EvidenceSheet

10.2 Nonconformity and corrective action

If a nonconformity arises, the organization shall respond to it and, where relevant, act to contain and fix it and to handle what it has caused. It shall judge whether action is needed to remove the underlying causes so the problem does not come back or appear somewhere else, by examining the nonconformity, finding out why it happened and checking whether comparable nonconformities already exist or might arise. It shall carry out whatever action is required, check whether the corrective action worked, and amend the PIMS where needed. Corrective action shall be proportionate to the impact of the nonconformity. The organization shall keep documented evidence of what each nonconformity was, what was done about it afterwards, and the outcome of the corrective action.

Source: ISO/IEC 27701:2025, 10.2. The statement above is our statement of the clause, read from the published text and cited so you can check it against the official text, not the instrument verbatim. Open ISO/IEC 27701:2025 in the compliance library.

3
artefacts
0
held by a system
2
at each review
hard
to go live
Policy repository / GRC workspace
where the evidence lives
teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review. To go live: easy when half or more of the artefacts are already held by a system, moderate from a quarter to a half, hard below a quarter.

These are the artefacts auditors commonly ask for on this requirement, our guidance rather than text from the standard. Your assessor decides what is sufficient in your context, and asks for samples across the period when a report covers one.

system holds itEvidence a system already holds

none for this control

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

  • Nonconformity and corrective action records with cause analysis · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • Effectiveness reviews of corrective actions · Policy repository / GRC workspace

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

  • Changes to the PIMS resulting from corrective action · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

No system holds this evidence for you: it is people and documents. Reminders and routing to the owner still save time. Put the document under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a record with reviewer and date.

Common gaps auditors find

Do this for your whole sheet

Paste the rows you run your controls from and get this mapping for every control at once, with the periodic-review ones flagged and a first move per row. No account for the first run.

Build my evidence sheet

10.1 Continual improvement · A.1.2.2 Identify and document purpose