Begin with the change decision, then plan the training and evidence it calls for. Keep the reason for that decision with the revised procedure or course reference. This checklist is a way to organize the review; it does not make every document edit a legal retraining trigger.
- Record what changed and why further training is needed.
- Review training and reassessment as separate follow-up decisions.
- Preserve the version that earlier evidence belongs to.
Record the change before assigning retraining
Identify the procedure, its new version and the work that changed. Record the reason for further training and who is responsible for the decision. If the review finds no change to the training requirement, keep that reasoning too. Avoid assigning a date before the scope of the work is clear.
- Which task or requirement is affected by the revision?
- What must be learned or demonstrated differently?
- What evidence will show that the follow-up is complete?
- Who will review the result and any unresolved conditions?
Decide who needs training and who needs reassessment
Review affected tasks against the existing evidence. Decide separately what further instruction is needed and how the relevant ability will be checked. The ISO/IAF APG guidance discussing ISO 9001:2015 distinguishes participation in training from evidence of demonstrated competence. APG competence guidance, page 6. It does not prescribe this checklist or make a universal retraining rule.
Record the basis for including work in the review. Do not infer that attendance at a new session closes every assessment question. Where follow-up remains, identify the evidence that the reviewer will need before closing it.
Keep earlier evidence attached to its version
Design the record so a reader can tell what applied when training was completed. Keep the earlier completion and its evidence associated with that version, then record the new requirement and its follow-up separately. A new procedure date should not be used to relabel an old completion.
During a software evaluation, inspect the history after making a revision in the evaluation workflow. Ask whether you can distinguish the earlier evidence from the new work and explain the relationship without relying on a separate note. The product-specific scope below describes what TrainGrid supports.
A specific US lockout/tagout example
Under the US lockout/tagout rule, specified job, equipment or procedure changes and identified knowledge or practice gaps trigger retraining. 29 CFR 1910.147(c)(7)(iii). OSHA's employee retraining tutorial distinguishes those triggers from an annual requirement. Keep this example within that rule; it is not a law covering every SOP edit.
The existing lockout/tagout training records guide provides the detailed recordkeeping context. Use the applicable requirements when deciding what your own change needs.
Record the retraining decision in TrainGrid
TrainGrid supports course versions and retraining assignments while keeping completed evidence tied to the version used.
TrainGrid's course-version workflow includes a requires-retraining choice and an optional retraining due date.
For a course requiring competency, TrainGrid offers assessment recording to a user with assessment permission when the assignment is completed and is not marked as failed.
TrainGrid displays the assessor, assessment date and an optional reassessment due date with the assessment.
Employees and courses import by CSV; training history not imported. Set Repeat every (days) and Valid for (days) on the course before recording past training with its original completion date, or keep the old register as the historical record.
Close the loop with evidence
Review the completion evidence, any assessment required by the program, unresolved follow-up and the review date. HSE's UK guidance recommends checking whether training worked and keeping records to help manage it. Health and safety training, page 5. It supports an effectiveness check, not a global rule or this article's exact fields.
Use recurring training for time-based refreshers and LMS completion versus audit evidence for the evidence question. Read the product guide and published plans before evaluating the documented workflow.