Working at height risk assessment template

A work-at-height risk assessment should first ask whether the task can be done without working at height. If it cannot, record how falls will be prevented; where a fall risk remains, record how its distance and consequences will be minimised. Include access and egress, fragile surfaces, falling objects, weather, equipment, supervision and rescue. Use the blank form below for the actual site and task. It is not a completed approval for every ladder, roof or platform job.

The legal concept of “work at height” is not limited to a fixed two-metre threshold. HSE explains that it means work where a person could fall a distance liable to cause injury if precautions were absent, including through a fragile roof. A fall into an opening at floor level can therefore matter. The assessor should plan the work, choose suitable equipment and consider people below as well as the person above.

This form has a distinct purpose from the live work-at-height toolbox talk, which is a briefing, the working-at-height checker, which is a self-check, and the general risk assessment template. It supplies the activity-specific decision record those pages do not replace. Any new route still needs a repository and unpublished-owner check.

Decide the work method before choosing PPE

Start with the work, duration, frequency and surface. Can equipment be installed from the ground, a lighting unit lowered, or a part assembled at ground level and lifted into place? HSE's step-by-step guide orders controls as avoid, prevent and then minimise a fall. Collective protection such as guardrails and suitable work platforms normally takes priority over personal protection that depends on individual action.

Do not prescribe a harness for every task or ban ladders in all circumstances. HSE says ladders and stepladders can be sensible for low-risk, short-duration tasks when the assessment shows they are suitable and workers use them safely. A prolonged two-handed job, heavy load or unstable support may require a tower, scaffold, MEWP or redesigned method. Specialist equipment adds its own inspection, competence and rescue decisions; this generic form points to those records rather than reproducing them.

Copyable work-at-height assessment

A. Job and location

B. Height-control decision

The answer should say where the guardrail, platform, exclusion zone or anchor will be, who checks it, and what is known about its suitability. “Harness and PPE” is not a hierarchy analysis.

C. Hazard and action table

Mark a missing critical control as stop and resolve, not “low risk”. If your organisation uses a risk matrix, record the assumptions behind it and the risk after controls are actually put in place.

D. Rescue and emergency arrangements

Do not write “call 999” as the whole rescue plan. Emergency services may be needed, but a foreseeable trapped or suspended worker requires an arrangement that can be initiated by people and equipment available on site. A MEWP task should link to its ground-controls rescue method; a fall-arrest system needs a site-specific retrieval plan; a fragile-roof operation needs controls that prevent entry onto the surface where possible.

E. Briefing and review

Record which workers were briefed, the current method and equipment revision, who checks controls at the start, and who can stop work. Review after a changed task/location, new hole or fragile panel, altered access, weather, new trade, equipment defect, near miss or failed control. Signatures should show a real discussion and confirmation of action, not merely attendance.

Three common decisions explained

Is a ladder allowed?

Yes, where a competent assessment finds it suitable for low-risk, short-duration work and it can be used safely. HSE's hierarchy guide gives that qualified position. Confirm the ladder type, stable footing, condition, safe angle/securement where relevant, contact points, the need to carry tools and whether the worker will overreach. If the task needs forceful or lengthy two-handed work, redesign the method or choose an appropriate platform. Do not use “ladders are prohibited” or “ladders are always fine” as a blanket rule.

What if the roof might be fragile?

Treat it as fragile until reliable information shows otherwise. Avoid access by working from below or from a suitable platform where possible. If access remains necessary, the specialist plan must address load spreading, edge protection, fall-prevention or mitigation and rescue. HSE roof guidance warns that rooflights and materials that look sound can fail. Do not infer safe access from an old drawing or another worker's footsteps.

Does a fall-arrest harness solve it?

No. It is a personal measure that depends on a suitable anchor, clearance, equipment compatibility, training, inspection and rescue. Prefer preventing the fall where reasonably practicable. A guardrail or properly selected platform may protect everyone without requiring each worker to connect correctly. If fall arrest is justified, document the system and retrieval method rather than writing only “wear harness”.

Example: replacing a high-level light fitting

A maintenance worker is asked to replace a light in a warehouse above a pedestrian route. The team first checks if the fitting can be lowered for maintenance; it cannot. The initial proposal is a ladder, but the task requires two hands for longer than a brief action and the floor area is used by pallet trucks. The assessor chooses a suitable work platform after confirming the floor and access route, separates the area from pedestrians, arranges equipment inspection and competence, and briefs the crew. The rescue method is checked for that platform. When stock is moved under the job and blocks the safe route, work pauses until the exclusion and access arrangements are restored.

The example does not choose the platform model, load rating or rescue equipment for a real site. Those are task-specific checks.

Where Complys fits

Use a controlled assessment to link the chosen work method, hazard controls, action owners, briefing and review. The risk assessment software page describes assessment records; work-at-height software presents the broader product area. These pages should not be interpreted as automating equipment selection, structural capacity, anchor certification or rescue approval. Verify feature and commercial claims against implementation before any stronger CTA.

Next step: fill the hierarchy decision before selecting equipment, verify the site-specific controls and rescue, and have the competent supervisor brief and approve the completed assessment before work starts.

Source, claim and writer-side QA register — checked 5 October 2026

Cannibalisation: general risk form, toolbox talk, checker and software page have distinct intents; no exact fillable work-at-height form observed. Confirm current repository/unpublished owners and proposed route. Product truth: no automatic equipment, anchor or rescue certification claim. Jurisdiction: GB Work at Height Regulations context. Links/CTA: observed .co.uk assessment and work-at-height pages; verify current product/canonical. Writer-side QA: fillable form, hierarchy decision, dropped objects, fragility and rescue, practical example, primary-source register and specialist gate included. Independent whole-page QA remains outstanding.