Do you need OSH software if you already use an external prevention service in Spain?
Using an external prevention service addresses an essential part of occupational risk management in Spain. The company receives advice and technical services under its agreement, then needs to translate the resulting decisions into everyday operations. The software question concerns coordination: actions, owners, deadlines and evidence shared between the service and internal teams.
Not every company needs another application. The decision depends on what the provider’s portal already supports, organisational complexity and existing follow-up problems. Start by examining unfinished work before comparing software packages or assuming that a separate system will automatically improve the process.
Which responsibilities remain with the employer?
Article 14.4 of Spain’s Occupational Risk Prevention Act establishes that using specialist organisations does not remove the employer’s duty of protection. The Regulations for Prevention Services govern service agreements and the activities undertaken by the provider, which also retains its own professional responsibilities.
Review the actual contract first: disciplines, covered sites, activities, follow-up and exclusions. The Explora entry on prevention services explains this framework. Avoid assigning uncontracted tasks to the provider or assuming that internal implementation is complete simply because a technical report has been delivered.
From a technical report to an implemented action
Consider an illustrative assessment recommending improved separation of pedestrians and vehicles in a warehouse. The external service assesses the risk and recommends action within its remit. The company must organise decisions, resources and implementation with the people competent to undertake and review the work.
To track the process, each action needs its source report, owner, priority, deadline and evidence. Closure requires an appropriate check, involving the external service where relevant. A photograph of completed work can form part of the evidence, but it does not answer every technical question on its own.
The Explora entry on planning preventive activity explains the connection between risk, action and follow-up. Software can provide the environment in which the company organises this workflow, provided that the contracted solution covers the requirements defined for its operation.
When a company’s own system may add value
The potential value grows when several departments participate, sites have different owners or documents arrive from multiple specialists. It also increases when one action involves maintenance, purchasing, training and supervisors, but no one has a shared view of the outstanding work and decisions.
Before buying, test whether your existing tool can assign tasks, track changes, restrict access and retrieve useful information. If it already supports these processes sustainably, introducing another application may create duplication. Where internal coordination is missing, define that specific problem as the purchasing scope and evaluate proposals against it.
Agree how collaboration will work
- Document source: decide where the current technical version is kept and how it is identified.
- Responsibilities: distinguish recommendation, resource approval, execution and verification.
- Changes: define how new tasks, equipment, incidents or site changes are communicated.
- Access: restrict shared information to what each intervention requires.
- Follow-up: establish when outstanding actions and technical questions will be reviewed.
Do not assume that applications integrate automatically. Proposed data exchanges need defined formats, frequency and update responsibilities. If the process is manual, identify who uploads records and how contradictory versions will be prevented. The chosen arrangement should be clear to both the provider and the internal process owner.
The Explora entry on digital evidence in occupational risk prevention helps define what to retain. The history of decisions and implementation should remain understandable when a responsible person changes or the company appoints a different external prevention service.
Focus the demonstration on your prevention model
Bring a fictional case involving a technical recommendation and two internal departments. Ask to follow assignment, a deadline change, evidence submission and status review. Check what the external provider can see and which information remains restricted to the company. Include an unresolved technical question to test the handover between teams.
Connect this decision to the total cost of the software and the implementation plan. When exploring Sabentis OSH software, explain your prevention arrangement and the contracted service scope. A useful proposal shows how coordination and execution can support the responsibilities your organisation needs to manage.
A practical checklist for company–provider coordination
Before introducing another application, review the handovers between the external prevention service and your company. These checks help avoid ownerless tasks and conflicting versions of reports or preventive actions.
- Select a recent recommendation and confirm that someone within the company has accepted responsibility for arranging its implementation.
- Identify work changes that must be reported to the service and who can request a technical review.
- Clarify how uncertain interpretations of a report are resolved without unilaterally changing the specialist’s original document.
- Check that temporary replacement of a specialist or supervisor allows follow-up to continue with access to the necessary background.
- Review which information and tasks must be transferred if the prevention service changes, including actions that remain open.
Frequently asked questions about software and external prevention services
Does hiring an external service delegate all prevention responsibilities?
No. Article 14.4 of Spain’s Prevention Act retains the employer’s duty of protection when specialist organisations are used. The service has its own obligations under the agreement. Software should reflect that distribution, without treating measures as implemented merely because advice has been received.
Must the company use the prevention service’s software?
The existence of a service agreement does not itself determine a single application for all internal management. Review the agreed terms and information exchange. An internal tool may improve coordination, provided that the two systems do not maintain conflicting versions of the same preventive action.
Who may close an action originating in a technical report?
The procedure should define this according to the measure and the competence needed to verify it. An operational owner can supply evidence, but some closures require technical assessment. Software configuration should respect that allocation and retain a record of who performed each necessary check.
What should be retained when changing prevention service providers?
Necessary reports and records, their context and outstanding actions, subject to applicable retention and access obligations. Prepare an inventory and appoint a transfer owner. Health information requires specific treatment and should not be indiscriminately added to an archive accessible to supervisors or administrative staff.
Legislation and sources consulted
- Spain: Occupational Risk Prevention Act 31/1995: Spain, Articles 14, 22 and 23: employer duties, confidentiality in health surveillance and preventive documentation.
- Spain: Royal Decree 39/1997 on prevention services: Spain, Article 20: content of agreements with external prevention services and the scope of activities they undertake.
Sources consulted on 6 October 2026. Checklists and examples are practical implementation proposals.
