Food Safety System Certification Case study 4 Integrity Program. Karen Smedley IP Assessor

Transcription

1 Food Safety System Certification Case study 4 Integrity Program Karen Smedley IP Assessor

2 Content Integrity Program Top 5 findings KPI s Case study

3 Focus during this case study session Understanding the Integrity Program Reducing NC s Improving CB performance

4 Integrity Program Team

5 Integrity Program Assessors Angelie Jansen Robert Readel Karen Smedley The Netherlands USA Australia Europe & Africa Americas Asia-Pacific Office Assessments Witness Audits Office Assessments Witness Audits Desk Reviews Office Assessments Desk Reviews Auditor Reviews Scope Reviews

6 IP and Sanction Team Cindy Smolder-van Velzen Marleen de Valk Nienke de Haan Aldin Hilbrands IP Officer IP Officer IP Manager Technical Director Gorinchem Gorinchem Gorinchem Gorinchem

7 Sanction and Appeals Committees Sanctions are reviewed independently and anonymously from the IP team Members of these committees are from the Board of Stakeholders (BoS) Chaired by Fons Schmid

8 Integrity Program

9 Integrity Program The following specific requirements are subject to the FSSC Sanction Policy: Application by CB and accreditation gained within one year; Payment of fees; Participation in Harmonization Day; Review of issued CB certificates on scope and category; Participation in annual enquiry; Participation in IP Desk Reviews and auditor reviews; Participation in IP CB Office audits and witness audits; Providing the necessary information for the measuring of CB KPIs.

10 Process for Desk Reviews

11 Process for Desk Reviews Corrective action plan Corrective action Evidence of corrective action Auditor related documents to upload into Auditor Register

12 Desk Review Findings

13 2017 Issues Driving Sanction Policy Not uploading documents for desk reviews within the timeframe Not responding to warnings Not closing Desk Reviews/Office Audit findings by the due date Not paying the invoice on time

14 2017 Issues Driving Sanction Policy Having received multiple Yellow Cards within 2 years Failing to adequately respond to a Yellow card

15 Documents for Desk Reviews Document Certificate Client Contract Audit Calculation Audit Report Technical Expert CV FSSC Waivers Comments Signed by CB and Client, additional translation if needed V4.1 changes Evidence of # HACCP studies, FTE, existing certifications etc. Stage 1 and stage 2 for initial audit Surveillance and recertification Follow-up audit reports if Major NC s result in visit Audit Plans for stage 1 and stage 2 If applicable If applicable

16 Documents for CB Office Assessments In addition to the Desk Review documents - Training records of other CB personnel: Planners ViaSyst data entry staff Certification committee Certification Committee minutes FSSC Licence(s) Accreditation Certificates QMS procedures etc. QMS records (MR, IA, CA etc.)

17 Key Performance Indicators

18 Key Performance Indicators % auditors meeting 5 GFSI per year % certificates entered within 4 weeks % audits with correct audit duration

19 5 GFSI per year Common finding for auditor maintenance in DR/OA/AR assessments ADS not completed with all team members If < 5 FSSC audits then Other GFSI Audits needs to be populated up to 5 GFSI per year From 1/1/18 it is 5 FSSC audits per year per auditor

20 Certificate Entry Effectiveness viewed during OA

21 Audit Duration Over 100 DR findings in 2017 Lack of justification if < than minimum time Lack of including FSSC time Not including stage 1 audit time when stage 2 report created in ADS Not including all team members during ADS upload

22 Case Study

23 Case Study Use the non-conformities from case study 2 prepare a Corrective Action Plan to address the findings In a team discuss: How you would approach this? What would you enter in ViaSyst in response to the findings? 15 minutes to discuss 15 minutes to develop a CAP Elect someone to document the CAP Elect someone to present the CAP

24 ISO/IEC :2015 Requirements The procedures shall define requirements for: a) identifying nonconformities (e.g. from valid complaints and internal audits); b) determining the causes of nonconformity; c) correcting nonconformities; d) evaluating the need for actions to ensure that nonconformities do not recur; e) determining and implementing in a timely manner, the actions needed; f) recording the results of actions taken; g) reviewing the effectiveness of corrective actions.

25 Interactive discussions Q&A Model Answers

26 Let s connect! Website info@fssc22000.com Phone LinkedIn Group FSSC 22000