Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Pre-Op's / Daily's - Paperwork

sanitation QA Dairy

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

#1 noahchris97

noahchris97

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 40 posts
  • 3 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Buffalo, NY
  • Interests:Classic/ Vintage coin-op restorer of pinballs & juke boxes.
    Model ship builder.

Posted 06 December 2016 - 01:02 PM

Morning All,

             I currently work in a dairy facility.( ice cream). Sanitation dept. Now they record and sign off on all daily assignment tasks. The sanitation workers would fill out their own daily paperwork, then hand it in. We have about 9 rooms worth equipment and such. Every piece of equipment is basically on the daily paperwork; a lot of initialing takes place. Now my question is; is it really necessary to record, sign off on every daily task / piece of equipment? Can a pre-op inspection be a coverall for the dailies performed? There is so much paperwork; would like to thin it down. If anyone has any ideas on how I can go about doing that, It would be much appreciated.

 

Thanks, :helpplease:


  • 0

#2 QAGB

QAGB

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 267 posts
  • 105 thanks
13
Good

  • Earth
    Earth

Posted 06 December 2016 - 02:44 PM

Morning All,

             I currently work in a dairy facility.( ice cream). Sanitation dept. Now they record and sign off on all daily assignment tasks. The sanitation workers would fill out their own daily paperwork, then hand it in. We have about 9 rooms worth equipment and such. Every piece of equipment is basically on the daily paperwork; a lot of initialing takes place. Now my question is; is it really necessary to record, sign off on every daily task / piece of equipment? Can a pre-op inspection be a coverall for the dailies performed? There is so much paperwork; would like to thin it down. If anyone has any ideas on how I can go about doing that, It would be much appreciated.

 

Thanks, :helpplease:

 

 

I suppose you could have one sign off sheet for all the dailies. The pros to doing that are just as you stated; thinning down paperwork and saving time. The major con I can see is that if you have several people doing different cleaning tasks and something is improperly cleaned, how do you know who cleaned it, and who took responsibility for that cleaning?

 

I like having initials completed per task because there are numerous times where a piece of equipment just isn't being cleaned properly; yet the person signs their name that the equipment has been cleaned. I'm then able to go back and have a record of the person who did the cleaning, and then ask them why they signed off if the equipment isn't clean.

 

If you want to assign one person overall inspection tasks and have that person sign off, then it is their duty to inspect and ensure that the employees have done what they need to do. It then is that person's responsibility if equipment isn't fully cleaned after inspection. You can also have it setup in your system to designate certain areas for certain people, so you will know who cleaned each item.

 

It all depends on how you want to setup the system. 

 

 

QAGB


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:

#3 QAGB

QAGB

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 267 posts
  • 105 thanks
13
Good

  • Earth
    Earth

Posted 06 December 2016 - 02:50 PM

I suppose you could have one sign off sheet for all the dailies. The pros to doing that are just as you stated; thinning down paperwork and saving time. The major con I can see is that if you have several people doing different cleaning tasks and something is improperly cleaned, how do you know who cleaned it, and who took responsibility for that cleaning?

 

I like having initials completed per task because there are numerous times where a piece of equipment just isn't being cleaned properly; yet the person signs their name that the equipment has been cleaned. I'm then able to go back and have a record of the person who did the cleaning, and then ask them why they signed off if the equipment isn't clean.

 

If you want to assign one person overall inspection tasks and have that person sign off, then it is their duty to inspect and ensure that the employees have done what they need to do. It then is that person's responsibility if equipment isn't fully cleaned after inspection. You can also have it setup in your system to designate certain areas for certain people, so you will know who cleaned each item.

 

It all depends on how you want to setup the system. 

 

 

QAGB

 

 

Also, I'd like to add that the more thorough your sanitation records are, the better off you are from the auditor's perspective. Auditors like detailed sanitation records because it shows that areas are actually being cleaned on a given frequency. If you want to streamline the intialing process, you should be able to do that. However, I hope that you will keep the details for each piece of equipment being cleaned, frequency, tools used, and so forth. It's very likely that your system was setup that way to meet standards. It sounds to me like your existing system is fine, but if you can make changes that will satisfy auditors and streamline processes, go for it.


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:

#4 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,462 posts
  • 3247 thanks
347
Excellent

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

Posted 06 December 2016 - 08:05 PM

Hi noahchris,

 

FS Standard if any ? SQF ?

Clause ?


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#5 noahchris97

noahchris97

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 40 posts
  • 3 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Buffalo, NY
  • Interests:Classic/ Vintage coin-op restorer of pinballs & juke boxes.
    Model ship builder.

Posted 07 December 2016 - 07:45 AM

Hi Charles,
That would be; BRC. QAGB thank you for your responses. What I have and would like to do; I have 3 supervisors on 3rd shift sanitation. I have split the room up to make three teams ( team 1,2,3) Each supervisor is responsible for the rooms assigned. Now for the paperwork, There is a lot of assigned daily tasks. What I was looking to do is, turn the list of dailies into a pre-op sheet ( no sense in re-inventing the wheel; just improve it)the one column along side of the assigned tasks that would have ( P N F )P-pass N- Not used F-Fail)instead of initials, initials, initials. Just a pass or fail. Then at the bottom of that column for the day, have one initial for ( person responsible for cleaning) and a supervisor's initials for that day. So all together 2 initials; not 15-20. By doing this, It will combine two documents into one. I just wanted to know if that was satisfactory / pleases the auditing gods. Your thoughts..


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:

#6 Leonie

Leonie

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 18 posts
  • 5 thanks
0
Neutral

  • South Africa
    South Africa

Posted 07 December 2016 - 11:21 AM

Hi noahchris,

I'm in the dairy industry too and know that well what you refer to. We also tried to simplified and limited the records, until somebody didn't clean something properly and it was spotted and gives the impression that this is the norm. And  to demonstrate to the auditor that it was corrected,  add (another) detailed checkpoint on the list. If everything was cleaned in the first place, it was end of story! :sleazy:


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:

#7 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,462 posts
  • 3247 thanks
347
Excellent

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

Posted 07 December 2016 - 01:52 PM

Hi noahchris,

 

i cannot see any specific mention of "pre-op" in BRC7 standard.

 

Sorry for my ignorance but which section/clause(s) are you actually attempting to satisfy ? 4.11 ?

 

Frankly my first reaction to yr description was "massive overkill" but it all depends on yr process/objectives/legal requirements etc. Presumably not solely BRC-related.


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Thanked by 1 Member:

#8 FurFarmandFork

FurFarmandFork

    QA Manager/FS Blogger

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 448 posts
  • 227 thanks
35
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA

Posted 07 December 2016 - 03:27 PM

I found that initialed checklists led to more "initialing" than "cleaning".

 

My pro-tip has always been to replace initials with data wherever possible (even if it's just "time completed") since folks are less likely to fabricate numbers than they are to check a box, and it's more obvious when they do.

 

As far as reducing initials and signatures, I take the approach of reducing the number of signatures/initials to the smallest traceable person where the responsibility buck should stop (e.g. sign off a room or otherwise). I always tell my guys that they can sign off anything they want to take responsibility for, but the paperwork needs to be done (production metric) and if your name is on it you're responsible for the quality of the work regardless of who actually did it. That way it encourages inspection regardless of who's "fault" it was.

 

It seems like, in your case, you could replace these checklists with detailed instructions by room instead, requiring only a single signature per room . At my old plant we did sanitation by room, and the paperwork indicated the room, listed the equipment being used in the room (they had different setups for different products) and what kind of clean took place. The person who cleaned signed, and the person who inspected signed. In your case you could probably go with the inspection person only to work on reduction, and just make sure your existing checklists turn into detailed instructions your people actually refer to and follow. I've found in audits that this works well as long as the information is detailed, accessible, used, and performance is verified properly.


  • 0

For discussions related to food safety, production, and agriculture. Check out my blog at http://furfarmandfork.com/.

 


Thanked by 2 Members:

#9 Tony-C

Tony-C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,958 posts
  • 791 thanks
167
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Koh Samui
  • Interests:My main interests are sports particularly football, pool, scuba diving, skiing and ten pin bowling.

Posted 09 December 2016 - 10:42 AM

Hi Charles,
That would be; BRC. QAGB thank you for your responses. What I have and would like to do; I have 3 supervisors on 3rd shift sanitation. I have split the room up to make three teams ( team 1,2,3) Each supervisor is responsible for the rooms assigned. Now for the paperwork, There is a lot of assigned daily tasks. What I was looking to do is, turn the list of dailies into a pre-op sheet ( no sense in re-inventing the wheel; just improve it)the one column along side of the assigned tasks that would have ( P N F )P-pass N- Not used F-Fail)instead of initials, initials, initials. Just a pass or fail. Then at the bottom of that column for the day, have one initial for ( person responsible for cleaning) and a supervisor's initials for that day. So all together 2 initials; not 15-20. By doing this, It will combine two documents into one. I just wanted to know if that was satisfactory / pleases the auditing gods. Your thoughts..

 

Hi NoahChris,

 

For the cleaning why not tick off the item and initial at the bottom of the sheet. For pre-Op checks you could add the extra column and have a system where the form is passed on to production. I would also add a line on the production record - pre Op cleaning checks satisfactory yes/no initials just as a reminder to the operator.

 

I am also wondering if there are any critical areas on these cleaning records such as product contact equipment and a risk of micro or allergen contamination?

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony


  • 0

#10 noahchris97

noahchris97

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 40 posts
  • 3 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Buffalo, NY
  • Interests:Classic/ Vintage coin-op restorer of pinballs & juke boxes.
    Model ship builder.

Posted 09 December 2016 - 02:31 PM

Attached File  Sanitation Pre-op Inspection.doc   31.5KB   37 downloads

Morning All,
Again thank you for your answers (help) much appreciated. Well from all the input / guidance I received I was able to pounder away at the drawing board and came up with an easy way to document all that needs to be covered as well hopeful pleases the auditing gods..lol. From a massive collection of dailies for each room. Countless time wasted filling out all the dailies, time taken away from what they are actually should be doing; sanitation. Here is a break down of what I have came up with. Please refer/ review my attachment; Sanitation Pre-op Inspection. This is a rough version. But taking in everyone's input as well as many colleagues throughout the food industry. Going by "Room" was more efficient instead of checking off numerous items / tasks. Obviously there will also be a procedure on "how to" for this document. To all that had that had great ideas, please your thoughts...


Again Thank you for your support,
  • 0

#11 noahchris97

noahchris97

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 40 posts
  • 3 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Buffalo, NY
  • Interests:Classic/ Vintage coin-op restorer of pinballs & juke boxes.
    Model ship builder.

Posted 09 December 2016 - 02:43 PM

My apologies,
My last post I forgot to mention about my Sanitation Pre-op inspection:

 

  • Date the inspection.
  • Circle Team- Supervisor are assigned a number of rooms ( 3 rooms each)
  • What room they are inspecting.
  • Room cleaned by- this is the kicker, instead of the guys beating at my door looking to sign the dailies, the supervisor will collect the initials from the san. techs in that room after inspection has been completed. No more sitting to fill out 20,000 initials, no more " hey can I borrow your pen" or " I'm waiting for the pen" or the just lets hangout. All this will be eliminated by collecting the initials right there and then.
  • Inspection completed by:  Supervisor
  • Room Passed Yes / No?
  • Room Released to Production- Yes  / No
  • Any deficiencies?
  • Document any findings, record, and correction action.
  • Then re-inspect the correction
  • Sign & date.

As you can see pretty easy, but covers all and no litter of san. techs hanging around awaiting to fill out paperwork, ( lean sanitation) :gleam:

Your thoughts would be much appreciated...Thanks.


  • 0

#12 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,462 posts
  • 3247 thanks
347
Excellent

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

Posted 09 December 2016 - 05:17 PM

Hi noahchris,

 

I'm slightly confused as to the intra-relationships of yr Sanitation System.

 

As I deduce, the "Sanitation" section is a Department ("independent" of both Production and QA Departments) which is responsible for both  (1) devising/performing the Sanitation function/procedures and (2) carrying out a pre-op inspection.

 

IMEX (1) is handled such that the practical aspect of "Sanitation" is implemented by Production Department Operatives who (a) implement/sign-off Sanitation Procedures/Forms devised by QA and (b) maintain own Production-devised log-books detailing related WIs, (2) is then carried out solely by QA so as to achieve a (theoretically) independent assessment of (1), potentially involving methods such as visual/ATP/micro.evaluations.

 

Feedback from (2) is analysed/discussed with Production in the context of aspects such as mentioned in Post 9.

 

I appreciate that maintaining a separate Sanitation Function is not unusual but I'm a little puzzled regarding the inclusion of (2). How does the QA function fit into this overall scheme ? (I liked the practical comments in Post 2)

 

I thought the Principle of the Form attached is OK (choice of Rooms /Areas/Units will likely be Process-specific)  but seems desirable (albeit may take some effort) to concatenate if possible, eg tabular Word/excel/database format ? (Obviously there is a mass of documentation/data underpinning the attached form).

IMEX some Companies use an abbreviated format for "routine" daily inspections but a heavyweight version once a week or depending on feedback. Again, may be Process / location specific.

 

It's not a small Project for sure. Good Luck !


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Thanked by 1 Member:

#13 QAGB

QAGB

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 267 posts
  • 105 thanks
13
Good

  • Earth
    Earth

Posted 13 December 2016 - 08:04 PM

Hi noahchris,

 

I'm slightly confused as to the intra-relationships of yr Sanitation System.

 

As I deduce, the "Sanitation" section is a Department ("independent" of both Production and QA Departments) which is responsible for both  (1) devising/performing the Sanitation function/procedures and (2) carrying out a pre-op inspection.

 

IMEX (1) is handled such that the practical aspect of "Sanitation" is implemented by Production Department Operatives who (a) implement/sign-off Sanitation Procedures/Forms devised by QA and (b) maintain own Production-devised log-books detailing related WIs, (2) is then carried out solely by QA so as to achieve a (theoretically) independent assessment of (1), potentially involving methods such as visual/ATP/micro.evaluations.

 

Feedback from (2) is analysed/discussed with Production in the context of aspects such as mentioned in Post 9.

 

I appreciate that maintaining a separate Sanitation Function is not unusual but I'm a little puzzled regarding the inclusion of (2). How does the QA function fit into this overall scheme ? (I liked the practical comments in Post 2)

 

I thought the Principle of the Form attached is OK (choice of Rooms /Areas/Units will likely be Process-specific)  but seems desirable (albeit may take some effort) to concatenate if possible, eg tabular Word/excel/database format ? (Obviously there is a mass of documentation/data underpinning the attached form).

IMEX some Companies use an abbreviated format for "routine" daily inspections but a heavyweight version once a week or depending on feedback. Again, may be Process / location specific.

 

It's not a small Project for sure. Good Luck !

 

 

 

I agree with Charles. I'm a little confused with the attached sheet. This sheet really looks like a sheet geared toward a QA inspection. I also understand that sanitation functions are different for each company (I know ours confuses auditors at times).

 

The bottom half of the information on the pre-op attached (pre-op inspection completed by, room passed, room released to production, deficiencies, corrective actions satisfied) are items that I would give to QA; since they are usually the ones that can approve cleaning. If this is a sheet that is jointly used between production & QA, then I could see this working as an actual pre-op inspection prior to running.

 

The part that I am missing comes from Noahchris's explanation of how to incorporate the dailies "What I was looking to do is, turn the list of dailies into a pre-op sheet ( no sense in re-inventing the wheel; just improve it)the one column along side of the assigned tasks that would have ( P N F )P-pass N- Not used F-Fail)instead of initials, initials, initials. Just a pass or fail". I don't really see that anywhere, but perhaps that is a second sheet that production uses as well? 

 

If this is the only sheet used, I can imagine an auditor asking if there is a work instruction for cleaning each room by equipment, and/or asking how do people know what they are supposed to clean, and what kinds of deficiencies to look for.

 

 

QAGB


  • 0

#14 noahchris97

noahchris97

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 40 posts
  • 3 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Buffalo, NY
  • Interests:Classic/ Vintage coin-op restorer of pinballs & juke boxes.
    Model ship builder.

Posted 15 December 2016 - 08:05 AM

Morning Charles, QAGB,

          Believe me as I know this all seems confusing but we all have to do what we are told from the higher ups. On my arrival (new) sanitation was doing a pre-op inspection. Sanitation dept. reported to VP of Operations. New management followed after my arrival; CEO,CFO,VP of Quality and such, others let go. Now with the new structure in place; Sanitation and QA are on the same team. Sanitation is considered QA if you will. "I" sanitation report to VP of Quality. So that's the confusion that you might be seeing and my apologies for not explaining further. In my past adventures, yes QA did the pre-op inspection, deficiencies found which turns into corrective action(s), then logged, tracked and trended. But the scheme of things we still continue to do the pre-op inspections until told other wise, but really don't see that changing any time soon.

           Now QAGB about dailies, I have explained in my recent posts about my dailies. We have 9 large rooms loaded with processing equipment. As for the dailies every item, task you name it was on that checklist. We are talking initialing / checking off 2-3-4 pages of. So we are talking 18-36 pages of signing off on a daily basis. This is not counting the time for the sanitation personnel to fill out the documents. All sitting around waiting to fill out the paperwork on who cleaned what. Keep in mind as there can be up to 4-5-6 cleaning techs in the rooms. So you have 5 people waiting to sign the daily paperwork for that room; for the pieces that they cleaned. Now if you read up on a few responses that I had, a few individuals inspect and signed off by rooms. The key word is "Room" instead of 18-36 pages of wasted time. By passing the " Room"  it would cover all equipment, environmentals, drains, walls, overheads and such. That was my main topic of this forum "of how I can reduce or change the pre-op process as well as reducing dailies". I hope this better description of what I'm faced with...

 

Thanks..   


  • 0

#15 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,462 posts
  • 3247 thanks
347
Excellent

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

Posted 15 December 2016 - 10:03 AM

Hi noahchris,

 

Thks for response.  Sympathies for yr environmental upsets. Tends to generate uncertainty all round.

 

I think you need to post an Organization Tree, if it exists. :smile:

 

Clearly yr proposed Pre-Op form should, as you describe, substantially reduce the amount of "worker waiting time". It's integration within the "Big Picture" should also be of relevance though ?

 

I still get the impression that the discussed Sanitation Pre-Op Room Inspection  is being carried out/signed off  by Personnel from the same Department as that which implements the Sanitation Function. By usual audit Procedures  this would be “atypical”. But I may be wrong ?.

 

Personally I use 3 basic Records-Forms for Sanitation – (a) Daily am-Pre-Op/pm Form Scanning Overall Operation – QA Dept, (b) Production Area inclusive, Operational am/pm Cleaning Form, multi-Supervisor,  sign-off sheet – Production Dept, (c) Weekly Verification (micro) Form – QA Dept.


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#16 QAGB

QAGB

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 267 posts
  • 105 thanks
13
Good

  • Earth
    Earth

Posted 15 December 2016 - 01:07 PM

Morning Charles, QAGB,

          Believe me as I know this all seems confusing but we all have to do what we are told from the higher ups. On my arrival (new) sanitation was doing a pre-op inspection. Sanitation dept. reported to VP of Operations. New management followed after my arrival; CEO,CFO,VP of Quality and such, others let go. Now with the new structure in place; Sanitation and QA are on the same team. Sanitation is considered QA if you will. "I" sanitation report to VP of Quality. So that's the confusion that you might be seeing and my apologies for not explaining further. In my past adventures, yes QA did the pre-op inspection, deficiencies found which turns into corrective action(s), then logged, tracked and trended. But the scheme of things we still continue to do the pre-op inspections until told other wise, but really don't see that changing any time soon.

           Now QAGB about dailies, I have explained in my recent posts about my dailies. We have 9 large rooms loaded with processing equipment. As for the dailies every item, task you name it was on that checklist. We are talking initialing / checking off 2-3-4 pages of. So we are talking 18-36 pages of signing off on a daily basis. This is not counting the time for the sanitation personnel to fill out the documents. All sitting around waiting to fill out the paperwork on who cleaned what. Keep in mind as there can be up to 4-5-6 cleaning techs in the rooms. So you have 5 people waiting to sign the daily paperwork for that room; for the pieces that they cleaned. Now if you read up on a few responses that I had, a few individuals inspect and signed off by rooms. The key word is "Room" instead of 18-36 pages of wasted time. By passing the " Room"  it would cover all equipment, environmentals, drains, walls, overheads and such. That was my main topic of this forum "of how I can reduce or change the pre-op process as well as reducing dailies". I hope this better description of what I'm faced with...

 

Thanks..   

 

 

Noahchris,

 

Thank you for explaining your organizational structure as it makes sense for the sheet to be filled out that way considering the setup.

 

I did actually read your posts (I've read everyone's posts), and understood your issue. I was just trying to figure out if you were going to keep an underlying Sanitation Standard Operating Procedure or Work Instruction to clarify what "Room" encompasses in case your auditors asked.

 

My facility has dry allergens, and we also work with liquids in other processing areas. My auditors question us about the depth of our sanitation program. They ask whether we are swabbing for allergens, or swabbing for ATP, etc. So we have to show evidence of swabbing and what pieces of equipment we swab.  

 

As I stated earlier, however you setup your program is fine; just as long as it satisfies your auditors and works for you.

 

QAGB


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users