Templates and records · ISO 17025 · Clause 7.7.2

ISO 17025 proficiency testing and interlaboratory comparison plan

The comparison with other laboratories that confirms, from the outside, that the laboratory produces results equivalent to those of its peers.

In one sentence

The proficiency testing and interlaboratory comparison plan spreads participation in external schemes over time so that it covers the accredited scope, and its record captures each round, the result obtained, the score against the assigned value and the actions taken after an unsatisfactory result, because clause 7.7.2 of ISO/IEC 17025 requires performance to be monitored by comparison with other laboratories where available and appropriate.

Content reviewed on 17 October 2026

Where the standard requires it: ISO 17025 · Clause 7.7.2 Clauses are cited using the numbering of ISO/IEC 17025:2017, the current edition and the same one the Academy uses.
Type of information: Mandatory record Monitoring of performance against other laboratories (7.7.2), with the data analysed (7.7.3)
Who fills it in: Quality lead with technical management The items are tested as routine work, by the usual staff
When: A plan for the accreditation cycle Reviewed every year and after each unsatisfactory result
How long it is kept: Set by the laboratory The standard requires a retention time to be defined for each record, consistent with contractual and legal obligations (8.4.2). Covering at least the accreditation cycle lets you show the history at every reassessment.

What the standard requires

What ISO 17025 demands and what it leaves to your judgement

Where available and appropriate, the laboratory takes part in proficiency testing or other interlaboratory comparisons. The standard sets no frequency; accreditation bodies apply ILAC policy P9 and expect a plan covering the technical areas of the scope over the accreditation cycle.

The data are analysed and used to control and improve activities. An unsatisfactory result requires the cause to be investigated, the effect on issued results to be assessed and action to be taken.

If no schemes are available, the laboratory must look for alternatives —exchanges with other laboratories, reference materials— and justify its choice.

Read it in context: Ensuring the validity of results, in the ISO 17025 Academy

Structure

Fields the template should include

Technical area, method and parameters covered
Scheme, provider and planned frequency
Round, date and technician performing the test
Laboratory result and assigned value
Score obtained and criterion (for example, z)
Assessment: satisfactory, questionable, unsatisfactory
Investigation and action after results that are not satisfactory
Alternatives where no scheme is available

Example

Example: plan and round for metals in water

Company, people and figures are fictitious: the example only shows what a properly completed record looks like.

Field	Content
Plan 2025-2028	Metals in water: 2 rounds a year · COD and solids: 1 a year · anions: 1 a year
Round	Metals in wastewater scheme, March 2026
Nickel	Result 48.1 µg/L · assigned value 50.0 · z = −0.6 · satisfactory
Zinc	Result 131 µg/L · assigned value 110 · z = 2.4 · questionable
Investigation	Blank contaminated by glassware that had not been acid-washed
Effect	Six weeks of blanks reviewed: within criteria, no effect on issued results
Action	Mandatory acid washing and dedicated glassware for zinc

At the audit

Mistakes auditors commonly flag

Areas of the scope with no participation at all across the cycle.
The proficiency test item is analysed by the best technician with special care.
Questionable results that are not investigated because they are not unsatisfactory.
The effect of an unsatisfactory result on reports already issued is not assessed.
No justification when the laboratory does not take part for lack of a scheme.

In Kimobox

How this record is kept in Kimobox

1Participation in proficiency testing and its results are documented in the system.
2An unsatisfactory result opens a nonconformity with a mandatory root cause and an effectiveness check.
3The trend of results is shown on a dashboard alongside internal quality control.

Frequently asked questions

What people ask us before getting started

What is a z-score?

The difference between the laboratory’s result and the assigned value, divided by the standard deviation for proficiency assessment. It is usually regarded as satisfactory if its absolute value is 2 or less, questionable between 2 and 3, and unsatisfactory above 3.

Is it the same as external quality assessment in a clinical laboratory?

It is the same concept. ISO 15189 calls it external quality assessment and adds clinical specifics, such as using materials that resemble patient samples; it has its own template.

Keep your ISO 17025 records without loose templates

We'll show you the module running with data similar to yours.

Request a demo

Keep exploring

Sources

Where each figure comes from

References to the official text in force. If a standard is revised, this page is updated and the review date says so.

ISO/IEC 17025:2017 — General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories ISO/IEC · November 2017
ILAC Policy Series (P9 on proficiency testing, P10 on metrological traceability) ILAC · Current editions
Entidad Nacional de Acreditación (Spain’s national accreditation body): laboratory accreditation criteria and documents ENAC · Official website, consulted in October 2026