Process Safety Maturity Assessment: Score Your Facility

Your facility has a MIPP, risk assessment, training records, and audit schedule. The harder test is whether those systems change decisions during a plant upset, equipment impairment, rushed shutdown, or late project.
Use this process safety maturity assessment to review the first half of 2026. Score each statement from 0 to 3:

• 0: No system or evidence.
• 1: A documented system exists, but use is inconsistent.
• 2: Teams use the system and can show current evidence.
• 3: Leaders verify effectiveness and improve the system from results.
  Do not award points for a policy alone. Ask for field evidence, recent records, and examples.

1. Leadership and accountability

Score each statement:

1. Senior leaders know the site's top major-incident scenarios and critical barriers.
2. Named managers own process-safety actions, impairments, and overdue assurance work.
3. Production decisions include process-safety limits and barrier availability.
4. Leaders visit the field and test whether systems work during real tasks.
5. The site tracks process-safety performance separately from personal injury performance.
   Section score: /15
   A mature site can explain why it stopped a transfer, delayed a startup, reduced inventory, or cancelled hot work because a barrier was unavailable.

2. Hazard and risk knowledge

1. HAZOPs, QRAs, BowTies, and scenario registers match the current plant.
2. Teams review changes, incidents, inspection findings, and new information against the risk picture.
3. Operators and maintainers can explain the major hazards in their area.
4. Risk recommendations have clear owners, due dates, and technical closure evidence.
5. The facility plans PHA revalidation before information becomes stale.
   Section score: /15
   Check whether the physical plant, P&IDs, procedures, and risk studies agree. A mismatch signals weak control of change.

3. Management of Change and operational readiness

1. Staff can distinguish replacement in kind from a change requiring review.
2. The MOC process covers temporary, procedural, software, and organisational changes.
3. Teams update drawings, procedures, inspection tasks, and training before startup.
4. PSSR reviews include field verification and clear go or no-go authority.
5. Temporary changes carry owners, expiry dates, controls, and restoration plans.
   Section score: /15
   Use the Management of Change guide to examine weak points in this section.

4. Operating discipline and control of work

1. Procedures reflect field equipment and state the response to deviations.
2. Shift handovers cover inhibited safeguards, abnormal conditions, permits, and temporary changes.
3. Permit issuers verify isolations and task controls in the field.
4. The site coordinates simultaneous operations and stops work when conditions change.
5. Supervisors observe safety-critical tasks and correct system weaknesses.
   Section score: /15
   Review our permit-to-work guide and human factors guide when the site relies on signatures rather than understanding.

5. Asset integrity and barrier assurance

1. The facility has a current safety-critical equipment register.
2. Each critical item has a defined function, test, interval, and acceptance criterion.
3. Inspection plans address credible degradation mechanisms.
4. Leaders can see overdue critical maintenance, failed tests, and active impairments.
5. Deferrals include a technical basis, temporary controls, approval, and revised date.
   Section score: /15
   Use the asset integrity guide to review corrosion, inspection, and aging-plant risks.

6. Emergency preparedness

1. Emergency plans match current scenarios, inventories, layouts, and neighbouring receptors.
2. Drills test decisions and coordination, not only evacuation time.
3. The site records lessons, assigns actions, and verifies closure.
4. Firewater, detection, communications, alarms, and response equipment receive functional tests.
5. The facility shares relevant information with emergency services and adjacent establishments.
   Section score: /15
   The SANS 1514 emergency-planning guide provides more detail.

7. Learning, competence, and worker participation

1. Incident investigations identify system causes and verify corrective-action effectiveness.
2. Near misses and weak signals receive review before a major event occurs.
3. Competence requirements state the knowledge, skill, and experience needed for each critical role.
4. Workers participate in risk assessments, procedure design, and improvement work.
5. The site retains technical knowledge through mentoring, records, and structured handovers.
   Section score: /15
   Training attendance alone does not prove competence. Ask a person to perform or explain the critical task.

Interpret your score

Add the seven section scores for a total out of 105.

Turn the assessment into a 90-day plan

Choose no more than five actions. Prioritise:

1. an impaired or missing barrier for a high-consequence scenario;
2. an overdue legal or risk-assessment obligation;
3. a repeated failure across MOC, PTW, inspection, or training;
4. a gap that prevents leaders from seeing current risk;
5. one workforce improvement that makes the safe action easier.
   Give each action an owner, due date, completion standard, and effectiveness check. Re-score the relevant section after 90 days.
   The Department of Employment and Labour's March 2026 MHI workshop highlighted plant fitness and performance monitoring. A maturity review helps a duty holder test whether the process-safety management system works beyond the policy file.
   MMRisk conducts MHI reviews, process-safety audits, BowTie workshops, hazard studies, and bespoke training. Contact MMRisk for an independent maturity assessment or targeted improvement plan.

Related resources

• MIPP implementation
• Process safety culture
• Department of Labour MHI inspections
• Predictive risk management

Sources

• South African Major Hazard Installation Regulations
• Department of Employment and Labour: March 2026 MHI workshop
• OSHA Process Safety Management standard
• AIChE 2026 Process Plant Safety Symposium
• World Steel Association: Safety and health in the steel industry data report 2026