistic | | Resources | Identified and allocated | Not specified | | Sustainability | Permanent solution | Temporary fix |
Effectiveness Verification
Verify corrective actions achieved intended results:
- Allow adequate implementation period (minimum 30-90 days)
- Collect post-implementation data
- Compare to pre-implementation baseline
- Evaluate against success criteria
- Verify no recurrence during verification period
- Document verification evidence
- Determine CAPA effectiveness
- Validation: All criteria met with objective evidence; no recurrence observed
Verification Timeline Guidelines
| CAPA Severity | Wait Period | Verification Window | |---------------|-------------|---------------------| | Critical | 30 days | 30-90 days post-implementation | | Major | 60 days | 60-180 days post-implementation | | Minor | 90 days | 90-365 days post-implementation |
Verification Methods
| Method | Use When | Evidence Required | |--------|----------|-------------------| | Data trend analysis | Quantifiable issues | Pre/post comparison, trend charts | | Process audit | Procedure compliance issues | Audit checklist, interview notes | | Record review | Documentation issues | Sample records, compliance rate | | Testing/inspection | Product quality issues | Test results, pass/fail data | | Interview/observation | Training issues | Interview notes, observation records |
Effectiveness Determination
Did recurrence occur during verification period?
├── Yes → CAPA INEFFECTIVE (re-investigate root cause)
└── No → Were all effectiveness criteria met?
├── Yes → CAPA EFFECTIVE (proceed to closure)
└── No → Extent of gap?
├── Minor gap → Extend verification or accept with justification
└── Significant gap → CAPA INEFFECTIVE (revise actions)
See references/effectiveness-verification-guide.md for detailed procedures.
CAPA Metrics and Reporting
Monitor CAPA program performance through key indicators.
Key Performance Indicators
| Metric | Target | Calculation | |--------|--------|-------------| | CAPA cycle time | <60 days average | (Close Date - Open Date) / Number of CAPAs | | Overdue rate | <10% | Overdue CAPAs / Total Open CAPAs | | First-time effectiveness | >90% | Effective on first verification / Total verified | | Recurrence rate | <5% | Recurred issues / Total closed CAPAs | | Investigation quality | 100% root cause validated | Root causes validated / Total CAPAs |
Aging Analysis Categories
| Age Bucket | Status | Action Required | |------------|--------|-----------------| | 0-30 days | On track | Monitor progress | | 31-60 days | Monitor | Review for delays | | 61-90 days | Warning | Escalate to management | | >90 days | Critical | Management intervention required |
Management Review Inputs
Monthly CAPA status report includes:
- Open CAPA count by severity and status
- Overdue CAPA list with owners
- Cycle time trends
- Effectiveness rate trends
- Source analysis (complaints, audits, NCs)
- Recommendations for improvement
Reference Documentation
Root Cause Analysis Methodologies
references/rca-methodologies.md contains:
- Method selection decision tree
- 5 Why analysis template and example
- Fishbone diagram categories and template
- Fault Tree Analysis for safety-critical issues
- Human Factors Analysis for people-related causes
- FMEA for proactive risk assessment
- Hybrid approach guidance
Effectiveness Verification Guide
references/effectiveness-verification-guide.md contains:
- Verification planning requirements
- Verification method selection
- Effectiveness criteria definition (SMART)
- Closure requirements by severity
- Ineffective CAPA process
- Documentation templates
Tools
CAPA Tracker
# Generate CAPA status report
python scripts/capa_tracker.py --capas capas.json
# Interactive mode for manual entry
python scripts/capa_tracker.py --interactive
# JSON output for integration
python scripts/capa_tracker.py --capas capas.json --output json
# Generate sample data file
python scripts/capa_tracker.py --sample > sample_capas.json
Calculates and reports:
- Summary metrics (open, closed, overdue, cycle time, effectiveness)
- Status distribution
- Severity and source analysis
- Aging report by time bucket
- Overdue CAPA list
- Actionable recommendations
Sample CAPA Input
{
"capas": [
{
"capa_number": "CAPA-2024-001",
"title": "Calibration overdue for pH meter",
"description": "pH meter EQ-042 found 2 months overdue",
"source": "AUDIT",
"severity": "MAJOR",
"status": "VERIFICATION",
"open_date": "2024-06-15",
"target_date": "2024-08-15",
"owner": "J. Smith",
"root_cause": "Procedure review gap",
"corrective_action": "Updated SOP-EQ-001"
}
]
}
Regulatory Requirements
ISO 13485:2016 Clause 8.5
| Sub-clause | Requirement | Key Activities | |------------|-------------|----------------| | 8.5.2 Corrective Action | Eliminate cause of nonconformity | NC review, cause determination, action evaluation, implementation, effectiveness review | | 8.5.3 Preventive Action | Eliminate potential nonconformity | Trend analysis, cause determination, action evaluation, implementation, effectiveness review |
FDA 21 CFR 820.100
Required CAPA elements:
- Procedures for implementing corrective and preventive action
- Analyzing quality data sources (complaints, NCs, audits, service records)
- Investigating cause of nonconformities
- Identifying actions needed to correct and prevent recurrence
- Verifying actions are effective and do not adversely affect device
- Submitting relevant information for management review
Common FDA 483 Observations
| Observation | Root Cause Pattern | |-------------|-------------------| | CAPA not initiated for recurring issue | Trend analysis not performed | | Root cause analysis superficial | Inadequate investigation training | | Effectiveness not verified | No verification procedure | | Actions do not address root cause | Symptom treatment vs. cause elimination |