Program & Plan Development

The Annual WVP Plan Evaluation, Step by Step

Chapter 331 requires an annual WVP plan evaluation reported to your governing body. Here is a repeatable process — and the board-ready report it produces — that satisfies the statute.

VIGILO Compliance Editorial Team8 min

The annual WVP plan evaluation is Chapter 331's built-in recurring obligation: the workplace violence prevention committee must evaluate the facility's plan at least annually and report the results to the governing body. It is the single requirement that renews by statute every year — and the documented evaluation, plus proof it reached the board, is what proves your program is alive rather than archived.

Most facilities pass the first survey on the strength of a freshly built program. The annual evaluation is what keeps them passing the second and third. This is the process that makes it repeatable.

#What the statute requires

Texas Health & Safety Code Chapter 331 (added by SB 240, 88th Legislature, 2023) requires the WVP committee to meet at least annually to evaluate the plan and report the results to the facility's governing body. Two distinct obligations live inside that sentence:

  1. The evaluation itself — a substantive committee review of whether the plan is working.
  2. The report to the governing body — a separately documented step proving the board received it.

Surveyors check for both, and the second is the one facilities most often miss. An evaluation done but never reported to the governing body is a frequently cited deficiency, because the board-reporting step is its own statutory requirement. The hospital rule 26 TAC §133.55 (adopted in the Texas Register, Oct. 11, 2024) hard-wires this into the licensure survey.

The recurring nature is the point. The annual evaluation, the annual worksite analysis and training the Joint Commission expects (effective Jan. 1, 2022 for hospitals), and OSHA's periodic program evaluation under Publication 3148 all renew the obligation every year. The program is never "done."

#A repeatable five-step process

Treat the evaluation as a defined annual procedure, not an ad hoc meeting. The same five steps run every year.

#Step 1 — Assemble the evidence

Before the committee meets, gather the year's record:

  • The incident log and trend report — what happened, where it concentrated, what direction it is moving.
  • The worksite analysis and mitigation log — which findings closed, which remain open.
  • Training compliance — rosters reconciled against the full employee and contracted-staff census.
  • Corrective-action status — what the committee committed to last year and whether it closed.
  • Any regulatory changes to Chapter 331, 26 TAC §133.55, PL 2024-10, the Joint Commission standards, or OSHA guidance.

#Step 2 — Evaluate the plan against the evidence

The committee asks the questions a surveyor would ask:

  • Did the plan's prevention controls match where incidents actually occurred?
  • Were worksite-analysis findings followed to closure?
  • Did training reach everyone, on cadence, including contracted staff?
  • Did the post-incident response run every time it was needed?
  • Does the plan still reflect actual floor practice, or has the facility drifted?

#Step 3 — Document findings and decisions

Capture the evaluation in committee minutes that record what was reviewed, what the committee concluded, and what it decided to change. This closing of the loop — showing that data drove a program change — is exactly what the Joint Commission's tracking-and-trending requirement tests.

#Step 4 — Produce the board-ready report

Translate the evaluation into a concise governing-body report. It should state, in executive language: the year's incident trend, the status of corrective actions, training compliance, plan revisions made, and the committee's recommendations. This is the artifact that satisfies the board-reporting obligation — and the one surveyors ask to see.

#Step 5 — Report to the governing body and capture proof

Deliver the report to the board and capture the proof: board minutes referencing the WVP evaluation, or a signed acknowledgment. Without this evidence, the evaluation is unprovable no matter how thorough it was.

#What the evaluation produces

OutputWhere it livesWhy it matters
Evaluation minutesCommittee minutes tab of the binderProves the committee evaluated the plan
Updated plan versionPlan tab; version-control blockShows the program responds to its own data
Closed corrective actionsMitigation logDemonstrates findings reach closure
Board-ready reportAnnual evaluation tabSatisfies the governing-body obligation
Board minutes / signed reportAnnual evaluation tabProves the report reached the board

These outputs flow directly into the survey-readiness binder at the annual-evaluation tab — the tab surveyors open to confirm the program is current.

#Common deficiencies

DeficiencyWhy it's cited
Evaluation done but never reported to the governing bodyBoard reporting is a distinct statutory obligation
No minutes proving the committee evaluated the planWithout minutes the evaluation is unprovable
Evaluation is a formality with no plan changes"Evaluate" implies acting on findings, not rubber-stamping
No proof the board received the reportBoard minutes or a signed report are required evidence
Evaluation lapses past the 12-month mark"At least annually" is a hard cadence

#Making it sustainable

The annual evaluation is only as reliable as the committee that runs it and the cadence that carries it. A committee that meets quarterly and minutes its work arrives at the annual evaluation with the evidence already assembled — which is why a functioning committee makes the evaluation almost automatic. See our guide to standing up a WVP committee that functions.

Because the obligation renews by law every year, the evaluation belongs inside a maintained WVP program of record that puts it on the calendar and never lets it lapse. VIGILO runs the annual plan evaluation and produces the governing-body report through the annual program reviews subscription, converting the statute's annual obligation into a managed, recurring deliverable. A focused survey-readiness audit can confirm whether your last evaluation would survive a tracer.

For the statutory text, see the HSC Chapter 331 requirements page.


Primary sources: Texas Health & Safety Code Chapter 331 (SB 240, 2023); 26 TAC §133.55 (Texas Register, Oct. 11, 2024); The Joint Commission workplace violence prevention requirements (EC/HR/LD, effective Jan. 1, 2022 for hospitals); OSHA Publication 3148.

From this article

Frequently asked questions

What is the annual plan evaluation required under Chapter 331?

Texas HSC Chapter 331 requires the workplace violence prevention committee to evaluate the facility's WVP plan at least annually and report the results to the facility's governing body. It is a recurring statutory obligation — the program must demonstrate this evaluation and the board report every year.

Who performs the annual WVP plan evaluation?

The Chapter 331 WVP committee performs the evaluation, drawing on incident trend data, worksite-analysis findings, training compliance, and corrective-action status. The committee then reports the evaluation results to the governing body, which is a distinct and separately documented step.

What happens if the evaluation is done but never reported to the board?

Performing the evaluation but failing to report it to the governing body is a commonly cited deficiency, because Chapter 331 makes board reporting a separate statutory obligation. Surveyors look for board minutes or a signed report proving the evaluation reached the governing body within the last 12 months.

Turn this guidance into a survey-ready program

VIGILO builds, documents, and maintains the workplace violence prevention program of record — committee, written plan, training, and binder — aligned to Chapter 331, the Joint Commission, and OSHA.

CallRequest an Audit