Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

BRC7-3.5 Procedures-Raw Material Risk Assessment/Supplier Approval


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,646 posts
  • 3318 thanks
352
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 01 April 2016 - 11:18 AM

Hi All,

 

In view of the frequent queries regarding BRC7’s Sections (3.5.1.1, 3.5.1.2) on  Raw Material Risk assessment / Supplier Approval I have assembled the attached example to try and illustrate a possible workflow via combining 2 previous posts and adding/generating some numbers.

 

Further details and the original sourced posts are included - linked within the following  Excel file(see Sheets 0,1,2 etc) -

 

Attached File  BRC7-3.5-Raw Material Risk Assessment 3.0a.xls   45.5KB   1055 downloads

(above is current version of file as of 14/05/2016)

 

Comments welcome as usual, especially if Excel errors spotted. :smile:

 

PS - in respect to permutations available relating to the mechanics of supplier audit/certification, these 2 fairly recent threads contain some quite useful comments IMO -

 

http://www.ifsqn.com...plier-approval/

 

http://www.ifsqn.com...questionnaires/

 

PPS - some additional comments/info -

 

(1) The procedure illustrated in attached Excel uses a combination of  raw material risk factors related to (a) the process HACCP Plan, (b) the VA of the Raw Material, (c) the Quality/Legality of the finished product.

 

(2) The risk values in (a) are assumed to be interpreted via a decision tree such as shown in this link –

http://www.ifsqn.com...nts/#entry38494

 

(3) The overall raw material risk status (RMR) as given by Sheet 1 of  Excel  may determine the audit frequency for  maintenance of  Approved Supplier Status. Some BRC6 examples from a Procedure by Tony are given here  –

http://www.ifsqn.com...ent/#entry79193

 

(4) Similarly the RMR may also influence the monitoring frequency for acceptance control at raw material reception. The cumulative results of the latter can subsequently provide feedback for item (3).

Examples of an ultra-basic Sampling Procedure and a BRC Guideline document follow -

 

Attached File  Incoming Raw Material Sampling Program.png   393.72KB   11 downloads

 

Attached File  BRC6 - Introduction to Acceptance Procedure Raw materials.pdf   3.52MB   906 downloads

 

P3S - I should add although it's probably obvious that the Risk score values used in the various Excel columns refer to those specific  "hazards"  found  to generate the highest risk values for the particular raw material other than that derived from the  Vulnerability Assessment which is effectively an averaged datum.

 

P4S (260816) - Word document below contains some additional Forum links/threads on RA/VA which I found useful.

Attached File  Additional useful RA-VA forum threads RV.1.doc   24.5KB   294 downloads


Edited by Charles.C, 26 August 2016 - 02:17 AM.
added P4S/Word document

  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#2 mgourley

mgourley

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 808 posts
  • 655 thanks
81
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Plant City, FL
  • Interests:Cooking, golf, firearms, food safety and sanitation.

Posted 02 April 2016 - 12:32 AM

Charles,

 

Well done.

 

Marshall


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:

#3 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,646 posts
  • 3318 thanks
352
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 02 April 2016 - 06:57 PM

Hi All,

 

I have updated the Excel in Post 1 after doing some tweaks on the Procedure so as to hopefully refine the use and display information.

 

The changes are detailed/discussed on sheet 1 of the Excel together with a few examples of the modifications.

 

PS - I subsequently realized that some people might like to play with the original version which is relatively Vanilla so, just in case, -

 

(file deleted since getting a bit aged / Ch.C/14-05-2016) (Current version maintained in Post 1)

 

(the basic RA calculations are identical to later version)


Edited by Charles.C, 13 May 2016 - 05:49 PM.
deleted out-of-date file. Current version maintained in Post 1

  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Thanked by 2 Members:

#4 PSC

PSC

    Grade - Active

  • Newbie
  • 22 posts
  • 8 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth

Posted 20 April 2016 - 12:28 AM

Hi Charles,

 

I'm in the processing of updating my ingredient risk assessment and I like your layout. However, I don't understand the letters associated with the "Overall Ingredient Risk". For instance, if I have 12 or higher in column H (Allergen) it will generate a "High-A" in column O "Overall Ingredient Risk". If the 12 or higher is in the next column (column I) then in column O it generates a "High-F", unless the previous column is a 12 or higher. Each previous column seems to supersede the following column (i.e. if column H is a 12 and column I is a 12, Column O will still show "High-A" rather than "High-F")

 

I've been reading through the excel spreadsheet and the links associated to this thread, but have not been able to understand what the different letters following "High" are referring to. Can you help me in this respect?

 

Thank you.


  • 0

#5 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,646 posts
  • 3318 thanks
352
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 20 April 2016 - 10:08 AM

Hi Charles,

 

I'm in the processing of updating my ingredient risk assessment and I like your layout. However, I don't understand the letters associated with the "Overall Ingredient Risk". For instance, if I have 12 or higher in column H (Allergen) it will generate a "High-A" in column O "Overall Ingredient Risk". If the 12 or higher is in the next column (column I) then in column O it generates a "High-F", unless the previous column is a 12 or higher. Each previous column seems to supersede the following column (i.e. if column H is a 12 and column I is a 12, Column O will still show "High-A" rather than "High-F")

 

I've been reading through the excel spreadsheet and the links associated to this thread, but have not been able to understand what the different letters following "High" are referring to. Can you help me in this respect?

 

Thank you.

 

Hi PSC,

 

Thks yr comments. Nice to have feedback. Yr observations are accurate.

 

The excel sheet, and particularly Column O, is restricted partially by my PC only having ver. 2003 but mainly by my regretfully limited experience with Excel. The objective in Column O is easy in a full computer program but I don't know VBA for Excel/macros.

 

I have slightly modified the format/text in some cells of Sheet 1 and expanded the explanation below display to hopefully answer yr queries (See Note 2a). The result is attached below.

 

Please revert if anything unclear or something(Excel-wise) looks not working correctly.

 

(File deleted,Ch.C / 14-05-2016, please see latest version in Post 1)

 

PS - Note that other risk matrices are usable by changing the value of "12" (see Notes 1a,b,c) and  the values in cells P(2-4)


Edited by Charles.C, 13 May 2016 - 05:47 PM.
deleted out-of-date ver. of excel file. Current version maintained in Post 1

  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Thanked by 1 Member:
PSC

#6 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,646 posts
  • 3318 thanks
352
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 12 May 2016 - 02:24 PM

Hi All,

 

Have been using Excel a bit more lately so was able to (hopefully) improve/streamline the layout of previous version a bit. Text has been adjusted accordingly.

 

(File deleted and transferred to Post 1, Ch.C/14-05-2016)(Current version is maintained in Post 1)

 

Maybe FDA will come out with an even simpler Procedure for their anticipated list of High Risk Foods.


Edited by Charles.C, 13 May 2016 - 05:52 PM.
deleted file and transferred to Post 1. Latest version will be maintained in Post 1

  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#7 gh3177

gh3177

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 6 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 13 May 2016 - 02:27 PM

Hi

 

I thought you assessed each raw material in the state it comes into the factory not in relation to what processing your factory will be doing to that raw material. (in the attached excel you say with respect to the process including baking)

e.g If you were risk assessing flour...would you look at the flour suppliers HACCP and from that determine what the micro/allergen/chem risk could be?

 

Do you need three risk assessments

 

1. Group your raw materials into similar groups..then risk assess these groups for inherent qualities to give an overall score (inherent qualities being allergen/chem/micro for the type of material).
How detailed do the groups need to be...e.g. Ambient stable could cover canned products or jams etc
This will give you a RMR  that will determine your raw material acceptance and testing procedure (e.g. visual inspection or coa etc)

 

2. Risk asses your supplier based on service level history, complaints, country of origin, any form of certification..this gives you how you should monitor the supplier either.

3. Do a vulnerability assessment on the raw material groups with economic factors etc to give you your testing procedure 

 

how do they link?

 

Super confused!

 

R


  • 0

#8 gh3177

gh3177

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 6 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 13 May 2016 - 02:28 PM

Apologies- that was a bit garbled. but the main point being HOW do you assess a raw material for chem contamination - looking at YOUR process or your SUPPLIERS process? and making a judgement call?


  • 0

#9 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,646 posts
  • 3318 thanks
352
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 13 May 2016 - 04:52 PM

Hi

 

I thought you assessed each raw material in the state it comes into the factory not in relation to what processing your factory will be doing to that raw material. (in the attached excel you say with respect to the process including baking)

e.g If you were risk assessing flour...would you look at the flour suppliers HACCP and from that determine what the micro/allergen/chem risk could be?

 

Do you need three risk assessments

 

1. Group your raw materials into similar groups..then risk assess these groups for inherent qualities to give an overall score (inherent qualities being allergen/chem/micro for the type of material).
How detailed do the groups need to be...e.g. Ambient stable could cover canned products or jams etc
This will give you a RMR  that will determine your raw material acceptance and testing procedure (e.g. visual inspection or coa etc)

 

2. Risk asses your supplier based on service level history, complaints, country of origin, any form of certification..this gives you how you should monitor the supplier either.

3. Do a vulnerability assessment on the raw material groups with economic factors etc to give you your testing procedure 

 

how do they link?

 

Super confused!

 

R

 

Apologies- that was a bit garbled. but the main point being HOW do you assess a raw material for chem contamination - looking at YOUR process or your SUPPLIERS process? and making a judgement call?

 

Hi rh,

 

I am assuming the context of yr query is HACCP rather than HARPC.

 

Yr initial queries are fundamental to implementing a hazard analysis in a HACCP plan.

 

Did you see the decision trees I referenced in Post 1 ?. These afaik answer yr query as to the reference point for a typical risk assessment procedure of the raw material. The 2nd  example is based on  Mortimore’s recent text on HACCP (2013).

 

(1) I would assume you can group different materials together if you can validate that they possess the same hazard characteristics. The latter would presumably depend on the materials/history involved.

(2) The basic (BRC) Supplier requirement is for Supplier Approval (SA). The requirements for SA are  spelled out in the last paragraph of clause 3.5.1.1 and the entire clause 3.5.1.2. The items you mention would likely be involved, yes. Also refer to Post 1, (3).

(3) Some basic VA requirements are spelled out in clause 5.4.2. An interpretation of BRC’s requirements is in the VA Procedure in the excel file attached to Post 1. Other threads here have alternative procedures.

 

I agree that the BRC Standard’s requirements in this case are convoluted and not smoothly linked together. This is BRC’s style. You might consider purchasing their Interpretation Guidelines if  you wish to know their “exact” thinking.

 

(Post 8) A short answer is via  (a) Using an Approved Supplier, (b) having an agreed Raw Material  Specification, (c) a COA, (d) Verification testing, (e) establishing/maintaining GMPs within the factory ( refer the Decision Tree I mentioned above).

 

Hope that helps to answer yr queries.

 

PS - It is maybe worth noting that –

 

(a) the BRC7 Standard contains no mention or definition of high/medium/low risk raw materials.

(b) the Standard (clause 3.5.1.2) does contain a mention of low risk Supplier but without defining the  meaning of such terminologies as applied to a Supplier. (In theory a Supplier of “high risk” raw materials might themselves be rated as either “high risk” or “low risk” from an Audit/Performance POV).

(c) the BRC6 document attached in Post 1 mentions high risk ingredient, but again provides no relevant definitions.

 

I have chosen to assume that a "high risk"  raw material is interpreted as given in the excel file, sheet 1. This is an expansion of the safety-related interpretation used  in the 2nd haccp Decision Tree of Post 1. Other interpretations are possible and probably exist. BRC may have deliberately avoided being too specific.

 

I also assume that a supplier of "high risk raw materials" is designated as a "high risk Supplier". This is again subjective but implies (to me) that the low risk Supplier mentioned in clause 3.5.1.2  is providing  Low Risk Raw materials.

 

In reality there are a substantial variety of definitions of "High Risk materials" currently being used  in the Literature.  Just as an example you could compare the criteria being suggested  by FDA in their Draft Procedure for determining High Risk Foods. This document has a rather different viewpoint of High Risk.

 

The “processing” related comment in the 2nd decision tree has practical relevance IMEX, even where the raw material is theoretically classified as Low Risk.


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Thanked by 1 Member:

#10 Harminnie

Harminnie

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 26 posts
  • 18 thanks
3
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 17 May 2016 - 01:58 PM

Greetings, I like parts of the sample given and will incorporate some it to improve what we came up with which is still in the evolution process. Wish we had it when preparing for BRC . We are a very small company with 4 employees so have  merged many functions into this form. We Googled every ingredient and supplier for fraud and abuse, recalls, physical, biological, and chemical hazards. It was laborious to do but is now easy to maintain and make changes to. It passed our audit.


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:

#11 Wowie

Wowie

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 54 posts
  • 17 thanks
2
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Anything outdoors, Reading, Backpacking, Traveling, Good Friends, Good Drinks, Good Music

Posted 17 May 2016 - 02:46 PM

Greetings, I like parts of the sample given and will incorporate some it to improve what we came up with which is still in the evolution process. Wish we had it when preparing for BRC . We are a very small company with 4 employees so have  merged many functions into this form. We Googled every ingredient and supplier for fraud and abuse, recalls, physical, biological, and chemical hazards. It was laborious to do but is now easy to maintain and make changes to. It passed our audit.

 

 

Both of these are a much cleaner format that what we are currently using for Risk assessments and vulnerability assessments with my company. (Sometimes, I feel like we're perpetually in the late '90's with our formatting. And with using AS400 systems.) Unfortunately, the template we are using is corporate mandated and I cannot change any of the format, which gets frustrating when some questions are worded/some values given with produce or liquid products in mind, and I'm the only meat plant in the company.  :yeahrite:

 

Regardless, well done, Charles C and Harminnie! I'm going to save these and request with puppy dog eyes that I be allowed to tweak the format.


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:

#12 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,646 posts
  • 3318 thanks
352
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 17 May 2016 - 03:11 PM

Greetings, I like parts of the sample given and will incorporate some it to improve what we came up with which is still in the evolution process. Wish we had it when preparing for BRC . We are a very small company with 4 employees so have  merged many functions into this form. We Googled every ingredient and supplier for fraud and abuse, recalls, physical, biological, and chemical hazards. It was laborious to do but is now easy to maintain and make changes to. It passed our audit.

 

Hi Harminnie,

 

Many thanks for the feedback and Congratulations on getting it through. :clap:

 

It’s a heck of a lot of work to demonstrate that all your ingredients have low Vulnerability and zero high risk.

 

I have a couple of queries –

 

(1)  How did you progress from the data in columns L> R to get the conclusions in Column S ? Visual Inspection (not unreasonable IMO since “one’s" everywhere) ?

(2) Did the auditor have any interest in how you actually determined all the “one’s” ?

 

I have got the impression from threads here that BRC are (this year) basically expecting to see that people are, at least,  “making an effort” (in current case a massive effort) as far as VA is concerned. Was that the "feeling" in yr  audit ?


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users