What this checklist covers
The EV Corrective Action Plan Checklist is a 15-point scorecard for EV readiness gaps, responsible person, root cause, action plan, timeline, evidence, escalation, and closure effectiveness. Each criterion is scored from 1 to 5 on what the auditor sees on the day, and every gap goes into an action plan with an owner and a close date.
AutoSmart tip: EV corrective action plans carry a higher-than-usual mix of safety-critical and non-safety items. Never allow a safety-critical gap (absent HV gloves, lapsed HV certification, non-functional emergency stop) to sit in the same queue as a non-safety administrative item. Flag safety items immediately, restrict EV HV work until the safety gap is resolved, and only then manage the resolution through the formal corrective action process.
The checks
Tap Yes, No or Maybe to try it: your answers stay in this page and clear when you refresh. For a detailed walkthrough, download our PDF or book a demo.
EV gap identification and responsible person
- Is each EV corrective action item linked to a specific finding from an EV audit (readiness, safety, training, tools, charging, campaign) rather than described in vague operational terms?
- Is a named individual — not a department — assigned as responsible for each EV action item, with the assignment confirmed and acknowledged before the due date is set?
- Are safety-critical EV gaps (missing HV certification, absent HV PPE, non-functional emergency stop) classified as urgent, triggering immediate escalation rather than entering the standard corrective action cycle?
- Are recurring EV gaps (same finding appearing across multiple audit cycles) flagged as systemic, requiring a structural solution rather than repeated individual correction?
Root cause and action plan
- Is a root cause documented for each EV action item — distinguishing between a procurement gap (tool not ordered), a process gap (procedure not followed), a training gap (person not certified), or a facility gap (infrastructure not installed)?
- Does the corrective action address the root cause directly — e.g., scheduling HV certification training rather than issuing a reminder about HV safety — with a specific, measurable deliverable?
- Where an EV readiness gap requires a capital or resource decision (charger installation, lift upgrade, diagnostic tool purchase), is the action plan escalated to a level with authority to approve the expenditure?
- Are EV safety-related action items treated with a shorter resolution window than non-safety items — with no EV safety gap remaining open beyond the defined maximum period?
Timeline, evidence and escalation
- Is a realistic and proportionate due date set for each EV action item, with safety items given shorter deadlines and structural changes given appropriate planning lead time?
- Is the type of evidence required to close each EV action defined upfront — e.g., training certificate, tool inventory record, installation completion certificate, OEM confirmation?
- Are overdue EV action items escalated to the Dealer Principal and regional management on a defined cycle — not silently rolled forward — with the escalation documented?
Closure effectiveness and governance
- Is closure evidence reviewed by the audit team or regional management before an EV action item is accepted as closed — not self-certified by the responsible person?
- Is the effectiveness of closed EV actions verified at the next audit cycle, confirming the corrected item is still compliant — not merely that the action was completed at the time of closure?
- Is the EV corrective action plan reviewed in the management meeting as a standing agenda item, not deferred to a separate EV review meeting that may be lower priority?
- Is there evidence across the full EV action register that corrective actions are producing sustained improvement in EV audit scores — not only reducing the open item count through administrative closure?
How to run it
How the scoring works
Before the visit, fill in the dealer or centre, the auditor, the date and the audit cycle. Then score each of the 15 checks from 1 to 5 on what you see on the day, not on what the site aims for, and add them up out of 75.
- 1Not in place
- 2Attempted
- 3Defined
- 4Managed
- 5Fully sustained
- Green60–75 · 80–100%Compliant. Keep the standard.
- Amber38–59 · 50–79%Improvement needed: a structured action plan within 30 days.
- Red0–37 · Below 50%Priority intervention, escalated to regional management.
Then close every gap
Each gap goes into the action plan tracker and moves through four stages until the auditor closes it.
- 1PendingOwner and close date set
- 2In progressWork under way, evidence gathered
- 3CompletedEvidence submitted for review
- 4ApprovedVerified and closed by the auditor
