RAMS & method statements
RAMS that are records, not email attachments
RAMS live in BuildOptix as records rather than attachments — built in the form builder or held against the subcontractor who wrote them, with review dates on the shared calendar and every version submitted kept in a searchable library.
A risk assessment and method statement is a live document that is usually treated as a delivery. It is written to win the job, accepted, filed, and then not looked at again until something happens. The review date is the part that gets lost first, because it lives inside the document rather than in anything that will remind you.
Putting the review date on the shared calendar changes what the document is. It stops being a file and becomes something with a next action attached, surfaced alongside the inductions and inspections due in the same week, on the same site.
Version history matters for the same reason. When a method changes mid-job, the question afterwards is always which version the operatives were briefed on. A library that keeps every submission answers that; a shared drive where the file was overwritten does not.
What the platform does not do is judge whether a RAMS is any good. That is a competent person's job, and a RAMS written to be filed rather than read will pass through any system you put it in.
What it does
Built or uploaded
Write a RAMS in the drag-and-drop form builder, or hold a subcontractor's own document against their record. Both end up in the same library.
Review dates on the calendar
Upcoming RAMS reviews surface automatically on the calendar shared across every site, filterable down to one job.
Drafts kept apart from submissions
A half-finished record on somebody's phone is tracked separately from a submitted one, so an unfinished document is never mistaken for evidence.
Every version, searchable
The record library holds every form ever submitted, so which version was current on a given date is a lookup rather than an argument.
What goes wrong without it
- The RAMS was written to satisfy the client, and the operatives doing the work have never read past the first page
- The review date exists only inside the document, so the review happens when somebody happens to open it
- The version pinned up in the cabin is not the version in the office, and nobody can say when they diverged
- There is a signed briefing sheet, but nothing links it to the version of the method statement that was actually briefed
Further reading
What is a RAMS, and why does every subcontractor need one?
If you're a subcontractor turning up to work on a construction project, you almost certainly need your own RAMS — and it needs to be specific to the work, not a stock document reused across every job.
RAMS quality versus box-ticking: what a genuinely good one looks like next to a bad one
Two RAMS can look identical in format and length while one genuinely protects the people doing the work and the other exists purely to be filed — the difference isn't obvious from a skim.
What happens if a subcontractor turns up without a RAMS?
A principal contractor is entitled to refuse site access — and doing so consistently, rather than making exceptions under time pressure, is what actually keeps the requirement meaningful.
Terms on this page
Next to this
- Subcontractor management
Insurance, RAMS and accreditation, tracked to their expiry dates
- Document control
Built, submitted and searchable — drafts kept apart from evidence
One licence, every site you run.
All eight modules are included on every licence — this one is not sold separately, and there is no per-user charge on top of it.