OSH Answers: Accident Investigation

Canadian Centre for Occupational Centre canadien d'hygiène et de

Health and Safety sécurité au travail

Français Contact Us Help Canada Site

Web Info Service Products & Services OSH Answers Education & Training

Home About Us E-News Bringing Health to Work Events Resources Shop

Printer Friendly Layout

Accident Investigation
What is an accident and why
should it be investigated? Health & Safety Programs
Who should do the accident Accident Investigation
investigating?
Should the immediate What is an accident and why should it be investigated?
supervisor be on the team?
Why look for the "root cause"? The term "accident" can be defined as an unplanned event that interrupts the
What are the steps involved in completion of an activity, and that may (or may not) include injury or property
investigating an accident? damage.
What should be looked at as
the cause of an accident? An incident usually refers to an unexpected event that did not cause injury or
damage this time but had the potential. "Near miss" or "dangerous occurrence"
How are the facts collected?
are also terms for an event that could have caused harm but did not.
What should I know when
making the analysis and
Reasons for workplace accident investigation are:
conclusions?
Why should recommendations
● most importantly to find out the cause of accidents and to prevent similar
be made?
accidents in the future
What should be done if the
● to fulfill the legal requirement
investigation reveals "human
● to determine the cost of an accident
error"?
● to determine compliance with applicable safety regulations
How should follow-up be ● to process workers' compensation claims
handled?

Incidents that involve no injury or property damage should still be investigated to

OSH Answers determine the hazards that should be corrected. The same principles apply to a
Feedback
quick inquiry of a minor incident and to the more formal investigation of a serious
event.
Disclaimer
Printer Friendly Layout Please note: The term incident is used in some situations and jurisdictions to
cover both an "accident" and "incident". It is argued that the word "accident"
implies that the event was related to fate or chance. When the root cause is
Inquiries Service
determined, it is usually found that many events were predictable and could have
The Inquiries Service at CCOHS been prevented if the right actions were taken -- making the event not one of fate
answers questions on the health or or chance (thus, the word incident is used). For simplicity, we will use the term
safety concerns people have about
accident to mean all of the above events.
the work they do.

More on Inquiries Service The information that follows is intended to be a general guide for supervisors or
joint occupational health and safety committee members. When accidents are
investigated, the emphasis should be concentrated on finding the root cause of
the accident rather than the investigation procedure itself so you can prevent it
from happening again. The purpose is to find facts that can lead to actions, not to
find fault. Always look for deeper causes. Do not simply record the steps of the
event.

Who should do the accident investigating?

Ideally, an investigation would be conducted by someone experienced in accident

causation, experienced in investigative techniques, fully knowledgeable of the

[Link] (1 of 10)3/27/2006 8:01:14 AM

OSH Answers: Accident Investigation

work processes, procedures, persons, and industrial relations environment of a

particular situation.

Some jurisdictions provide guidance such as requiring that it must be conducted

jointly, with both management and labour represented, or that the investigators
must be knowledgeable about the work processes involved.

In most cases, the supervisor should help investigate the event. Other members
of the team include:

● employees with knowledge of the work

● safety officer
● health and safety committee
● union representative, if applicable
● employees with experience in investigations
● "outside" expert
● representative from local government

Should the immediate supervisor be on the team?

The advantage is that this person is likely to know most about the work and
persons involved and the current conditions. Furthermore, the supervisor can
usually take immediate remedial action. The counter argument is that there may
be an attempt to gloss over the supervisors shortcomings in the accident. This
situation should not arise if the accident is investigated by a team of people, and if
the worker representative(s) and the management members review all accident
investigation reports thoroughly.

Why look for the "root cause"?

An investigator who believes that accidents are caused by unsafe conditions will
likely try to uncover conditions as causes. On the other hand, one who believes
they are caused by unsafe acts will attempt to find the human errors that are
causes. Therefore, it is necessary to examine some underlying factors in a chain
of events that ends in an accident.

The important point is that even in the most seemingly straightforward accidents,
seldom, if ever, is there only a single cause. For example, an "investigation"
which concludes that an accident was due to worker carelessness, and goes no
further, fails to seek answers to several important questions such as:

● Was the worker distracted? If yes, why was the worker distracted?
● Was a safe work procedure being followed? If not, why not?
● Were safety devices in order? If not, why not?
● Was the worker trained? If not, why not?

An inquiry that answers these and related questions will probably reveal
conditions that are more open to correction than attempts to prevent
"carelessness".

What are the steps involved in investigating an accident?

[Link] (2 of 10)3/27/2006 8:01:14 AM

OSH Answers: Accident Investigation

The accident investigation process involves the following steps:

● Report the accident occurrence to a designated person within the

organization
● Provide first aid and medical care to injured person(s) and prevent further
injuries or damage
● Investigate the accident
● Identify the causes
● Report the findings
● Develop a plan for corrective action
● Implement the plan
● Evaluate the effectiveness of the corrective action
● Make changes for continuous improvement

As little time as possible should be lost between the moment of an accident or

near miss and the beginning of the investigation. In this way, one is most likely to
be able to observe the conditions as they were at the time, prevent disturbance of
evidence, and identify witnesses. The tools that members of the investigating
team may need (pencil, paper, camera, film, camera flash, tape measure, etc.)
should be immediately available so that no time is wasted.

What should be looked at as the cause of an accident?

Accident Causation Models

Many models of accident causation have been proposed, ranging from Heinrich's
domino theory to the sophisticated Management Oversight and Risk Tree (MORT).

The simple model shown in Figure 1 attempts to illustrate that the causes of any
accident can be grouped into five categories - task, material, environment,
personnel, and management. When this model is used, possible causes in each
category should be investigated. Each category is examined more closely below.
Remember that these are sample questions only: no attempt has been made to
develop a comprehensive checklist.

Figure 1: Accident Causation

[Link] (3 of 10)3/27/2006 8:01:14 AM

OSH Answers: Accident Investigation

Task

Here the actual work procedure being used at the time of the accident is explored.
Members of the accident investigation team will look for answers to questions
such as:

● Was a safe work procedure used?

● Had conditions changed to make the normal procedure unsafe?
● Were the appropriate tools and materials available?
● Were they used?
● Were safety devices working properly?
● Was lockout used when necessary?

For most of these questions, an important follow-up question is "If not, why not?"

Material

To seek out possible causes resulting from the equipment and materials used,
investigators might ask:

● Was there an equipment failure?

● What caused it to fail?
● Was the machinery poorly designed?
● Were hazardous substances involved?
● Were they clearly identified?
● Was a less hazardous alternative substance possible and available?
● Was the raw material substandard in some way?
● Should personal protective equipment (PPE) have been used?
● Was the PPE used?
● Were users of PPE properly trained?

Again, each time the answer reveals an unsafe condition, the investigator must
ask why this situation was allowed to exist.

Environment

The physical environment, and especially sudden changes to that environment,

are factors that need to be identified. The situation at the time of the accident is
what is important, not what the "usual" conditions were. For example, accident
investigators may want to know:

● What were the weather conditions?

● Was poor housekeeping a problem?
● Was it too hot or too cold?
● Was noise a problem?
● Was there adequate light?
● Were toxic or hazardous gases, dusts, or fumes present?

Personnel

The physical and mental condition of those individuals directly involved in the
event must be explored. The purpose for investigating the accident is not to
establish blame against someone but the inquiry will not be complete unless
personal characteristics are considered. Some factors will remain essentially
constant while others may vary from day to day:

● Were workers experienced in the work being done?

● Had they been adequately trained?
● Can they physically do the work?

[Link] (4 of 10)3/27/2006 8:01:14 AM

OSH Answers: Accident Investigation

● What was the status of their health?

● Were they tired?
● Were they under stress (work or personal)?

Management

Management holds the legal responsibility for the safety of the workplace and
therefore the role of supervisors and higher management and the role or presence
of management systems must always be considered in an accident investigation.
Failures of management systems are often found to be direct or indirect factors in
accidents. Ask questions such as:

● Were safety rules communicated to and understood by all employees?

● Were written procedures and orientation available?
● Were they being enforced?
● Was there adequate supervision?
● Were workers trained to do the work?
● Had hazards been previously identified?
● Had procedures been developed to overcome them?
● Were unsafe conditions corrected?
● Was regular maintenance of equipment carried out?
● Were regular safety inspections carried out?

This model of accident investigations provides a guide for uncovering all possible
causes and reduces the likelihood of looking at facts in isolation. Some
investigators may prefer to place some of the sample questions in different
categories; however, the categories are not important, as long as each pertinent
question is asked. Obviously there is considerable overlap between categories;
this reflects the situation in real life. Again it should be emphasized that the above
sample questions do not make up a complete checklist, but are examples only.

How are the facts collected?

The steps in accident investigation are simple: the accident investigators gather
information, analyze it, draw conclusions, and make recommendations. Although
the procedures are straightforward, each step can have its pitfalls. As mentioned
above, an open mind is necessary in accident investigation: preconceived notions
may result in some wrong paths being followed while leaving some significant
facts uncovered. All possible causes should be considered. Making notes of ideas
as they occur is a good practice but conclusions should not be drawn until all the
information is gathered.

Injured workers(s)

The most important immediate tasks--rescue operations, medical treatment of the

injured, and prevention of further injuries--have priority and others must not
interfere with these activities. When these matters are under control, the
investigators can start their work.

Physical Evidence

Before attempting to gather information, examine the site for a quick overview,
take steps to preserve evidence, and identify all witnesses. In some jurisdictions,
an accident site must not be disturbed without prior approval from appropriate
government officials such as the coroner, inspector, or police. Physical evidence is
probably the most non-controversial information available. It is also subject to
rapid change or obliteration; therefore, it should be the first to be recorded. Based

[Link] (5 of 10)3/27/2006 8:01:14 AM

OSH Answers: Accident Investigation

on your knowledge of the work process, you may want to check items such as:

● positions of injured workers

● equipment being used
● materials or chemicals being used
● safety devices in use
● position of appropriate guards
● position of controls of machinery
● damage to equipment
● housekeeping of area
● weather conditions
● lighting levels
● noise levels
● time of day

You may want to take photographs before anything is moved, both of the general
area and specific items. Later careful study of these may reveal conditions or
observations missed previously. Sketches of the accident scene based on
measurements taken may also help in subsequent analysis and will clarify any
written reports. Broken equipment, debris, and samples of materials involved may
be removed for further analysis by appropriate experts. Even if photographs are
taken, written notes about the location of these items at the accident scene
should be prepared.

Eyewitness Accounts

Although there may be occasions when you are unable to do so, every effort
should be made to interview witnesses. In some situations witnesses may be your
primary source of information because you may be called upon to investigate an
accident without being able to examine the scene immediately after the event.
Because witnesses may be under severe emotional stress or afraid to be
completely open for fear of recrimination, interviewing witnesses is probably the
hardest task facing an investigator.

Witnesses should be kept apart and interviewed as soon as possible after the
accident. If witnesses have an opportunity to discuss the event among
themselves, individual perceptions may be lost in the normal process of accepting
a consensus view where doubt exists about the facts.

Witnesses should be interviewed alone, rather than in a group. You may decide to
interview a witness at the scene of the accident where it is easier to establish the
positions of each person involved and to obtain a description of the events. On the
other hand, it may be preferable to carry out interviews in a quiet office where
there will be fewer distractions. The decision may depend in part on the nature of
the accident and the mental state of the witnesses.

Interviewing

Interviewing is an art that cannot be given justice in a brief document such as

this, but a few do's and don'ts can be mentioned. The purpose of the interview is
to establish an understanding with the witness and to obtain his or her own words
describing the event:

DO...

● put the witness, who is probably upset, at ease

● emphasize the real reason for the investigation, to determine what
happened and why
● let the witness talk, listen

[Link] (6 of 10)3/27/2006 8:01:14 AM

OSH Answers: Accident Investigation

● confirm that you have the statement correct

● try to sense any underlying feelings of the witness
● make short notes or ask someone else on the team to take them during the
interview
● ask if it is okay to record the interview, if you are doing so
● close on a positive note

DO NOT...

● intimidate the witness

● interrupt
● prompt
● ask leading questions
● show your own emotions
● jump to conclusions

Ask open-ended questions that cannot be answered by simply "yes" or "no". The
actual questions you ask the witness will naturally vary with each accident, but
there are some general questions that should be asked each time:

● Where were you at the time of the accident?

● What were you doing at the time?
● What did you see, hear?
● What were the environmental conditions (weather, light, noise, etc.) at the
time?
● What was (were) the injured worker(s) doing at the time?
● In your opinion, what caused the accident?
● How might similar accidents be prevented in the future?

If you were not at the scene at the time, asking questions is a straightforward
approach to establishing what happened. Obviously, care must be taken to assess
the credibility of any statements made in the interviews. Answers to a first few
questions will generally show how well the witness could actually observe what
happened.

Another technique sometimes used to determine the sequence of events is to re-

enact or replay them as they happened. Obviously, great care must be taken so
that further injury or damage does not occur. A witness (usually the injured
worker) is asked to reenact in slow motion the actions that preceded the accident.

Background Information

A third, and often an overlooked source of information, can be found in documents

such as technical data sheets, health and safety committee minutes, inspection
reports, company policies, maintenance reports, past accident reports, formalized
safe-work procedures, and training reports. Any pertinent information should be
studied to see what might have happened, and what changes might be
recommended to prevent recurrence of similar accidents.

What should I know when making the analysis and conclusions?

At this stage of the investigation most of the facts about what happened and how
it happened should be known. This has taken considerable effort to accomplish but
it represents only the first half of the objective. Now comes the key question--why
did it happen? To prevent recurrences of similar accidents, the investigators must
find all possible answers to this question.

[Link] (7 of 10)3/27/2006 8:01:14 AM

OSH Answers: Accident Investigation

You have kept an open mind to all possibilities and looked for all pertinent facts.
There may still be gaps in your understanding of the sequence of events that
resulted in the accident. You may need to reinterview some witnesses to fill these
gaps in your knowledge.

● When your analysis is complete, write down a step-by-step account of what

happened (your conclusions) working back from the moment of the
accident, listing all possible causes at each step. This is not extra work: it is
a draft for part of the final report. Each conclusion should be checked to see
if:
● it is supported by evidence
● the evidence is direct (physical or documentary) or based on eyewitness
accounts, or
● the evidence is based on assumption.

This list serves as a final check on discrepancies that should be explained or

eliminated.

Why should recommendations be made?

The most important final step is to come up with a set of well-considered

recommendations designed to prevent recurrences of similar accidents. Once you
are knowledgeable about the work processes involved and the overall situation in
your organization, it should not be too difficult to come up with realistic
recommendations. Recommendations should:

● be specific
● be constructive
● get at root causes
● identify contributing factors

Resist the temptation to make only general recommendations to save time and
effort.

For example, you have determined that a blind corner contributed to an accident.
Rather than just recommending "eliminate blind corners" it would be better to
suggest:

● install mirrors at the northwest corner of building X (specific to this

accident)
● install mirrors at blind corners where required throughout the worksite
(general)

Never make recommendations about disciplining a person or persons who may

have been at fault. This would not only be counter to the real purpose of the
investigation, but it would jeopardize the chances for a free flow of information in
future accident investigations.

In the unlikely event that you have not been able to determine the causes of an
accident with any certainty, you probably still have uncovered safety weaknesses
in the operation. It is appropriate that recommendations be made to correct these
deficiencies.

The Written Report

If your organization has a standard form that must be used, you will have little
choice in the form that your written report is to be presented. Nevertheless, you

[Link] (8 of 10)3/27/2006 8:01:14 AM

OSH Answers: Accident Investigation

should be aware of, and try to overcome, shortcomings such as:

● If a limited space is provided for an answer, the tendency will be to answer

in that space despite recommendations to "use back of form if necessary."
● If a checklist of causes is included, possible causes not listed may be
overlooked.
● Headings such as "unsafe condition" will usually elicit a single response even
when more than one unsafe condition exists.
● Differentiating between "primary cause" and "contributing factors" can be
misleading. All accident causes are important and warrant consideration for
possible corrective action.

Your previously prepared draft of the sequence of events can now be used to
describe what happened. Remember that readers of your report do not have the
intimate knowledge of the accident that you have so include all pertinent detail.
Photographs and diagrams may save many words of description. Identify clearly
where evidence is based on certain facts, eyewitness accounts, or your
assumptions.

If doubt exists about any particular part, say so. The reasons for your conclusions
should be stated and followed by your recommendations. Weed out extra material
that is not required for a full understanding of the accident and its causes such as
photographs that are not relevant and parts of the investigation that led you
nowhere. The measure of a good accident report is quality, not quantity.

Always communicate your findings with workers, supervisors and management.

Present your information 'in context' so everyone understands how the accident
occurred and the actions in place to prevent it from happening again.

What should be done if the investigation reveals "human error"?

A difficulty that has bothered many investigators is the idea that one does not
want to lay blame. However, when a thorough worksite accident investigation
reveals that some person or persons among management, supervisor, and the
workers were apparently at fault, then this fact should be pointed out. The
intention here is to remedy the situation, not to discipline an individual.

Failing to point out human failings that contributed to an accident will not only
downgrade the quality of the investigation. Furthermore, it will also allow future
accidents to happen from similar causes because they have not been addressed.

However never make recommendations about disciplining anyone who may be at

fault. Any disciplinary steps should be done within the normal personnel
procedures.

How should follow-up be handled?

Management is responsible for acting on the recommendations in the accident

investigation report. The health and safety committee, if you have one, can
monitor the progress of these actions.

Follow-up actions include:

● Respond to the recommendations in the report by explaining what can and

[Link] (9 of 10)3/27/2006 8:01:14 AM

OSH Answers: Accident Investigation

cannot be done (and why or why not).

● Develop a timetable for corrective actions.
● Monitor that the scheduled actions have been completed.
● Check the condition of injured worker(s).
● Inform and train other workers at risk.
● Re-orient worker(s) on their return to work.

Document last updated on March 10, 2006

Copyright ©1997-2005 Canadian Centre for Occupational Health & Safety

OSH Answers Search

Search Help

OSH Answers Search is designed to help you specifically target items

about Occupational Health and Safety that are explained in the OSH
Answers portion of our site.
Home Products/Services Education/Training Events OSH Answers Resources Search

[Link] (10 of 10)3/27/2006 8:01:14 AM