toggle menu
Most FSQA teams don’t struggle to open corrective actions. The real pressure comes later, when auditors ask the question they always do: “Show me closure.” A CAR marked “complete” in a spreadsheet isn’t enough, auditors expect to see proof that the fix worked and continues to work.
Why “closure” is a sticking point
Lack of evidence: Notes like “operator retrained” don’t satisfy an auditor without a sign-in sheet, training log, or record of competency.
Follow-up forgotten: Without verification steps, issues quietly reappear six months later.
Spreadsheets don’t scale: Tracking open vs closed CAPAs across sites or teams is nearly impossible without a live system.
What high-performing plants do differently
Bake verification into the workflow: no CAR closes without a follow-up inspection, swab, or retraining log.
Collect proof, not explanations: attach logs, photos, or results to the record so the evidence speaks for itself.
Trend by source: instead of just counting open vs closed CARs, track whether they stem from suppliers, shifts, or equipment.
Make it visible: open CAR dashboards keep issues from vanishing into files.
The bigger impact
Plants that move from “closing” to “proving closure” reduce repeat findings, strengthen customer trust, and turn corrective actions into an improvement tool, not just an audit requirement.
How Certdox supports it
Certdox helps FSQA teams:
Assign and track corrective actions
Require verification evidence before closure
Trend CAPAs by source to spot systemic issues early
Surface open CARs in dashboards so nothing gets lost
Closing thought
Corrective actions aren’t just about filling out forms.
They’re about proving that problems get fixed, and stay fixed.
With the right system, “show me closure” stops being the hardest audit question and becomes your strongest answer.
French
Spanish
Portuguese
Polish
Pashto
Mandarin
Italian
German
Vietnamese
Indonesian