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
Form Plug-and-play starting point Audits & Inspection

Form: SME Inspection Readiness Preparation and Mock-Interview Record

A plug-and-play record for preparing subject matter experts for an FDA or EMA inspection: system-and-procedure readiness, a mock-interview question bank scored against the listen-clarify-answer-stop pattern, and a coaching action list, with a filled specimen.

Document type: Form

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 record for preparing a subject matter expert (SME) before an inspection. A poorly prepared SME is one of the most common sources of inspection trouble, and unlike a missing record, a bad SME answer cannot be quietly corrected later. This form covers two things: whether the SME actually knows their systems and procedures, and how they answer under pressure, scored against the listen, clarify, answer, stop pattern. Replace every <<FILL: ...>> placeholder, run it as part of your mock inspection program, and turn every weak area into a coaching action with an owner. A filled specimen follows. This content is educational reference, not legal or regulatory advice; adapt it to your quality system.

FieldEntry
Record number<<FILL: FORM-ID>>
SME name / role<<FILL>>
Area / systems owned<<FILL: e.g. QC chromatography, LIMS>>
Preparation session date<<FILL>>
Prepared / assessed by<<FILL: inspection readiness lead / QA>>
Anticipated inspection<<FILL: PAI / routine / for-cause / mock>>

Part 1, Knowledge readiness

The SME should be able to speak to each of these without looking it up. Mark Ready, Gap, or N/A.

#The SME can, without notesR/G/NANote
K1Describe each system in their area: what it does, how it is validated, and its current validated state<<FILL>><<FILL>>
K2State what the audit trail captures and when it was last reviewed<<FILL>>
K3State who has access and administrator rights, and how that is controlled<<FILL>>
K4Walk through the relevant SOPs from memory of intent, not word for word<<FILL>>
K5Walk a sample from receipt to reported result (or the equivalent process flow)<<FILL>>
K6Show, live in the system, the last audit trail review and the last few investigations<<FILL>>
K7Explain how the system clock is controlled and known correct<<FILL>>

Part 2, Behavior under questioning

The content can be right and the delivery still create risk. Coach and score the habits.

#BehaviorObserved (good / needs work)Note
B1Listens to the whole question before answering<<FILL>><<FILL>>
B2Clarifies scope when a question is ambiguous<<FILL>>
B3Answers the specific question, in plain language<<FILL>>
B4Stops; does not fill silence or volunteer new topics<<FILL>>
B5Says “I do not know, I will find out” rather than guessing<<FILL>>
B6Offers a supporting document when one exists<<FILL>>

Part 3, Mock-interview question bank

Ask each. Record the answer quality and whether it opened an unnecessary new thread. These mirror the openers investigators actually use.

#QuestionAnswer quality (1-5)Opened a new thread?Note
Q1Walk me through the lifecycle of a sample from receipt to reported result<<FILL>><<FILL: Y/N>><<FILL>>
Q2How is this system validated, and where is the validation summary?<<FILL>>
Q3Who has administrator rights to this system, and how is that controlled?<<FILL>>
Q4Show me the last time the audit trail was reviewed<<FILL>>
Q5How do you know the system clock is correct?<<FILL>>
Q6What happens when an analyst makes an entry error in a batch record?<<FILL>>
Q7How do you decide whether a deviation is major or minor?<<FILL>>
Q8Walk me through your last OOS that confirmed<<FILL>>
Q9Who can change integration parameters, and what is logged when they do?<<FILL>>
Q10How do you ensure a contractor follows your procedures?<<FILL>>

Score guide: 5 = accurate, complete to the question, backed by a record, opened no new thread; 3 = correct but volunteered extra or hesitated; 1 = wrong, guessed, or opened a significant new thread.

Coaching action list

ActionSource itemOwnerDueStatus
<<FILL>><<FILL: e.g. K6, Q8>><<FILL>><<FILL>><<FILL>>

Acceptance criteria

  • Every Part 1 item is Ready or a justified N/A before the inspection window; each Gap has a coaching action.
  • Behavior items B1 to B6 are observed as good, or coached with a re-check.
  • No mock question scores below 3 without a coaching action and a re-run.
  • The record is signed and the coaching actions are tracked to closure.

Signoff

RoleNameSignatureDate
SME<<FILL>>
Assessor (readiness lead / QA)<<FILL>>

References

FDA Data Integrity and Compliance With Drug CGMP, Questions and Answers (2018). FD&C Act section 704 (inspection authority). ICH Q10 (pharmaceutical quality system, for roles and knowledge management).

Confirm the current version of each reference before use.


Filled specimen

A partial completed record for an example QC chromatography SME. Illustrative only.

#QuestionAnswer quality (1-5)Opened a new thread?Note
Q4Show me the last audit trail review5NOpened the CDS, showed the signed review from last week
Q8Walk me through your last OOS that confirmed4NAccurate, but hesitated locating the investigation number
Q9Who can change integration parameters, and what is logged?2YVolunteered a past period of “heavy reintegration when the method was drifting”

On Q9 the SME gave a correct core answer but then opened a new thread, an unprompted mention of a period of heavy reintegration, that an investigator would immediately pull on. The coaching action: rehearse the listen-clarify-answer-stop pattern so the answer ends at “integration parameters can be changed by the analyst and reviewer roles; every change is captured in the audit trail with old value, new value, user, time, and reason,” backed by showing the access list, and then stops. Re-run scored 5.

Common inspection findings this record helps prevent

  • An SME who cannot show, live, that the audit trail was reviewed or that a system is validated.
  • An SME who volunteers a new problem the investigator had not asked about, expanding the inspection.
  • An SME who guesses at an answer the records later contradict, which reads as evasion or incompetence.
  • An SME who has to find and read the SOP during the inspection instead of demonstrating command of it.

How to adapt this record

  1. Replace the question bank with the openers most likely in your area (add sterility, aseptic, or chain-of-identity questions as relevant).
  2. Run it inside the mock inspection program, not as a memo the week before.
  3. Re-run any question that scored below 3 after coaching, and record the improved score.
  4. Track coaching actions to closure before the anticipated inspection window.
Use madhadi.com as an app Full screen, works offline, one tap from your home screen.