Independent and not affiliated with the FDA, MHRA, ISPE, PDA, or any agency. Get the appgoutham@madhadi.com
madhadi.comData Integrity & GxP Quality
Browse all topics → Articles Templates & Procedures Learning paths GlossaryScenariosToolsRegulatory ReferencesLearning PathsTopics About Start here
Template Plug-and-play starting point CSV / CSA

Template: Part 11 / Annex 11 Computerized System Assessment

The full plug-and-play Part 11 / EU Annex 11 computerized system assessment document: header, combined requirements matrix, evidence and gap columns, severity ranking, and sign-off, ready to run against any GxP system, with a filled specimen row set.

Document type: Template

Read and copy the template below into your own quality system. It is a generic starting point for your own internal use, provided as is, with no warranty; see the Terms and License. Adopting it does not by itself create compliance.

This is a ready-to-use assessment document. Replace every <<FILL: ...>> placeholder with your system’s specifics, complete a row for every applicable requirement, and route through your normal validation and QA review. A filled specimen for one system follows the blank template.

1. Header

FieldEntry
System name and version<<FILL>>
Business / technical owner<<FILL>>
GxP scope statement<<FILL: what GxP records this system creates, modifies, stores, or transmits>>
Predicate rule(s) in play<<FILL: e.g. 21 CFR Part 211, Part 600 series, Part 1271>>
EU GMP scope (if applicable)<<FILL: Yes/No, site(s)>>
GAMP software category<<FILL: 1, 3, 4, or 5>>
Assessment date and author<<FILL>>
ApprovalSee section 4

2. Scope determination

QuestionAnswer
Does the system generate, modify, maintain, archive, retrieve, or transmit a GxP record?<<FILL: Y/N>>
Is that record kept to satisfy a predicate rule (US) or is it a GxP record in an EU GMP context?<<FILL: Y/N>>
Conclusion<<FILL: In scope, proceed / Out of scope, document rationale and stop here>>

3. Combined requirements matrix

Complete one row per applicable requirement. Mark not-applicable rows with a stated reason rather than leaving them blank.

Requirement (Part 11 / Annex 11)Applicable?Current controlEvidenceGap?SeverityRemediation and owner
§11.10(a) / cl.4, Validated system<<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>>
§11.10(b)(c) / cl.7, cl.17, Retrieval and retention<<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>>
§11.10(d)(g) / cl.12, Access control<<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>>
§11.10(e) / cl.9, Audit trail (on by default, reviewed)<<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>>
§11.10(f), Sequence/workflow enforcement<<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>>
§11.10(h), Device checks<<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>>
§11.10(i) / cl.2, Training<<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>>
§11.10(k) / cl.4, cl.10, Documentation control<<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>>
§11.50 / cl.14, Signature manifestation<<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>>
§11.70 / cl.14, Signature linking<<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>>
§11.100, Uniqueness + FDA certification<<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>>
§11.200 / cl.14, Two-component signing<<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>>
§11.300 / cl.12, Password/ID controls<<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>>
cl.3, Supplier oversight<<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>>
cl.11, Periodic review<<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>>
cl.13, Incident management<<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>>
cl.15, Batch release (if applicable)<<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>>
cl.16, Business continuity<<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>>

Severity scale: Critical, record trustworthiness or patient safety directly compromised, generally a stop item before go-live. Major, control weak or partial, data integrity exposure plausible, closed before go-live or formally risk-accepted with an interim control. Minor, documentation or procedural gap, low data risk, closed on a defined post-go-live timeline.

4. Conclusion and approval

FieldEntry
Total gaps identified (Critical / Major / Minor)<<FILL>>
Overall disposition<<FILL: fit for release / release with risk-accepted gaps / not fit for release pending remediation>>
System owner acceptance of residual risk<<FILL: name, date>>
Validation lead<<FILL: name, date>>
QA approval<<FILL: name, date>>

Filled specimen (excerpt, three rows)

Header. System: Environmental Monitoring LIMS module, v4.2. Owner: Microbiology QA lead. GxP scope: EM sample results and trend data supporting batch release. Predicate rules: 21 CFR Part 211. EU GMP scope: Yes, one EU site. GAMP category: 4. Assessed 5 August 2026 by CSV specialist T. Wren.

Scope determination. Generates and retains EM results used to support batch disposition: Yes. Kept under 21 CFR 211 and EU GMP: Yes. Conclusion: in scope, proceed.

RequirementApplicable?Current controlEvidenceGap?SeverityRemediation and owner
§11.10(e) / cl.9, Audit trailYesOn by default, locked from non-admin rolesConfig export, negative test TC-12No--
§11.10(e) / cl.9, Audit trail reviewYesWeekly review defined in SOP, not yet performed on live systemDraft SOP QA-204, no review records yetMajorMajorPerform first review before go-live; owner: Micro QA lead, due 2 weeks
cl.3, Supplier oversightYesVendor assessed 2024, no current service agreement on fileOld assessment record, agreement expiredMajorMajorRenew supplier quality agreement; owner: Procurement, due before go-live

Conclusion. Two Major gaps identified, zero Critical, zero Minor at this stage of review. Overall disposition: release with risk-accepted gaps only if both Majors close within the stated timeline; otherwise hold go-live. System owner accepted the interim risk with both remediation dates documented, 12 August 2026.

Common inspection findings this template prevents

  • No written Part 11 / Annex 11 assessment exists at all for a system in active GxP use.
  • An assessment exists but is mapped to a system version the site no longer runs.
  • Gaps are identified but never ranked by severity, so a Critical and a Minor get the same remediation urgency.
  • The assessment was written and approved by the same person who configured the system, with no independent QA review.

How to adapt this template

  1. Add or remove matrix rows to match what is actually applicable to your system; do not leave inapplicable rows blank without a documented reason.
  2. Confirm every Part 11 section and Annex 11 clause citation against the currently in-force text; the 2025-2026 Annex 11 revision is a draft, not yet in force, so continue citing the 2011 clauses until the final text publishes.
  3. Reference this assessment by document number in your validation plan and validation summary report so it is traceable as part of the release package.
Use madhadi.com as an app Full screen, works offline, one tap from your home screen.