Impartiality Policy

Impartiality is fundamental to the value of certification. CAS Conformity Assessment Services (“CAS”) and its top management are committed to acting impartially in all certification activities, and to being seen to do so. Certification decisions are based on objective evidence of conformity (or non-conformity) obtained through competent assessment — never on commercial pressure, personal relationships, or any other interest.

This commitment is made by top management and applies to every member of CAS personnel, every committee, and every person acting on CAS’s behalf.

We understand impartiality as the presence of objectivity: conflicts of interest do not exist, or are resolved so as not to adversely influence our activities. We protect it through the principles of objectivity, independence, freedom from bias and from conflicts of interest, fairness, open-mindedness, even-handedness, and balance.

CAS identifies and analyses the threats to its impartiality on an ongoing basis, including those that arise from its relationships. These include:

• Self-interest — threats arising from a person or body acting in its own financial or other interest.
• Self-review — we do not certify a management system on which we (or a related body) provided consultancy.
• Familiarity (or trust) — threats from being too familiar with, or too trusting of, a client; auditor assignments are rotated accordingly.
• Intimidation — threats from a client or other party deterring us from acting objectively.
• Relationship threats — from related bodies, outsourced parties, resellers, agencies, or personnel.

• No consultancy. CAS does not offer or provide management-system consultancy. We do not certify a system on which CAS, or any related body, has provided consultancy.
• No internal auditing of clients. CAS does not provide internal audits to its certified clients.
• Marketing & sales separation. We do not market or offer our activities as linked with the activities of an organisation that provides management-system consultancy, and we take action to correct any false claim by a consultancy that certification would be simpler, easier or cheaper through CAS.
• Personnel independence. Personnel and contracted auditors declare any prior or current relationship with a client; they are not assigned where a relationship could compromise impartiality (a cooling-off period applies after consultancy/employment relationships).
• Decisions separated from audit. The person(s) making the certification decision are different from those who carried out the audit.
• Finances. Our income does not depend on a single client to a degree that would threaten impartiality, and remuneration of personnel involved in certification does not depend on the number or outcome of audits.

CAS operates a structured mechanism — an impartiality committee — that brings together a balance of interests so that no single interest predominates. The committee has the right to take independent action (up to and including informing the accreditation body) if CAS management does not respect the requirement for impartiality. It advises on:

• the policies and principles relating to the impartiality of certification;
• any tendency on the part of CAS to allow commercial or other considerations to prevent the consistent objective provision of certification; and
• matters affecting confidence in certification, including openness and public perception.

CAS reviews its impartiality risks, relationships, and the effectiveness of these safeguards regularly, and whenever a new relationship or activity could introduce a new threat. Findings feed into management review and, where needed, into corrective action.