On this page
- Who is responsible for reviewing subcontractor RAMS?
- Does approving RAMS make the Principal Contractor liable?
- What should a RAMS review check?
- What does a good review response look like?
- Who should carry out a RAMS review?
- How can RAMS reviews avoid delaying the programme?
- What happens after the RAMS are accepted?
- What are the common failings in RAMS review?
- Need an independent RAMS review?
A RAMS review is the check a Principal Contractor, or a contractor managing its own supply chain, carries out on a subcontractor's Risk Assessment and Method Statement before the work starts. Its purpose is to confirm that the RAMS are suitable for the task, fit the site and the programme and can be followed in practice.
Done well, a RAMS review is one of the most effective controls a Principal Contractor has. Done badly, it becomes a stamp that gives false confidence. This guide explains who is responsible for reviewing RAMS, what a competent reviewer should check and how to run the process without holding up the programme.
For the basics of what RAMS are and what the law requires, start with our guide to RAMS in construction.
Who is responsible for reviewing subcontractor RAMS?
On a project with more than one contractor, the Principal Contractor is normally responsible for reviewing subcontractor RAMS. This is not a regulation that mentions RAMS by name. It follows from the Principal Contractor's duties under CDM 2015 to plan, manage, monitor and coordinate health and safety during the construction phase.
Responsibility is shared in layers:
- The subcontractor is responsible for preparing suitable RAMS for its own work and for following them. This comes from its own duties as an employer and as a contractor under CDM 2015.
- Any intermediate contractor that sublets work should review its own subcontractors' RAMS before passing them to the Principal Contractor.
- The Principal Contractor reviews the RAMS against the Construction Phase Plan, site rules, programme and neighbouring activities, then monitors the work against them.
On a single contractor project there is no Principal Contractor, but the contractor still needs to plan and check its own work in the same way.
Does approving RAMS make the Principal Contractor liable?
Reviewing or accepting RAMS does not transfer the subcontractor's legal duties. The subcontractor remains responsible for its own method and the safety of its own workers.
The Principal Contractor does carry its own risk, however. If it accepts RAMS that are plainly unsuitable, or fails to check the work is carried out as described, it may be failing in its own duty to plan, manage and monitor the construction phase. That is why a RAMS review should be a real check by a competent person, not an administrative step.
What should a RAMS review check?
A useful RAMS review asks whether the document describes a safe, practical way of doing this job on this site. The following checklist covers the main areas.
Scope and context
- Does the scope match the subcontract package and the current programme?
- Is the location on site clear?
- Does the RAMS reflect the site layout, logistics plan and access routes?
- Is the correct revision of drawings and design information referenced?
Hazards and controls
- Are the significant hazards of this task identified, including health hazards?
- Are the controls specific to the task rather than generic statements?
- Do the controls follow the hierarchy of control, or rely mainly on PPE?
- Have hazards created for other people nearby been considered?
Sequence and method
- Is the sequence logical and complete?
- Are the controls applied at the right stage of the sequence?
- Would a supervisor be able to brief and control the work from this document?
Plant, equipment and temporary works
- Is the plant named suitable for the task, the ground conditions and the loads?
- Are inspection and thorough examination requirements covered?
- Are lifting operations planned by a competent person with a lift plan where needed?
- Are temporary works identified, with design, check and permit to load arrangements linked to the project's temporary works procedure?
Permits and interfaces
- Are permits identified, such as hot works, excavation, confined space, live services or work at height?
- Are interfaces with other trades and live environments addressed?
- Is segregation or an exclusion zone needed? Who controls it?
People and competence
- Is the supervision level appropriate to the risk?
- Are the competence and training requirements stated and realistic?
- Are named supervisors or appointed persons identified where required?
Emergency arrangements
- Is there a task specific rescue plan where needed, for example for work at height, confined spaces or excavations?
- Does it fit the site emergency arrangements in the Construction Phase Plan?
Briefing and review
- Is there a clear method for briefing the workforce and recording it?
- Does the RAMS say when it will be reviewed?
What does a good review response look like?
A review outcome should be clear and recorded. Most projects use a simple status such as accepted, accepted with comments or returned for revision.
Comments should be specific and actionable. "Inadequate" teaches the subcontractor nothing. "Rescue plan for the MEWP does not state who will operate ground controls or where the key will be held" tells them exactly what to fix.
The version that is accepted must be the version briefed on site. Controlling revisions is part of the review process, not an afterthought.
Who should carry out a RAMS review?
The reviewer needs competence in health and safety and in the type of work being reviewed. On many projects the site manager or project health and safety adviser reviews routine activities. Higher risk or specialist work needs input from someone with specific technical knowledge:
- Lifting operations: the appointed person for lifting
- Temporary works: the Temporary Works Coordinator
- Electrical work on or near live systems: someone competent in electrical safety
- Demolition, confined spaces or asbestos: someone with experience of that activity
A generalist review of specialist RAMS can miss the issues that matter most.
How can RAMS reviews avoid delaying the programme?
RAMS reviews delay work when they happen too late. A few simple measures keep them moving:
- Set RAMS submission dates in the subcontract and the programme, well ahead of the start on site
- Hold a preconstruction meeting with each subcontractor to agree the method before RAMS are written
- Use a consistent review checklist so subcontractors know what will be checked
- Agree a turnaround time for reviews and keep to it
- Track submissions, comments and acceptance on a single register
Time spent agreeing the method early usually saves far more time than it costs.
What happens after the RAMS are accepted?
Acceptance is not the end of the process. The Principal Contractor should make sure that:
- The accepted RAMS are briefed to the workforce before work starts
- Supervisors monitor the work against the RAMS
- Site inspections check that the work matches the method
- Changes to the method trigger a revised RAMS and a new review where significant
- Findings from incidents and inspections feed back into the RAMS
What are the common failings in RAMS review?
- RAMS accepted without being read in full
- Reviews carried out by someone with no knowledge of the activity
- Generic comments that do not help the subcontractor improve
- No check against the site layout, programme or neighbouring trades
- Temporary works and lifting operations not linked to their own control processes
- Accepted RAMS never briefed, or briefed in an older revision
- No monitoring on site to confirm the work follows the accepted method
Need an independent RAMS review?
Matthews & Roberts supports Principal Contractors and specialist contractors with independent RAMS review, subcontractor control, site inspections and retained health and safety support.
Explore health and safety support for contractors →
Frequently asked questions
Who is responsible for reviewing subcontractor RAMS?
The Principal Contractor is normally responsible for reviewing subcontractor RAMS on a project with more than one contractor. This flows from its CDM 2015 duty to plan, manage, monitor and coordinate the construction phase. The subcontractor remains responsible for the content of its own RAMS and for carrying out the work safely. Where a subcontractor sublets work, it should review its own subcontractors' RAMS before they are passed up to the Principal Contractor.
Does approving RAMS transfer liability to the Principal Contractor?
No. Reviewing or accepting RAMS does not transfer the subcontractor's legal duties to the Principal Contractor. Each contractor keeps its own duties under health and safety law. However, a Principal Contractor that accepts RAMS which are obviously unsuitable, or fails to check that they are followed, may itself be failing to plan, manage and monitor the construction phase. The review should be treated as a genuine check, not a formality.
How long should a RAMS review take?
There is no legal timescale. Most projects set a turnaround in their subcontract or site procedures, commonly a few working days depending on complexity. The key is to request RAMS early enough in the programme that review, revision and briefing can happen before the start date. Late submission is the most common reason RAMS reviews delay work on site.
What is the difference between approving and accepting RAMS?
Many Principal Contractors use the word accepted rather than approved to make clear that the review does not take over the contractor's responsibility for its own method. In practice both mean the RAMS are suitable for work to proceed. What matters more is that the status is recorded clearly, any conditions are stated and the version reviewed is the version briefed on site.
Who should carry out a RAMS review?
The reviewer should be competent in both health and safety and the type of work being reviewed. For routine activities this may be the site manager or project health and safety adviser. For higher risk or specialist work, such as heavy lifting, demolition, confined spaces or temporary works, the review should involve someone with specific technical knowledge, such as an appointed person for lifting or the Temporary Works Coordinator.
Need support with health & safety on your project?
