[Plant Audits] Best (Audit) Practices

Audits and standards are simply a fact of doing business in the food industry. But should they be?

That is, while the industry generally accepts the importance of standards and audits and their efficacy in assessing and affirming food safety and quality initiatives, does the industry need multiple sets of standards and auditing programs? Or could the system be pared down to a single global standard and auditing program?

It is a question with strong viewpoints and as many outlooks as there are current standards:

• “I don’t believe any one standard will be accepted globally,” said Bruce Becker, marketing and sales director for the GMA-SAFE program of the Food Products Association.
• “There should be and can be a single standard,” said Larry Eaves, new product development manager for TUV SUD America.
• “We (provide) a program to help our clients as the world searches for one audit,” said Rena Pieromi, division vice president of technical services for Silliker.

Consultant Duane Burau, during a presentation at the International Association of Food Protection (IAFP) Annual Meeting earlier this year, said the most important key to success for a single standard is global acceptance, and that the food safety industry is making progress toward that goal.

Rather than attempt to develop a single standard or audit that would be accepted around the world, Becker said he believes that a focus on information gathering is the key to global acceptance. Through the SAFE program, he said, information is collected at a plant, and it is then made available to assessors and auditors for assessment of compliance with their standards. The program allows any number of assessing customers or agencies to set their own standards and score a plant against these, while subjecting the plant to a single visit for information collection.

The program, Becker said, is outcome based, invoking the idea that a plant should be assessed by one and judged by all: The information collector has no pre-conceived notions, no requirements or expectations; he or she is going into the plant only to gather information about the plant processes, verify that the plant is doing what it says it is, and determine if its system is working.

“GMA-SAFE would be a collector of information,” Becker said.

Silliker was accredited in June as a certification body for the Safe Quality Food (SQF) program of the Food Marketing Institute (FMI). “It is one of the few that really focuses on the whole farm-to-fork system,” Pieromi said. “This scheme allows it to ensure not just the retailer’s supplier, but also the supplier’s supplier.” In addition, suppliers that produce product for more than one retailer would be able to follow a single system to meet the requirements of all.

SQF is recognized by the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI), coordinated by the independent global food business network CIES, and has been implemented by more than 8,600 companies worldwide. SQF was created at the request of FMI members to create a coordinated approach to audits.

Rather than the current process in which many food processors set standards based on the requirements of their customers or regulatory agencies, each processor should set its own internal system while ensuring that it is aligned with standards, Pieromi said. It is a fine distinction, but one that is more commonplace outside the U.S. because certified audits have been around longer, and it is a distinction that is driven by the ever-increasing globalization of the supply chain.

It is because of SQF’s focus on safety, its specificity to food producers and manufacturers, and its ever-increasing global acceptance that TUV sets its focus on this program.  “In the near future, I believe you will see a single global standard,” Eaves said. “That standard is the SQF program.”

The current snag is with regulatory agencies that have set standards and don’t want to be locked into another body telling them what to do, he said. “There should be and can be a single standard,” he said. “but it’s got to go through the government and that’s where the hiccup is.”

But the recent recalls of meats, spinach, pet food and even bay leaves are proving that current standards are not enough. “There’s no formal policing in place right now, but there’s obviously a need for it from a quality and processes standpoint,” said Carmen Hopwood, TUV SUD America marketing communications specialist.

Hopwood and Eaves said  globalization of a single standard could be a reality within the next three years. Consumers are increasingly demanding that suppliers and manufacturers be able to assure them that their products are safe, Hopwood said, and SQF provides a versatile, global program adaptable to different foods as well as different links in the supply chain, providing full traceability.

A global standard may be possible and desirable, but it certainly will not be easy. Plant audits are currently done  by the processor as well as customers, third parties, regulatory agencies and industry organizations — each of which has a different focus, purpose and process for its standards and audits, Burau said.

While taking these into consideration, however, one should not ignore traditional industry standards, such as HACCP. “If you do HACCP correctly and it’s written correctly, the rest will fall in line,” he said.

But standards are gaining in emphasis, at least in part because of increased consumer awareness and consumer ability to quickly spread the word and “mobilize an angry customer base,” Burau said, as well as a change in food concerns from those of the past. Allergen awareness, traceability standards, increased testing ability and large retailer requirements are all affecting the way food products are assessed and determined “fit for use.”

There are definite challenges to implementation of a single global standard, or the “Holy Grail of One Global Standard” as the IAFP session was entitled, however it is possible and the industry is making progress “but we need leadership for continued improvement.” 

Lisa Lupo is staff editor of QA magazine. She can be reached at llupo@giemedia.com.