21 replies to this topic

[charlorne]

Who are the Certification companies that are qualified to audit the ISO 22000:2005 FSMS in North and in South America?

Is Incontec (from Bogota) one of them??

lorne

[Simon]

Who are the Certification companies that are qualified to audit the ISO 22000:2005 FSMS in North and in South America?

Not entirely sure Lorne. I would check with your countries (Chile??) National Accreditation Body, they should maintain a list.

Is Incontec (from Bogota) one of them??

Do they claim to be?
Welcome to the forums Lorne.
Regards,
Simon

[Charles Chew]

Certification Company does not audit - they only certify base on an FSMS Auditor's Report.

You should be looking for a competent FSMS Auditor........remember Wayne's Engineering friend who had a makeover from QMS to FSMS.

Looks like auditees are generally still blurr about the difference between a competent auditor and a CB. Its time we got smarter than them.

[Simon]

Certification Company does not audit - they only certify base on an FSMS Auditor's Report.

You should be looking for a competent FSMS Auditor........remember Wayne's Engineering friend who had a makeover from QMS to FSMS.

Looks like auditees are generally still blurr about the difference between a competent auditor and a CB. Its time we got smarter than them.

Of course you're right Charles, but FSMS Auditors are normally affiliated to one or more Certification Bodies. As a customer you would contact an Accredited Certification Body for the particular standard and they would select a suitable Auditor. Yes we should be asking for the auditors credentials.

Maybe people 'in the know' would, but the majority would not give this a second thought. Given the choice would they take the weaker auditor? After all they just want to pass the audit.

Simon

[charlorne]

Of course you're right Charles, but FSMS Auditors are normally affiliated to one or more Certification Bodies. As a customer you would contact an Accredited Certification Body for the particular standard and they would select a suitable Auditor. Yes we should be asking for the auditors credentials.

Maybe people 'in the know' would, but the majority would not give this a second thought. Given the choice would they take the weaker auditor? After all they just want to pass the audit.

Simon

Thanks Simon and Charles for the inputs .. I am looking for accredited certification bodies who make use of qualified auditors to assess a ISO 22000:2005 food safety management system.
Auditor credential would of course be an important consideration .. would want to have an auditor with knowledge of the food industry and with specific experience with my products .. would not accept an auditor who is a star in auto parts production, for example.

Lorne

Not entirely sure Lorne. I would check with your countries (Chile??) National Accreditation Body, they should maintain a list.

Do they claim to be?
Welcome to the forums Lorne.
Regards,
Simon

Icontec, the established (QMS) certification body from Bogota Colombia informed me that they are in a position to audit and certify FSMS to ISO 22000.
They have in fact forwarded their 3-page Formulario de Informacion previa certificacion de sistemas de gestion.

Lorne

[Charles Chew]

Hi Charlorne,
I have just done a check on IRCA's FSMS Auditor Listing for Chile and confirm that there is no competent person there. See

https://www.iqasecur...ubmit.asp?dir=1

You may want to confirm if the FSMS Auditor is coming out from another country as this could end up being a very expensive exercise unless you arrange a joint audit with others. Alternatively, since IRCA and RABQSA are in collaboration, there is a better possibility that an RABQSA Auditor may be closer to you than an IRCA Food Auditor.

I would also like to draw the importance of auditor's credentials particularly in a new international standard where you do not want to end up with one of Wayne's Engineering friends as your Food Auditor. May I echo Simon's advice on this as well.

Yes we should be asking for the auditors credentials.

Hi Simon

After all they just want to pass the audit. whistling.gif

- Simon, I am not sure if this is the signal we would like to send out to the forum members if we are going to help maintain global standards. It would be a very wrong objective to just want to pass when we should be seeking continual improvements of our own FSMS from the valuable input of our external auditor which is exactly the reason why we need to ensure that we do have a competent auditor to help us do just that.

Charles

[Simon]

Hi Simon
- Simon, I am not sure if this is the signal we would like to send out to the forum members if we are going to help maintain global standards. It would be a very wrong objective to just want to pass when we should be seeking continual improvements of our own FSMS from the valuable input of our external auditor which is exactly the reason why we need to ensure that we do have a competent auditor to help us do just that.

In a 'perfect world' everyone would pursue certification for the right reason however, in the 'real world' we all know that isn't the case. Sure we should promote best practice on the forums, but in order to get a balanced debate sometimes I have to play devils advocate. I'm sure you'll agree it's a necessary role.

Thanks for your help on this topic Charles.

Regards,
Simon

[charlorne]

Thanks Simon and Charles for the inputs .. I am looking for accredited certification bodies who make use of qualified auditors to assess a ISO 22000:2005 food safety management system.
Auditor credential would of course be an important consideration .. would want to have an auditor with knowledge of the food industry and with specific experience with my products .. would not accept an auditor who is a star in auto parts production, for example.

Lorne
Icontec, the established (QMS) certification body from Bogota Colombia informed me that they are in a position to audit and certify FSMS to ISO 22000.
They have in fact forwarded their 3-page Formulario de Informacion previa certificacion de sistemas de gestion.

Lorne

To add to Icontec - Colombia, other certification bodies who have indicated capabilities to audit and certify FSMS are:

TUV - Canada

Moody International - UK

As with Icontec, they have provided the 'form' to request information for costing purposes.

Does anyone have 'real-life food safety' experience with the above CBs?

Cheers
Lorne

[Charles Chew]

Hi Simon,

I got lost in "PerfectWorld" for a little while but now that you have knocked some sense in me, the "RealWorld" is what we have to come to terms with.

Charles

[Charles.C]

Dear CharlesChew,

Actually, it is my own theory that the concept of 'continuous improvement' was created in order to enable the auditor to force the auditee to 'progress' to the former's 'PerfectWorld' (a state run by auditors according to ISO ?).
Perhaps a better objective would be to strive for the 'PerfectCompromise'.

Rgds / Charles.C

Added - Apologies Charlorne, this is getting off topic, to recap yr query was -

""Does anyone have 'real-life food safety' experience with the above CBs?""

Anybody ??

Edited by Charles.C, 03 September 2006 - 05:04 PM.

[chen]

Added - Apologies Charlorne, this is getting off topic, to recap yr query was -

""Does anyone have 'real-life food safety' experience with the above CBs?""

Anybody ??

Hi Charlorne,

I think competition had made most CB's more customer oriented. No harm asking them who are their Auditors and a brief CV of each of them. Also note that most online databases are seldom up todate.

Regards.

[Simon]

Also note that most online databases are seldom up todate.

In which case organisations who choose to list themselves in online food safety databases achieve a distinct marketing edge; especially when the database is 'world unique' such as the IFSQN Food Safety Standards Directory.

Regards,
Simon

[joyfranks]

In which case organisations who choose to list themselves in online food safety databases achieve a distinct marketing edge; especially when the database is 'world unique' such as the IFSQN Food Safety Standards Directory.

Regards,
Simon

Hi There,

I watch this with interest and am not convinced that IRCA registered auditors proves competance as required by ISO 22003 (still not released as yet due to issues with competant)

You should have the confidence in your chosen CB that they would only provide you with a competant auditor based on the 22003 requirements and the CB's own process for approving FSMS auditors. As a global organisation we have spent months identifiying and training competance auditors around the globe. Specilist codes relating to each type of industry sector controls who does what. An auditor for example may be competant to audit a bakery but not have the specilist code for example dairy. This ensures sector specify auditors are allocated to the right client.

Its not all negative guys !!

[charlorne]

Hi There,

I watch this with interest and am not convinced that IRCA registered auditors proves competance as required by ISO 22003 (still not released as yet due to issues with competant)

You should have the confidence in your chosen CB that they would only provide you with a competant auditor based on the 22003 requirements and the CB's own process for approving FSMS auditors. As a global organisation we have spent months identifiying and training competance auditors around the globe. Specilist codes relating to each type of industry sector controls who does what. An auditor for example may be competant to audit a bakery but not have the specilist code for example dairy. This ensures sector specify auditors are allocated to the right client.

Its not all negative guys !!

Right on .. It is not all negative guys !!!

It is not all that mysterious .. It is not all that difficult !!!

Cheers

Lorne

[wayne]

Dear All

In ISO22K, it is not the size of a CB but the experience together with his/her technical background counts. My engineering friend knows it too well that he will be out of the scene soon after the publication of ISO22003.

It is a worldwide problem; even the current training organisations for A/L auditor are confronting with similar problems. It would be nice if someone from a FSMS training organisation/ a competent food trainer could make comments on this.

Regards/Wayne

[charlorne]

Dear All

In ISO22K, it is not the size of a CB but the experience together with his/her technical background counts. My engineering friend knows it too well that he will be out of the scene soon after the publication of ISO22003.

It is a worldwide problem; even the current training organisations for A/L auditor are confronting with similar problems. It would be nice if someone from a FSMS training organisation/ a competent food trainer could make comments on this.

Regards/Wayne

Hello to All

Your concerns expressed above are certainly valid.
In fact, they are very similar to the auditing concerns that were expressed some years ago when the certifications of QMS to ISO 9001:2000 were at their peak.
Organizations were worried about getting an auditor that would be familar with their industry, their products and understand their way of doing things.

Since those early years of registration / certification activities, more than 500,000 organization worldwide have enjoyed the benefits of formal management systems.
For the most part, the auditing and certification of management systems whether they are Quality or Environmental or Food Safety or others follow a sequence of activities that have de-mystified the process and prepare all parties for the audit.

These are:

1. Auditors realize that they cannot be experts in all fields and recognize that the organization being audited is the expert in their business. They need to work with you and you need to work with auditors .. they are not the enemy.

2. As experts in the business, organizations describe their management system in a documented 'manual' that is submitted to a certification body well in advance of the certification audit.

3. The CB does a desk / documentation review of this system to confirm that it meets the intent of the ISO standard. If not, upgrading is required for implementation prior to the certification audit.

4. Upon confirmation that the system meets the intent of the standard, the standard itself (ISO 9001, or ISO 14001, or GMP, etc) is set aside and not used for auditing purposes.

5. The "Approved Manual" is the document that is used by the auditors to design checklists or other aids to conduct the certification audit.

6. This ensures that "No New Requirements" are introduced at the discretion of auditors so that the management system that is audited is one that the organization has been using for at least 3 months.

7. With a relatively new system in place, it is predictable that some non-conformances will surface. These are generally minor in nature and can be corrected relatively quickly.

8. With the corrections in place, the Registration Certificate is usually awarded by the CB within 1 month of the certification visit by the auditor.

.. Apologies for rambling on .. I know that lessons were learned with the certification of QMS and have reasons to believe that they can be applied to a FSMS.

Cheers and good luck !!

Lorne

[Charles.C]

Dear Charlorne,

Your analysis is certainly very proactive!.

I would like to make one comment which I suppose is a bit like Wayne's. One of the features of establishing a HACCP System is that it demands the combination of various specialisations. This is where, even with the best of intentions, I think it often gets misapplied. I find it difficult to see how auditors are logistically going to 'generalise / standardise' the food sector in the HACCP respect, hygiene-type factors mayyybe yes, but as for meat, vegetables, fish etc I have my doubts. BRC has also faced this type of difficulty in my opinion. I hope my fears are groundless, would be most interested to see some numerical sector data as described in JoyFranks post.

Rgds / Charles.C

[joyfranks]

Dear Charlorne,

Your analysis is certainly very proactive!.

I would like to make one comment which I suppose is a bit like Wayne's. One of the features of establishing a HACCP System is that it demands the combination of various specialisations. This is where, even with the best of intentions, I think it often gets misapplied. I find it difficult to see how auditors are logistically going to 'generalise / standardise' the food sector in the HACCP respect, hygiene-type factors mayyybe yes, but as for meat, vegetables, fish etc I have my doubts. BRC has also faced this type of difficulty in my opinion. I hope my fears are groundless, would be most interested to see some numerical sector data as described in JoyFranks post.

Rgds / Charles.C

Hi Charles,

What data do you think would be an advantage ? In my opinion we need to make sure our assessors are competant in each field, either from working in the industry sector or/and carrying out audits in the sector. To become signed off as an ISO 22000 auditor we have a very comprehensive process and all our assessors have to meet these requirements along with additional training and completion of test of understanding in application of ISO 22000. We are a global business and aim to have the same level of competance and understanding of application across the world.

Joy

[wayne]

Dear All

I do agree with Charles C. that food safety auditor needs a combination of a variety of specialisations -such as cropping systems /husbandry systems, postharvest systems, transformation systems and etc.

It is difficult to imagine those such as my engineering friend who takes a generalised approach (i.e. with a planned audit checklist) in assessing a food safety system (i.e. HACCP/ISO22000) even though he has received an intensive training and testing by his CB. He is regarded as the best among the food safety team but he has admitted that when C=0, he is totally lost.

A food safety system is not just a document; if the system is properly /professionally assessed, a risk/safety approach is needed along each part of the food supply chain within a defined system boundary. As risk factors are dynamic, an audit checklist is meaningless; in confronting with this situation, individual experience with strong technical background helps.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Regards/Wayne

[Charles.C]

Dear Joy,

Thanks yr invitation. I am completely ignorant of the standard auditorial approach to HACCP (if there is one) so my following query may be unanswerable. If so, please feel free to educate.
I presumed you would have some kind of internal specialisation with respect to product type since I could not see how one could assess a HACCP plan otherwise. Perhaps auditors don't agree with this statement ? Making the assumption, I was curious (a) as to the number of product categories you subdivide food into for auditorial purposes - possibly pre-determined in the case of BRC (?) but not for ISO22k I suppose ? and (b) the distribution of how many people are considered competent to audit X categories, eg suppose-

Category 1 - Raw Meat
Category 2 - Raw Seafood
Category 3 - Raw Vegetables
Category 15 - Cooked Seafood

Auditor GroupA can audit Nos 1,2 ie 2 Categories
Auditor Group B can audit Nos 1,2,3 ie 3 Categories
Auditor Group O can audit Nos 1,2,3,4….15 ie 15 Categories

Number of Auditors in Group A = ?
Number of Auditors in Group B = ?
Number of Auditors in Group O = ?

I realise it may not work this way, eg one has a General Purposes (Lead??) Auditor who uses a specialist auditor(s) / assistants on a given category to assist technically.
I have so far ignored the question of required depth of technical ability since it is a sort of corollary to the above (eg see Wayne above).
The question obviously has a geographical component also.

Rgds / Charles.C

Added - I subsequently saw the gigantically fine post of James Gibb in thread -
http://www.saferpak....?showtopic=4044

If representative, this extract partially answers my curiosity regarding his organisation's 'expected' knowledge base for ISO22k / FSMS auditors. Regardless, it depends to what depth words like 'post-secondary' and 'relevant' education mean however, to me, the expectations would appear of great difficulty if required to cover simultaneously more than a few product categories. As an aside, I was once picking the brains of a manager of a consultancy company who stated that he had 'many' people competent for ISO9k2k, maybe 10% of that for HACCP, and less than a handful for BRC. Don't know if this is globally typical ?

Edited by Charles.C, 12 September 2006 - 04:31 AM.

[charlorne]

Dear All

I do agree with Charles C. that food safety auditor needs a combination of a variety of specialisations -such as cropping systems /husbandry systems, postharvest systems, transformation systems and etc.

It is difficult to imagine those such as my engineering friend who takes a generalised approach (i.e. with a planned audit checklist) in assessing a food safety system (i.e. HACCP/ISO22000) even though he has received an intensive training and testing by his CB. He is regarded as the best among the food safety team but he has admitted that when C=0, he is totally lost.

A food safety system is not just a document; if the system is properly /professionally assessed, a risk/safety approach is needed along each part of the food supply chain within a defined system boundary. As risk factors are dynamic, an audit checklist is meaningless; in confronting with this situation, individual experience with strong technical background helps.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Regards/Wayne

Hello

ISO 22K is a management system where the word "Regulations" is mentioned a total of 14 times.
So it becomes the responsibility of the food producer to know exactly what regulations apply to the operations. With this knowledge, the food producer, who wishes to stay in the food business, is responsible to put in place the systems and methods to meet the regulatory requirements, some of which will be very special and complex, but very much part of the FSMS.
Yes, the food saftey management system auditor requires "individual experience with strong technical background" to properly assess this "specialized" food system. Knowledge of special areas, such as mentioned above .. cropping systems / husbandry systems, postharvest systems, transformation systems, etc. would no doudt be helpful.

However, what is important to note is that a food safety management system auditor is responsible to audit a management system which is a task that is very much systems oriented and not so much product related.
The auditor therfore should not be a "Food Inspector" and needs to leave that important and specialized task to Food Safety Inspection Agencies" who do very well with food safety issues such as customer complaints, product recalls, etc..

Cheers .. as you likely noticed .. I like to keep it "Simple"

Lorne

[joyfranks]

Hello

ISO 22K is a management system where the word "Regulations" is mentioned a total of 14 times.
So it becomes the responsibility of the food producer to know exactly what regulations apply to the operations. With this knowledge, the food producer, who wishes to stay in the food business, is responsible to put in place the systems and methods to meet the regulatory requirements, some of which will be very special and complex, but very much part of the FSMS.
Yes, the food saftey management system auditor requires "individual experience with strong technical background" to properly assess this "specialized" food system. Knowledge of special areas, such as mentioned above .. cropping systems / husbandry systems, postharvest systems, transformation systems, etc. would no doudt be helpful.

However, what is important to note is that a food safety management system auditor is responsible to audit a management system which is a task that is very much systems oriented and not so much product related.
The auditor therfore should not be a "Food Inspector" and needs to leave that important and specialized task to Food Safety Inspection Agencies" who do very well with food safety issues such as customer complaints, product recalls, etc..

Cheers .. as you likely noticed .. I like to keep it "Simple"

Lorne

Hi Again,

This debate could go on for sometime. ISO 22000 is the first ISO management system relating to food safety under guide 62 or now the new released ISO 17021 which replaced both guide 62 and guide 66 which is the QMS and EMS requirements for certification bodies ( but thats another debate).

My reason for mentioning this is because most other food safety standards are inspection based standards such as BRC, which come under guide 65 product certification. I am not a great believer in this as an auditor (in a past life) I did not feel that I was certifiing the product as i did not test the product myself, I just verified that the tests had been completed. The purpose of the audit or evaluation as known in BRC was to audit the processes to ensure safe food was produced NOT to certify the product as is with kitemark product certification for example, whereby the random samples are taken by the auditor at the time of the audit and sent to the test labs for conformity testing. I may be going off the point here, but to get back to basics, YES there is a difference in inspections and audits. Example we had a very competant person apply to audit ISO 22000 PHd in food science and stacks of expereince in environmental health inspections, was he granted the audit codes ??. NO as he did not have any auditing experience of management systems and this showed. Further training can get you to the required competance, however with ISO 22000 it requires very good audit and assessment skills as well as technical expertise in the sector because the standard requires you to carry out an audit and not follow a detailed checklist of you must wear a hairnet in the colour of blue with a black rim and must be worn over the ears and must be changed every day and must be put in the black bin in the right corner of the washroom on a MONDAY !!. Sorry but I hope you get my drift. its all about skills to assess RISK.

And to Charles, your view how the food categories are split is near enough spot on split into direct food production sectors and non direct food. The percentage of auditors meeting the requirements is low.

Worn out now !!!