Introduction. The growing market of cosmetology services is accompanied by the expansion of invasive techniques, which requires strict safety control. However, internal quality and safety control of medical activities remains fragmented in most clinics, and a differentiated risk management approach is lacking. Aim. To develop and substantiate a classification of cosmetic procedures based on their degree of invasiveness and associated risk, and to evaluate its applicability as a foundation for differentiated internal quality and safety control of medical activities within an organization providing cosmetic services. Materials and methods. A retrospective study (2020–2025) in a private medical organization. Procedures, medical records, and standard operating procedures (SOPs) were analyzed. Services were grouped by invasiveness level and clustered by risk degree (C1 – high, C2 – increased, C3 – standard, C4 – minimal). Results. The proportion of high-risk (C1) and increased-risk (C2) procedures was 17.5%, standard-risk (C3) – 49.37%, minimal-risk (C4) – 33.13%. The registered complication rate was 4.24%. The most frequent complications were dissatisfaction with the outcome (36.32% of all complications), allergic reactions (24.29%), infectious complications and pigmentation disorders (15.09% each). Lack of SOPs for high-risk procedures (fillers, mesothreads, laser resurfacing) and documentation defects (absence of device parameters in 60% of records, implant serial numbers in 40%) were identified. Discussion. Systemic problems of internal control include absence of complication reporting, low safety culture, lack of standardization, and insufficient patient information, especially in high-risk clusters. Conclusion. A classification of cosmetology procedures by invasiveness and risk level has been developed and validated. Nine procedure groups and four risk clusters were identified: minimal (33.13% of services), standard (49.37%), increased (13.02%), and high (4.46%). Procedures of increased and high risk account for 17.5% of the volume but contribute to 4.24% of all complications, with 36.32% of them being patient dissatisfaction. Systemic internal control defects were found: lack of SOPs for high-risk interventions (fillers, mesothreads, laser resurfacing), low safety culture, missing device parameters in 60% of records, implant serial numbers in 40%, and informed consent signatures in 35%. The proposed classification enables a differentiated approach to internal quality control, focusing on high-risk areas.