Food Safety System Certification 22000Case study 4 – Integrity ProgramKaren Smedley – IP Assessor

Content

• Integrity Program• Top 5 findings• KPI’s• Case study

Focus during this case study session

• Understanding the Integrity Program• Reducing NC’s • Improving CB performance

Integrity Program Team

Integrity Program Assessors

AngelieJansen RobertReadel KarenSmedley

TheNetherlands USA Australia

Europe&Africa Americas Asia-Pacific

OfficeAssessmentsWitness Audits

Office AssessmentsWitnessAuditsDeskReviews

Office AssessmentsDeskReviews

AuditorReviewsScopeReviews

IP and Sanction Team

CindySmolder-vanVelzen

MarleendeValk NienkedeHaan AldinHilbrands

IPOfficer IPOfficer IPManager TechnicalDirector

Gorinchem Gorinchem Gorinchem Gorinchem

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

Integrity Program

Integrity Program

The following specific requirements are subject to the FSSC 22000 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.

Process for Desk Reviews

Process for Desk Reviews

• Corrective action plan• Corrective action• Evidence of corrective action• Auditor related documents to upload into Auditor Register

Desk Review Findings

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

2017 Issues Driving Sanction Policy

• Having received multiple Yellow Cards within 2 years

• Failing to adequately respond to a Yellow card

Documents for Desk Reviews

Document Comments

Certificate

ClientContract SignedbyCBandClient,additional translationifneededV4.1 changes

AuditCalculation Evidence of#HACCPstudies,FTE,existingcertificationsetc.

AuditReport Stage 1andstage2forinitialauditSurveillanceandrecertificationFollow-upauditreports ifMajorNC’sresultinvisitAuditPlansforstage1andstage2

TechnicalExpertCV Ifapplicable

FSSCWaivers Ifapplicable

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 22000 Licence(s)• Accreditation Certificates• QMS procedures etc.• QMS records (MR, IA, CA etc.)

Key Performance Indicators

Key Performance Indicators

• % auditors meeting 5 GFSI per year• % certificates entered within 4 weeks• % audits with correct audit duration

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 22000 audits per year

per auditor

Certificate Entry

• Effectiveness viewed during OA

Audit Duration

• Over 100 DR findings in 2017• Lack of justification if < than minimum time• Lack of including FSSC 22000 time• Not including stage 1 audit time when stage 2

report created in ADS• Not including all team members during ADS

upload

Case Study

Case Study

Use the non-conformities from case study 2 prepare a Corrective Action Plan to address the findingsIn 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

ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 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.

Interactive discussions

• Q&A• Model Answers

Website www.fssc22000.comE-mail info@fssc22000.comPhone +31 183 645 028

Twitter @FSSC22000 LinkedIn Group FSSC 22000

Let’s connect!