A RAMS document is one of the most commonly requested items on a UK construction project — and one of the most commonly rejected. This page gives you an annotated template mapped to the specific legal duties it satisfies, a fully worked trade scenario, and a principal contractor (PC) acceptance checklist, so you can see exactly what separates a compliant document from a box-ticking one.
What a RAMS template is — and what it is not
RAMS stands for Risk Assessment and Method Statement. It is not a single prescribed statutory document with a fixed format. In practice it combines two legally distinct requirements into one document:
- Part A — Risk Assessment: the duty on every employer to make a suitable and sufficient assessment of risks to employees and others affected by their work, under the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, regulation 3.
- Part B — Method Statement: the sequence of safe working steps that gives effect to the control measures identified in Part A. The method statement is the practical expression of how those controls will actually be implemented on site.
Understanding this distinction matters. A method statement without a risk assessment behind it has no legal grounding. A risk assessment without a method statement leaves operatives with controls they don't know how to apply. Only together do the two parts create a document that satisfies the duty and gives a PC confidence that work will be managed safely.
The legal duties your RAMS template must satisfy
MHSWR 1999, regulation 3 — the risk assessment duty
Under the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, regulation 3, every employer must make a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks to employees and others who may be affected by their work activities. (legislation.gov.uk)
Where an employer has five or more employees, the significant findings of that assessment must be recorded. This recording obligation is what gives Part A of a RAMS its legal weight — it is not optional paperwork.
The HSE describes risk management as a five-step process: identify hazards, assess the risks, control the risks, record your findings, and review the controls. (hse.gov.uk) Every column in Part A of the template below maps to one of those steps.
CDM 2015 — the principal contractor's coordination duty
A principal contractor is appointed by the client to control the construction phase of any project involving more than one contractor. (hse.gov.uk) The PC must plan, manage, monitor and coordinate the entire construction phase, taking account of health and safety risks to everyone affected by the work, including members of the public, in planning and managing the measures needed to control them. (hse.gov.uk)
Under CDM 2015 regulation 13(1), the principal contractor must plan, manage and monitor the construction phase and coordinate matters relating to health and safety to ensure that, so far as is reasonably practicable, construction work is carried out without risks to health or safety. (legislation.gov.uk) Regulation 13(3) requires the PC to organise cooperation between contractors and coordinate implementation of applicable legal requirements for health and safety. (legislation.gov.uk)
This coordination duty is why a PC asks sub-contractors for RAMS before work begins: the PC cannot fulfil its own legal duty without knowing how each trade intends to manage its risks. Under CDM 2015 regulation 12(1), the principal contractor must draw up a construction phase plan before the construction site is set up. (legislation.gov.uk) Your RAMS feeds directly into that plan.
The PC must also have the skills, knowledge, experience and, where relevant, organisational capability to carry out their role — which means a competent PC will scrutinise your RAMS rather than simply file it. (hse.gov.uk)
Anatomy of a compliant RAMS template: every field explained
Header block — version control fields
| Field | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| Company name & address | Identifies the duty-holder under MHSWR 1999 reg 3 |
| Project address & contract number | Ties the document to a specific site; essential when a PC is coordinating multiple sub-contractors under CDM 2015 reg 13(3) |
| Task description | Defines the scope — changes outside this scope trigger a review |
| Document version & date | Version control ensures operatives are working to the current issue; a PC reviewing multiple RAMS needs to know which version is live |
| Author | Names the competent person who produced the assessment |
| Review date | Sets the forward review cycle |
| Approver signature | Confirms the employer has authorised the document before work begins |
Part A — Risk Assessment columns (mapped to legal duty)
| Column | Legal / regulatory basis |
|---|---|
| Ref no. | Document control — supports the recording obligation in MHSWR 1999 reg 3(6) |
| Hazard description | Step 1 of HSE's five-step process: identify hazards, including how people work, how plant is used, and what safe/unsafe practices exist |
| Persons at risk | Reg 3(1)(b) MHSWR 1999 — covers employees and persons not in employment (other trades, public) |
| Likelihood (L) — 1–5 | Step 2: assess the risk. Score is a good-practice tool, not a statutory requirement |
| Severity (S) — 1–5 | Step 2 continued |
| Risk rating (L × S) | Uncontrolled risk level — used to prioritise controls |
| Control measures | Step 3: eliminate or reduce the risk to as low as reasonably practicable |
| Residual risk rating | Demonstrates that controls have reduced the risk; supports the 'suitable and sufficient' test |
| Responsible person | Who implements the control on site |
Part B — Method Statement sections
| Section | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Sequence of work | Step-by-step task description so operatives know the safe order of activities |
| Plant, tools & equipment | Identifies what is used — directly relevant to hazard identification under HSE's five-step process |
| Materials & substances | Captures COSHH-relevant materials; feeds back into Part A hazard rows |
| Competence & training required | Evidences that workers have the skills to carry out the task safely |
| PPE requirements | Lists PPE specified as a control measure in Part A |
| Communication & supervision arrangements | Sets out how the method will be briefed and monitored on site |
| Emergency procedures | Site-specific response actions (e.g. first aid, evacuation route) — sourced from the Construction Phase Plan |
Worked example: cable tray installation at height
Task: Installing cable trays at 4 m above finished floor level using a mobile elevating work platform (MEWP) — first-fix electrical package, commercial fit-out project.
Part A — Risk Assessment row
| Field | Before controls | After controls |
|---|---|---|
| Ref | WAH-01 | WAH-01 |
| Hazard | Fall from height — operative working from MEWP platform at 4 m | — |
| Persons at risk | MEWP operator, banksman, other trades below, members of public if in vicinity | — |
| Likelihood (L) | 4 (working at height with unsecured platform risk) | 2 |
| Severity (S) | 5 (fall from 4 m — likely serious injury or fatality) | 5 |
| Risk rating | 20 — High | 10 — Medium |
| Control measures | 1. MEWP pre-use inspection completed and recorded. 2. Operator holds an IPAF 3a operator card (industry training scheme) or demonstrates equivalent MEWP competence. 3. Exclusion zone established beneath work area — barriers and signage. 4. Harness and lanyard worn and connected to manufacturer's anchor point. 5. Banksman in attendance for duration of task. 6. Ground conditions checked and MEWP outriggers deployed where required. 7. Briefing given to all trades on exclusion zone before work starts. | — |
| Residual risk | — | 10 — Medium (ALARP) |
| Responsible person | Site Supervisor — J. Patel | J. Patel |
Part B — Method Statement extract
Sequence of work:
- Supervisor confirms exclusion zone barriers are in place and signed; other trades withdrawn from the area.
- MEWP operator completes pre-use checklist; any defect stops work until resolved.
- Banksman positions at ground level with line of sight to operator at all times.
- Operator dons harness and connects lanyard before entering basket.
- MEWP raised to working height; cable tray brackets fixed using pre-drilled positions.
- Operator lowers platform to ground level before repositioning MEWP along the run.
- On completion, exclusion zone barriers removed and area inspected for tools/debris.
Competence required: MEWP operator competence evidenced by an IPAF 3a operator card or equivalent, manual handling awareness, task-specific briefing recorded.
PPE: Safety helmet, harness + lanyard, safety footwear, hi-vis vest, safety glasses during drilling.
Principal contractor acceptance checklist
A PC reviewing your RAMS under its CDM 2015 regulation 13 coordination duty will typically ask the following questions. Use this checklist before submission to reduce rework.
| # | Question the PC will ask | Where to address it in your RAMS |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Does the RAMS cover the specific task and location on this project — not a generic activity? | Header block: task description, project address |
| 2 | Are all persons at risk identified, including other contractors and members of the public? | Part A: Persons at risk column |
| 3 | Do control measures follow a hierarchy (eliminate → reduce → PPE last)? | Part A: Control measures column |
| 4 | Is there a residual risk rating showing controls have been applied? | Part A: Residual risk rating column |
| 5 | Are competence requirements stated and verifiable (licences, training cards)? | Part B: Competence & training section |
| 6 | Does the method statement align with the Construction Phase Plan site rules? | Part B: Sequence of work; cross-reference to CPP |
| 7 | Is the document version-controlled with a named author and approver signature? | Header block |
| 8 | Has the RAMS been briefed to operatives, with a record of that briefing? | Part B: Communication & supervision section |
| 9 | Is plant and equipment identified with inspection/maintenance evidence referenced? | Part B: Plant, tools & equipment section |
| 10 | Is there a clear review date and a named responsible person for each control? | Header block; Part A: Responsible person column |
When to review and re-issue your RAMS
Under MHSWR 1999 regulation 3(3), a risk assessment must be reviewed if there is reason to suspect it is no longer valid, or if there has been a significant change in the matters to which it relates. (legislation.gov.uk) CDM 2015 regulation 12(4) places an equivalent obligation on the PC to keep the Construction Phase Plan updated as the project evolves. (legislation.gov.uk) Your RAMS must keep pace with both.
Review-trigger table
| Trigger event | Action required |
|---|---|
| Change in scope or task (e.g. new cable route adds roof-level work) | Re-issue RAMS before revised task begins; re-brief all operatives |
| Near miss or accident related to the task | Immediate suspension of work; review and update before resuming |
| New operative starting on the task | Brief against current RAMS; record briefing; check competence evidence |
| Change in plant or equipment (e.g. MEWP swapped for scaffold tower) | Part A and Part B must be revised — different hazard profile |
| Change in site conditions (e.g. ground works open a void beneath MEWP route) | Review ground condition controls; update before work continues |
| Change in adjacent activities (e.g. hot works introduced near exclusion zone) | Assess interaction hazards; coordinate with other sub-contractor RAMS |
| Scheduled review date reached | Review all controls; confirm still valid or update and re-issue |
Download the ramsdocs RAMS template
The ramsdocs RAMS template is pre-structured to the two-part layout described above, with every column labelled to its regulatory basis. It is version-controlled, editable in Word and PDF, and designed to be review-ready for principal contractor submission on UK construction projects.
Browse the 51 free task-specific RAMS templates →
Not sure what belongs in each section? See what to include in a RAMS template and how to write a method statement.
Review and adapt before use. This template must be reviewed and adapted to your specific site, task, and contractor requirements by a competent person before it is used to authorise work. It is not a substitute for site-specific assessment, and no template can be described as guaranteed compliant or HSE-approved.
Frequently asked questions
What fields must a RAMS template include to be legally compliant in the UK?
At minimum: a header block identifying the company, project, task, version, author, and approver; Part A risk assessment columns covering hazard, persons at risk, likelihood, severity, uncontrolled risk rating, control measures, residual risk rating, and responsible person; and Part B method statement sections covering sequence of work, plant and equipment, competence requirements, PPE, and communication arrangements. Where an employer has five or more employees, MHSWR 1999 regulation 3(6) requires the significant findings to be recorded in writing.
What is the difference between a risk assessment and a method statement within a RAMS document?
The risk assessment (Part A) identifies hazards, scores their likelihood and severity, and specifies control measures — satisfying the duty under MHSWR 1999 reg 3. The method statement (Part B) translates those controls into a step-by-step safe working sequence. One without the other is incomplete: the risk assessment tells you what the risks are and how to control them; the method statement tells your operatives how to work safely in practice.
Who is responsible for producing RAMS on a construction project?
The employing contractor for each trade is responsible for producing a RAMS covering their own work activities. The duty under MHSWR 1999 reg 3 falls on every employer. The principal contractor does not produce RAMS on behalf of sub-contractors, but under CDM 2015 reg 13(3) must coordinate implementation of health and safety requirements across all contractors.
When does a RAMS document need to be reviewed or updated?
Under MHSWR 1999 reg 3(3), a review is required when there is reason to suspect the assessment is no longer valid, or when there has been a significant change in the matters to which it relates. In practice this includes scope changes, near misses, new operatives, changes in plant, and changes in site conditions. See the review-trigger table above.
How does a RAMS document relate to the Construction Phase Plan under CDM 2015?
Under CDM 2015 regulation 12(1), the principal contractor must draw up a Construction Phase Plan before the site is set up. Sub-contractor RAMS feed into that plan — they provide the trade-level hazard and control information the PC needs to fulfil its coordination duty under regulation 13. Your RAMS should cross-reference and be consistent with the CPP's site rules.
What makes a RAMS document acceptable to a principal contractor?
A PC carrying out its coordination duty under CDM 2015 reg 13 will look for: task-specific (not generic) content, identified persons at risk including third parties, a credible control hierarchy, a residual risk rating, verifiable competence evidence, version control, a named responsible person, and a record of operative briefing. Use the PC acceptance checklist above before submission to identify gaps.
Does a RAMS submission need to include a separate COSHH assessment for hazardous substances? Many principal contractors expect a discrete COSHH assessment — either as a clearly labelled appendix or a dedicated section — rather than a brief materials list in the method statement. This reflects the position in the official source "Construction method statements (managing the work)" that certain regulations require specific hazard assessments, explicitly listing hazardous substances (COSHH) as distinct from the general risk assessment. In practice, produce one COSHH assessment per substance, referencing the relevant Safety Data Sheet, and bundle each into your RAMS pack so the PC has a single consolidated submission.
How does COSHH link to the hazard rows already in Part A of a RAMS template? Part A captures task-level hazards; a COSHH assessment drills down to substance-level exposure, covering how workers might be harmed through inhalation, skin contact or ingestion, how often they are exposed, and what controls are already in place — as set out in the official HSE COSHH risk assessment guidance. The two documents are complementary rather than duplicated: cross-reference each COSHH assessment in the relevant Part A hazard row so the control measures align and reviewers can trace substance controls back to the method statement.
Will pre-qualification schemes such as CHAS, SafeContractor or Constructionline ask to see RAMS during the application process? SSIP-aligned schemes and Constructionline assess a contractor's safety competence using documentary evidence, and RAMS are among the practical documents assessors scrutinise alongside policies and procedures. Submitting well-structured, task-specific RAMS — rather than generic templates — gives a clearer picture of how your organisation manages risks in the field. Treat your live project RAMS library as a resource to draw on when compiling your pre-qualification submission.
Disclaimer: The template, worked example, and guidance on this page are provided for informational purposes. They must be reviewed and adapted to your specific site, task, and contractor requirements by a competent person before use. No template can remove the need for site-specific assessment, and nothing on this page constitutes legal advice or a guarantee of regulatory compliance.
Sources Used
This guide is checked against official source material. Verify current legal duties against the live legislation and HSE guidance before relying on the content for a live project.
- Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, regulation 3 (legislation.gov.uk)
- Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015 (legislation.gov.uk)
- Managing risks and risk assessment at work (HSE)
- Planning for construction work (HSE)
Put This Guide To Work
Use the related templates, trade hubs and free tools below to turn the guidance into a site-specific RAMS workflow.