Service Review Report: [Service name], [Period]
Periodic service level report for one service or a group of services, prepared for a monthly or quarterly service review with the customer or business owner: executive summary, service level agreement (SLA) and service level objective (SLO) attainment, availability and error budget, incidents, major incidents, problems, changes, service requests, capacity and performance, customer satisfaction, supplier performance, risks, and improvement actions with owners. Structure aligned with ISO/IEC 20000-1:2018 with Amendment 1:2024 (the current edition as of October 2026), clause 8.3.3 service level management and clause 9.4 service reporting, with links to clauses 8.2.4, 8.3.2, 8.4.3, 8.7.1, 9.3 and 10.2. Replace every [bracketed] value and every row marked Example.
Document control
| Field | Value |
|---|
| Report ID | [SRR-YYYY-QN-SVC] Example: SRR-2026-Q3-CHK |
| Service(s) | [Service name and catalogue ID] Example: Online checkout (SVC-CHK) |
| Reporting period | YYYY-MM-DD to YYYY-MM-DD Example: 2026-07-01 to 2026-09-30 |
| Version | [1.0] |
| Status | [Draft / Reviewed / Presented / Final] |
| Owner (service level manager) | [@service-level-manager] |
| Approvers/reviewers | [@service-owner], [@customer-representative] |
| Review meeting date | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Agreement reference | [SLA ID and version] Example: SLA-CHK version 3 |
| Data sources | [Monitoring tool, service management tool, survey tool] |
| Last updated | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Classification | [Internal / Customer confidential] |
Approvals
| Role | Name | Decision | Date |
|---|
| Service owner | [@name] | [Approved for presentation] | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Customer or business representative | [@name] | [Accepted / Accepted with comments] | YYYY-MM-DD |
Revision history
| Version | Date | Author | Change summary |
|---|
| 0.1 | YYYY-MM-DD | [@name] | Data extracted and draft written |
| 1.0 | YYYY-MM-DD | [@name] | Example: Presented at the Q3 service review on 2026-10-14 |
| 1.1 | YYYY-MM-DD | [@name] | Example: Corrected service request count after duplicate tickets were removed |
Contents
1. Executive summary
| Item | Summary (Example) |
|---|
| Overall status | Amber: two of three months met the availability target; quarter average 99.940% against a monthly target of 99.900% |
| Main miss | August availability 99.870%, below the 99.900% target, mainly due to major incident INC-3125 (41 minutes of checkout outage) |
| Cause and action | Database failover left stale connections in checkout-api; root cause found (PRB-0042), fix implemented 2026-09-09 (CR-2231), no recurrence since |
| Service credit | Due for August under SLA-CHK section [n]; calculated by finance as [amount] |
| Other highlights | Change failure rate down from 4.55% in Q2 to 3.27%; incident response target met for 97.4% of incidents |
| Decisions requested | Approve funding for the database proxy project PRJ-118 (section 9); agree to move the storage expansion forward to January 2027 |
2. Service level attainment
| ID | Measure | Target | Jul | Aug | Sep | Quarter | Status | Trend vs Q2 |
|---|
| SL-01 (Example) | Checkout availability (monthly) | 99.900% | 99.973% | 99.870% | 99.979% | 99.940% | Missed in Aug | Worse |
| SL-02 (Example) | Incident response within target | 95% | | | | 97.4% (150 of 154) | Met | Same |
| SL-03 (Example) | Incident resolution within target | 90% | | | | 93.5% (144 of 154) | Met | Better |
| SL-04 (Example) | Service requests fulfilled within target | 95% | | | | 96.0% (1,190 of 1,240) | Met | Same |
| SL-05 (Example) | Customer satisfaction (survey) | 85% satisfied | | | | 90.0% (371 of 412) | Met | Better |
| [SL-] | [Measure] | [Target] | | | | [Actual] | [Status] | [Trend] |
SLO view (internal objectives that sit behind the SLA, see dev/slo-doc):
| SLO | Objective (Example) | Quarter result (Example) | Error budget consumed (Example) |
|---|
| Checkout success rate | 99.9% of order submissions succeed over 28 days | Met in 2 of 3 windows | Exhausted in August, recovered in September |
| Checkout latency | 95% of order submissions complete in under 800 ms | Met | 41% |
3. Availability and error budget
Downtime rule (Example): a minute counts as downtime when fewer than 95% of checkout submissions succeed in that minute, measured by synthetic and real-user monitoring. Announced maintenance inside the agreed window is excluded under the SLA maintenance clause and listed separately.
| Month | Minutes in month | Unplanned downtime (min) | Availability | Allowed downtime at 99.9% (min) | Budget consumed |
|---|
| July 2026 (Example) | 44,640 | 12 | 99.973% | 44.6 | 26.9% |
| August 2026 (Example) | 44,640 | 58 | 99.870% | 44.6 | 129.9% |
| September 2026 (Example) | 43,200 | 9 | 99.979% | 43.2 | 20.8% |
| Quarter | 132,480 | 79 | 99.940% | 132.5 | 59.6% |
Availability = 1 minus (unplanned downtime divided by minutes in the period). Allowed downtime = minutes in the period multiplied by 0.1%.
Downtime by cause (Example):
| Incident | Month | Downtime counted (min) | Cause summary |
|---|
| INC-3098 | July | 12 | Payment provider outage, supplier fault |
| INC-3125 | August | 41 | Stale database connections after unplanned failover (PRB-0042) |
| INC-3130 | August | 17 | Expired certificate on internal payment gateway |
| INC-3141 | September | 9 | Supplier network fault at the payment provider |
| INC-3112 | August | 0 (22 minutes excluded, inside announced maintenance window MN-2026-14) | Same cause as INC-3125; reported for transparency |
Error budget policy actions taken (ops/error-budget-policy) (Example): feature releases to checkout paused from 2026-08-22 to 2026-09-10 while reliability work CR-2231 and ALR-077 was completed.
4. Incidents and major incidents
4.1 Incidents by priority
| Priority | Incidents | Response target met | Response % | Resolution target met | Resolution % |
|---|
| P1 (Example) | 1 | 1 | 100.0% | 1 | 100.0% |
| P2 (Example) | 4 | 4 | 100.0% | 3 | 75.0% |
| P3 (Example) | 37 | 36 | 97.3% | 34 | 91.9% |
| P4 (Example) | 112 | 109 | 97.3% | 106 | 94.6% |
| Total | 154 | 150 | 97.4% | 144 | 93.5% |
P2 resolution miss (Example): INC-3141 waited 11 business hours for the payment provider; the supplier target was missed and is covered in section 8.
4.2 Top categories (Example)
| Cause category | Incidents | Share | Comment |
|---|
| Application, functional error | 46 | 29.9% | Mostly promotion code edge cases; problem PRB-0047 opened |
| Identity and access | 38 | 24.7% | Store staff password resets; self-service reset rolled out in September |
| Integration | 27 | 17.5% | Payment and tax service timeouts |
| Infrastructure | 21 | 13.6% | Including the three database and certificate incidents INC-3112, INC-3125 and INC-3130 |
| Other | 22 | 14.3% | |
| Total | 154 | 100.0% | |
4.3 Major incidents
| Incident | Date | Severity | Duration | Customer impact | Postmortem | Problem |
|---|
| INC-3125 (Example) | 2026-08-21 | SEV1 | 41 min | Checkout unavailable for all customers | PM-2026-09, published 2026-08-28 | PRB-0042, closed 2026-10-09 |
| [INC-] | YYYY-MM-DD | [SEV] | [min] | [Impact] | [PM-] | [PRB-] |
5. Problems and known errors
| Measure | Q2 (Example) | Q3 (Example) |
|---|
| Problems opened | 4 | 5 |
| Problems resolved or closed | 3 | 3 |
| Problems open at period end | 4 | 6 |
| Known errors published | 2 | 3 |
| Incidents linked to known errors | 9 | 14 |
| Open problems older than 90 days | 1 | 1 |
| Problem | Title | Priority | Status at period end | Next step |
|---|
| PRB-0042 (Example) | Checkout requests time out after database failover | P2 | Resolved, monitoring (closed 2026-10-09) | Database proxy project PRJ-118 to remove the risk class |
| PRB-0047 (Example) | Promotion codes rejected when basket contains a gift card | P3 | Known error KE-0021 | Fix planned in release 2026.11 |
| [PRB-] | [Title] | [P] | [Status] | [Next step] |
6. Changes
| Measure | Q2 (Example) | Q3 (Example) |
|---|
| Changes implemented | 198 | 214 |
| Standard | 132 (66.7%) | 150 (70.1%) |
| Normal | 58 (29.3%) | 58 (27.1%) |
| Emergency | 8 (4.0%) | 6 (2.8%) |
| Failed changes (incident, backout or unplanned fix) | 9 | 7 |
| Change failure rate | 4.55% | 3.27% |
| Unauthorised changes detected | 0 | 0 |
Changes that caused incidents (Example): CR-2198 (promotion engine release, backed out, INC-3117, P3). The pool configuration change that set up PRB-0042 was made in May 2026, in the previous quarter.
7. Service requests and customer satisfaction
| Measure | Q3 (Example) |
|---|
| Service requests fulfilled | 1,240 |
| Fulfilled within target | 1,190 (96.0%) |
| Fulfilled late | 50 (4.0%) |
| Top request types | Access requests, store device replacement, report extracts |
| Survey responses | 412 |
| Satisfied or very satisfied | 371 (90.0%) |
| Main themes in comments | Faster password resets welcomed; delays on device replacement at two stores |
8. Capacity, performance and suppliers
8.1 Capacity and performance
| Resource | Threshold | Peak or current | Trend | Forecast (Example) | Action |
|---|
| Orders database CPU (peak hour) (Example) | 75% | 68% | +1 point per month | Threshold not reached in the next 6 months at current growth | None; review in Q4 |
| Orders database storage (Example) | 80% | 71% | +2.1 points per month | 80% in about 4.3 months, early February 2027 | Expansion moved forward to January 2027 (decision requested) |
| Checkout latency p95 (Example) | 800 ms | 640 ms | Stable | Not applicable | None |
Detail is kept in the Capacity Plan (ops/capacity-plan).
8.2 Supplier performance
| Supplier | Service | Contracted target | Actual (Example) | Status | Action |
|---|
| [Payment provider] (Example) | Payment authorisation | 99.95% monthly availability; P2 response within 2 hours | Two outages (INC-3098, INC-3141); one response target missed | Missed | Service credit claimed; quarterly supplier review on YYYY-MM-DD |
| [Cloud provider] (Example) | Managed database | Provider SLA | Met | Met | None |
9. Risks, improvement actions and decisions
9.1 Risks
| ID | Risk | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation | Owner |
|---|
| RSK-CHK-03 (Example) | Payment provider outages continue at the Q3 rate | Medium | High | Second payment provider evaluation | [@service-owner] |
| RSK-CHK-05 (Example) | Peak trading in November exceeds tested load | Low | High | Load test at 2x last year's peak before freeze FRZ-01 | [@sre-lead] |
9.2 Improvement actions
| ID | Action | Source | Owner | Due | Status |
|---|
| SIP-031 (Example) | Database proxy project to remove failover risk class | PRB-0042 | [@platform-lead] | 2027-03-31 | Awaiting funding decision |
| SIP-032 (Example) | Certificate expiry monitoring for all internal endpoints | INC-3130 | [@sre-lead] | 2026-10-31 | In progress |
| SIP-033 (Example) | Self-service password reset for store staff | Incident category trend | [@service-desk-lead] | 2026-09-15 | Done |
| [SIP-] | [Action] | [Source] | [@name] | YYYY-MM-DD | [Status] |
9.3 Decisions from the review meeting
| Decision | Made by | Date |
|---|
| Example: Fund PRJ-118 database proxy in Q1 2027 | [Business owner] | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Example: Bring forward storage expansion to January 2027 | [Service owner] | YYYY-MM-DD |
| [Decision] | [@name] | YYYY-MM-DD |
10. Definitions, data sources and references
| Measure | Definition | Source |
|---|
| Availability | 1 minus unplanned downtime minutes divided by minutes in period, downtime per the rule in section 3 | Monitoring tool |
| Response target met | Incident assigned and user contacted within the target for its priority, per ops/incident-management-procedure section 6 | Service management tool |
| Resolution target met | Incident resolved within target for its priority, clock pauses as defined in the procedure | Service management tool |
| Change failure rate | Failed changes divided by changes implemented, per ops/change-enablement-policy section 12 | Change records and pipeline |
| Customer satisfaction | Share of survey responses rating 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale | Survey tool |
| Sections not covered | [List sections removed and why] | |
| Section of this report | ISO/IEC 20000-1:2018 clause | Topic (short original label) |
|---|
| 1, 2 Summary and attainment | 8.3.3 Service level management, 9.4 Service reporting | Report performance against agreed targets |
| 3 Availability | 8.7.1 Service availability management | Monitor availability against requirements |
| 4 Incidents | 8.6.1 Incident management | Incident performance |
| 5 Problems | 8.6.3 Problem management | Problem trends |
| 6 Changes | 8.5.1 Change management | Change performance |
| 7 Requests and satisfaction | 8.6.2 Service request management, 8.3.2 Business relationship management | Requests and customer satisfaction |
| 8 Capacity and suppliers | 8.4.3 Capacity management, 8.3.4 Supplier management | Headroom and supplier performance |
| 9 Actions and decisions | 9.3 Management review, 10.2 Continual improvement | Decisions and improvements |
| Service scope | 8.2.4 Service catalogue management | Services covered by the report |
| Reference | Version or date checked | Use |
|---|
| ISO/IEC 20000-1:2018, Information technology, Service management, Part 1: Service management system requirements, with Amd 1:2024 | Current edition as of October 2026 | Clause numbers above |
Standard and licence note
Structure aligned with ISO/IEC 20000-1:2018 with Amendment 1:2024, clause 8.3.3 service level management and clause 9.4 service reporting, with the related clauses listed in section 10. ISO/IEC 20000-1 is a copyrighted standard: this template cites clause numbers with short original labels only; no text, table or definition is copied. Official text: ISO, purchase or licensed access: https://www.iso.org/standard/70636.html, also sold by national standards bodies. Measures, targets, thresholds and every figure in the worked example are fictional and illustrative, not taken from any standard. All text is original, written for this collection. Check the current edition of any standard you certify against. Template licence: MIT.