Peer reviews of MIKES, CMI, SMU and GUM Quality Management Systems

Project Description

All the NMIs and DIs participating CIPM MRA must operate a QMS to support their calibration activities. The QMS must comply with the requirements of ISO/IEC 17025 and ISO Guide 34 (if applicable).
This project of QMS peer reviews will support the development and improvement of QMS processes, and evaluation of QMSs of participating institutes. Learning from each other and sharing the best practice for QMS implementation are also the goals of the project. A peer review programme with visits by metrological experts will be planned on an annual basis.
Expenses of peer review visits will be based on the following principles:

  • no invoices will be sent
  • hotel will be arranged and paid by the host
  • working hours, flights, daily allowances etc. will be paid by the sending NMI

Progress Report 2019-09-04

Eight peer review visits were carried out during the reported period. Results of the peer reviews, such as non-conformities and recommendations, were reported in separate reports. The peer reviews and their main results were also reported in the EURAMET TC-Q meeting in April 2019. The peer review visits were considered useful and the results supported well continuous improvement of Quality Management Systems of the participating institutes. The project is on-going and the peer review programme for 2019 and forthcoming years is under discussion and development.


Progress Report 2018-07-23

Eleven peer reviews were performed during the reported period. The results of peer reviews, such as non-conformities and recommendations, were reported in separate reports. The reviews and their main results were also reported in the EURAMET TC-Q meeting in April 2018. The project is on-going and the peer review programme for 2018 and forthcoming years is under discussion and development.


Progress Report 2017-06-29

Nine peer reviews were made during the reported period. The results of the peer reviews, such as non-conformities and recommendations, were reported in separate reports. The reviews and their main results were also reported in the EURAMET TC-Q meeting in April 2017. The project is on-going and the peer review programme for 2017 and forthcoming years is under discussion and development.


Progress Report 2016-05-04

Six peer review visits were made during the reported period. The results of the peer reviews, suchas non-conformities and recommendations, were reported in separate reports. The reviews andtheir main results were also reported in the EURAMET TC-Q meeting in April 2016. The project ison-going and the peer review programme for 2016 and forthcoming years is under preparation.


Progress Report 2015-07-02

Fourteen peer reviews were made during the reported period. The results of the peer review visits,such as non-conformities and recommendations, were reported in separate reports. These reviewsand their main results were also reported in the EURAMET TC-Q meeting in March 2015. Theproject is on-going and the peer review programme for 2015 and forthcoming years is underpreparation.


Progress Report 2014-09-03

In total, eight peer review visits were made during the reported period. The results of the peer reviews, such as non-conformities and recommendations, were reported in separate reports. The peer reviews and their main results were also reported in the EURAMET TC-Q meeting in April 2014. The project is on-going and the peer review programme for 2014 and forthcoming years is under preparation and discussion.  


Progress Report 2013-10-25

In total,eight peer review visits were made during the reported period. The results of the peer reviews, such as non-conformities and recommendations, were reported in separate reports. The peer reviews and their main results were also reported in the EURAMET TC-Q meeting in March 2013. The project is on-going and the peer review programme for 2013 and forthcoming years is under preparation and discussion.

Progress Report 2012-11-08

The project was very active during the reported period. In total 16 peer reviews were made. The results of the peer reviews, such as non-conformities and recommendations, were reported in separate reports. The peer reviews and their main results were also reported to EURAMET TC-Q in its meeting in March 2012. The project is on-going and some more peer review visits for the year 2012 have been agreed between the project partners


Progress Report 2011-06-09

Two QMS peer review visits were carried out during 2010. Mr. Jan Otych from CMI reviewed GUM’s Humidity metrology activities on 3-5 November 2010, and Dr. Radek Strnad from CMI reviewed SMU’s Temperature metrology activities on 23 November 2010. Results of the both reviews were given in separate reports. The participating institutes have considered the peer review visits useful because of change of views and recommendations for QMS improvement. Discussions about quality and technical matters with external experts have been the most successful parts of the visits. The peer review programme for 2011 is under preparation and discussion. The project year 2011 seems to be active: in addition to new peer review visits, some planned visits were postponed from 2010 to 2011.


Progress Report 2010-07-2010

The project started with pilot reviews in 2008. Then the main quality documents of MIKES were reviewed by Ms. Jana Meistrova, Quality Manager of CMI, and the main quality documents of CMI were reviewed by Ms. Jaana Järvinen, Quality Manager of MIKES. Pressure Laboratory of MIKES was visited and reviewed by Dr. Jiri Tesar from CMI on 27-28 May 2008. Length activities of CMI were visited and reviewed by Dr. Antti Lassila from MIKES on 10-11 June 2008. Also quality documents and Pressure Laboratory of SMU were reviewed by Ms. Jana Meistrova and Dr. Jiri Tesar on 3-5 December 2008. Experts from SMU, Quality Manager Anna Mathiasova and Dr. Peter Vrabcek reviewed quality documents and DC electrical quantities and quantum of CMI on 8-10 December 2008. All the review results were given in separate reports for internal use. The results were also reported in QMS re-evaluation presentations of CMI and MIKES at TC-Q meeting in February 2009. The results of these first peer reviews were so engouraging that it was decided to continue the visits under the registered EURAMET TC-Q project.

Two QMS peer reviews were carried out in 2009. DC electrical quantities of MIKES were visited and reviewed by Mr. Jiri Streit from CMI on 1-2 October 2009. The Mass Laboratory of CMI was visited and reviewed by Dr. Kari Riski from MIKES on 26 October 2009. The review results of these reviews were given in reports.
The peer reviews have been useful and motivating for the reviewed institutes as well as to the reviewers. Recommendations for improvement, change of views, and discussions about technical matters with external reviewers have been the most fruitful parts of the visits. The review results have supported the CMCs of the institutes and operation of QMSs according to the requirements of the CIPM MRA. The peer review programme for 2010 is under preparation.  

Subjects
Quality (Q)
Coordinating Institute
MIKES (Finland)