How to Write RAMS That Actually Get Approved

Every contractor has been there: you submit your RAMS, wait three days, and get them bounced back with a list of issues. Meanwhile, the start date slips and the client loses patience.

The problem is rarely that contractors don't understand the work — it's that the document doesn't communicate that understanding clearly enough for the reviewer. This guide covers how to write RAMS that demonstrate competence and get approved first time.

What Are RAMS?

RAMS stands for Risk Assessments and Method Statements. They're two distinct documents, though they're almost always submitted together:

• Risk Assessment — identifies the hazards associated with the work, evaluates the level of risk, and sets out the control measures to reduce that risk to an acceptable level.
• Method Statement — describes how the work will be carried out safely, step by step, incorporating the control measures identified in the risk assessment.

Together, they demonstrate that you've thought through the task, identified what could go wrong, and planned how to prevent it.

When Do You Need RAMS?

There's no single regulation that mandates RAMS by name, but they're the industry-standard way of meeting your duties under:

• The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 — which require suitable and sufficient risk assessments
• CDM 2015 — which requires contractors to plan, manage, and monitor their work
• Client and principal contractor requirements — most will refuse to let you start without approved RAMS

In practice, you need RAMS for virtually every construction activity. Even if the client doesn't explicitly request them, producing them is evidence that you've met your legal duties.

What to Include in a Risk Assessment

A proper risk assessment should cover:

Activity description — what work is being carried out and where

Hazard identification — what could cause harm (e.g., working at height, manual handling, exposure to dust, live services)

Who is at risk — your operatives, other trades, members of the public, building occupants

Existing controls — what's already in place (e.g., site hoarding, permit systems)

Risk rating — likelihood x severity, both before and after controls

Additional control measures — what you'll put in place to reduce the residual risk

Residual risk rating — the risk level after your controls are applied

Use the hierarchy of control: eliminate, substitute, engineering controls, administrative controls, PPE. Reviewers notice when every hazard jumps straight to "wear PPE" — that's a red flag.

What to Include in a Method Statement

The method statement is your step-by-step safe system of work:

• Scope of work — clear description of what's included (and what isn't)
• Sequence of operations — numbered steps in the order they'll be carried out
• Plant and equipment — what you'll be using, including any certification requirements
• Materials — including COSHH assessments for hazardous substances
• Competence requirements — qualifications, training, and experience needed
• PPE requirements — specific to each task phase
• Welfare and emergency arrangements — first aid, fire, spill response
• Environmental controls — dust suppression, waste management, noise mitigation
• Interfaces with other trades — how you'll coordinate with others on site

Why RAMS Get Rejected

These are the reasons RAMS come back with comments, in order of how often we see them:

1. Generic Content

The most common reason by far. If your RAMS could apply to any project on any site, they'll get rejected. Reviewers want to see the specific site address, specific hazards for that location, and specific control measures you'll implement. Copying and pasting from a previous job without tailoring is obvious.

2. Missing or Vague Control Measures

"Operatives will take care" is not a control measure. Neither is "follow safe working practices." Every identified hazard needs a concrete, measurable control. Instead of "work safely at height," write "erect scaffold to TG20 compliance, inspected by CISRS-carded scaffolder before use, weekly inspections recorded on SG4 checklist."

3. No Risk Rating Methodology

If you include risk ratings (you should), explain the matrix you're using. A 5x5 matrix with defined likelihood and severity scales is standard. Without it, your ratings are meaningless to the reviewer.

4. Incomplete Sequences

Method statements that skip steps or gloss over transitions between tasks suggest you haven't fully planned the work. Include mobilisation, set-up, each work phase, demobilisation, and waste removal.

5. No Evidence of Competence

RAMS should reference the qualifications and experience of the people doing the work. CSCS cards, IPAF licences, PASMA training, asbestos awareness — whatever's relevant. Some reviewers will ask for copies of certificates alongside the RAMS.

Template Structure That Works

Here's a structure that consistently gets through first-time review:

Document Header

• Company details, project name, site address, revision number, date
• Author name, reviewer name, approval status

Section 1: Scope and Description

• What work is covered, what isn't, any assumptions or exclusions

Section 2: Risk Assessment Table

• Hazard | Who's at risk | Controls | Likelihood | Severity | Risk rating | Residual risk

Section 3: Method Statement

• Numbered sequence of operations with control measures embedded at each step

Section 4: Emergency Procedures

• First aid, fire, environmental spill, accident reporting

Section 5: Competence and Training

• Roles, required qualifications, training records

Section 6: Communication and Review

• Briefing arrangements, toolbox talk schedule, review triggers

Appendices

• COSHH assessments, equipment certificates, relevant permits

Tips for First-Time Approval

• Be specific to the site. Reference actual locations, access routes, and known hazards.
• Use plain English. Overly technical language doesn't impress — clarity does.
• Include photographs or sketches where they help explain the method or layout.
• Version control everything. Use revision numbers and dates so reviewers know they're looking at the latest version.
• Submit early. Don't leave RAMS until the week before you're due on site. Most principal contractors need 5-10 working days for review.

---

ScopeKit helps you generate project-specific RAMS using your actual project data — site details, work packages, and identified hazards feed directly into structured templates that meet principal contractor expectations. No more copying from old jobs and forgetting to change the site address. See how ScopeKit handles RAMS.