Form 5A Scope of Project Services Review
Form 5A Scope of Project Services Review is a compliance review form for confirming that every in-scope service and delivery mode is listed accurately for HRSA reporting. Use it to catch missing services, undocumented telehealth, and scope changes before submission.
Trusted by frontline teams 15 years of frontline software AI customization in seconds
Built for: Community Health Centers · Federally Qualified Health Centers · Primary Care Clinics · Behavioral Health Providers · Public Health Organizations
Overview
Form 5A Scope of Project Services Review is a compliance review template for checking whether the services and delivery modes listed in Form 5A match what a site actually provides. It gives reviewers a structured way to confirm the review period, identify the project and site, verify in-scope services, and document any gaps or changes that need follow-up.
Use this template when you need a repeatable internal check before HRSA submission, after a service expansion, when telehealth is added or changed, or when multiple sites need the same scope review process. The form is especially useful when service descriptions are maintained by different teams and the reviewer needs a single place to compare the approved scope against current operations.
Do not use it as a substitute for the underlying scope documentation or as a place to collect unrelated operational data. If the review is only for a narrow site update, keep the fields focused on that site and use conditional logic so reviewers do not see irrelevant sections. The form should also avoid collecting unnecessary PII; the reviewer name and role are usually enough for accountability. When completed well, the template leaves a clear audit trail showing what was checked, what was missing, and whether follow-up is required.
Standards & compliance context
- This template supports HRSA scope review workflows by documenting what was checked, what was missing, and who completed the review.
- Keep data collection limited to the minimum necessary for the review, consistent with GDPR Article 5 data minimization and general privacy principles.
- If the form is used in a public-facing or shared workflow, make labels, validation, and navigation accessible in line with WCAG 2.1 AA.
- Use clear attestation language so the reviewer understands what they are confirming before submission.
- Avoid collecting unnecessary PII in reviewer notes or change descriptions unless it is required for the compliance record.
General regulatory context for orientation only — verify current requirements with counsel or the relevant agency before relying on this template for compliance.
What's inside this template
Review Overview
This section establishes the review period, reviewer, and timing so the compliance record is traceable.
- Review title
- Review date
- Review period start
- Review period end
- Reviewer name
- Reviewer role
Project and Site Information
This section ties the review to the correct project, site, and service area before any scope checks begin.
- Project name
- Site name
- Site type
-
Service area counties
List counties or equivalent service area descriptors only if needed for the review.
In-Scope Services Review
This section confirms whether every in-scope service is listed accurately and whether any descriptions need correction.
- Services reviewed
- Are all in-scope services listed on Form 5A?
-
If no, describe the missing in-scope services
List only the services that are missing from the current Form 5A.
- Are service descriptions accurate and sufficiently specific?
Modes of Delivery Review
This section verifies how services are delivered, including telehealth, so the scope record matches actual operations.
- Modes of delivery verified
- Are all applicable modes of delivery documented?
-
If no, describe the missing or incorrect modes of delivery
Include the service name and the specific mode of delivery that needs correction.
- If telehealth is used, is it documented appropriately?
Exceptions and Changes
This section captures out-of-scope items and recent changes so reviewers can explain differences from the prior review.
- Are any out-of-scope items listed on Form 5A?
- If yes, describe the out-of-scope items
- Have there been changes since the last review?
- If yes, summarize the changes
Attestation and Submission
This section records the reviewer’s confirmation and any follow-up needed so the review ends with an actionable outcome.
- I attest that this review accurately reflects the current Form 5A scope of project services.
- Is follow-up or correction needed?
- If yes, describe the follow-up needed
How to use this template
- Enter the review title, date, review period, and reviewer identity so the record clearly shows when the scope check was performed and by whom.
- Select the project name, site name, site type, and service area counties so the review is tied to the correct location and scope context.
- Compare the current Form 5A service list against the services actually delivered, then mark which in-scope services were reviewed and note any missing items or description mismatches.
- Verify each delivery mode in use, including telehealth if applicable, and record any gaps where the mode is missing or not documented accurately.
- Flag any out-of-scope items or recent changes, summarize what changed since the last review, and assign follow-up actions before submitting the attestation.
Best practices
- Use conditional logic so telehealth questions appear only when telehealth is actually part of the site’s delivery model.
- Mark required fields only where the review cannot be completed without them, and keep optional fields clearly labeled.
- Write service descriptions in the same language used in the approved scope documents so reviewers can compare them line by line.
- Record changes since the last review as soon as they are identified, rather than waiting until the final attestation step.
- Use a date picker for review dates and structured fields for counties and service types instead of free-text where consistency matters.
- Keep the review focused on in-scope services and delivery modes; do not add unrelated operational questions that slow completion.
- If a gap is found, document the follow-up owner and next action in the form so the review produces a usable audit trail.
What this template typically catches
Issues teams running this template most often surface in practice:
Common use cases
Frequently asked questions
What is Form 5A Scope of Project Services Review used for?
This template is used to verify that Form 5A reflects the services and delivery modes actually provided within the project scope. It helps reviewers compare the current service list against what is documented for the site and catch omissions before submission. The form also creates a clear review record for follow-up and attestation.
Who should complete this review form?
It is typically completed by a compliance lead, project manager, or operations reviewer who understands the site’s approved scope. A reviewer should be able to confirm service descriptions, delivery modes, and any changes since the last review. If the site has multiple programs or locations, the person completing it should coordinate with service owners before signing off.
How often should this review be done?
Use it on a regular cadence tied to your internal compliance cycle and any time scope changes are introduced. It is especially useful before HRSA-related submission deadlines and after service expansions, site changes, or telehealth updates. If your organization changes services frequently, review it more often so gaps do not accumulate.
What counts as a common scope gap on this form?
Common gaps include a service that is being delivered but is not listed, a delivery mode such as telehealth that is missing, or an outdated description that no longer matches practice. Another frequent issue is listing an out-of-scope item without clearly marking it as excluded. This template is designed to surface those mismatches in a structured way.
Does this template help with compliance documentation?
Yes, it creates an audit trail showing what was reviewed, who reviewed it, and what follow-up is needed. That record is useful when you need to demonstrate that scope was checked before submission or update. It also supports consistent internal controls by making review steps and attestation explicit.
Can I customize the service and delivery mode fields?
Yes, the template is meant to be adapted to your project’s actual service list and site structure. You can add conditional logic for telehealth, specialty services, or site-specific exceptions so reviewers only see relevant fields. Keep the wording aligned with the approved scope and avoid adding unnecessary PII.
What integrations or workflow steps work well with this form?
This form works well with task assignment, approval routing, and document storage so the review result is easy to track. You can also connect it to a change log or follow-up workflow when gaps are found. If your team uses a shared compliance system, store the completed review alongside the source scope documents.
How is this better than doing the review in email or a spreadsheet?
A structured form reduces missed fields, inconsistent wording, and unclear ownership. It also standardizes the review process so every site is checked against the same criteria. Compared with ad hoc email threads, it produces a cleaner record of what was verified, what was missing, and what needs action.
Related templates
Go deeper on the topic
-
Lockout/tagout (LOTO) is the procedure for controlling hazardous energy — electrical, hydraulic, pneumatic, mechanical, thermal, chemical — before...
-
Job hazard analysis (JHA) — also called job safety analysis (JSA) — is the structured exercise of breaking a work task into sequential steps, identifying the...
-
A near-miss is an event that could have caused injury or damage but didn't — a slip that didn't fall, a load that shifted but didn't drop, a machine that...
-
AI governance is the framework a company uses to decide what AI tools are allowed to do, who's accountable for their outputs, what data they're allowed to...
-
Learn how AI-driven workflows close compliance gaps in hiring, field inspections, and compensation — before they become audit findings.
-
Spring '26 adds real-time Google & Outlook calendar sync, Google Workspace file creation in Files, upgraded Messenger, and expanded mobile parity.
-
Learn how nonprofit tracking of KPIs, donations, and operational workflows reduces turnover and improves decision-making with the right knowledge management...
-
Compare the best employee apps of 2026—MangoApps, Blink, WorkJam, Flip, and more—to find the right fit for your frontline workforce.
Ready to use this template?
Get started with MangoApps and use Form 5A Scope of Project Services Review with your team — pricing built for small business.
