[HeatherH]

Hello, I am curious to see if anyone has been through the SQF 2000 Audit with a similar story. Last month we received the book Audit, we received 100% we were told this was the first time the auditor had given 100% (I will tell you personally, we were glad to get a good score however we all knew we were far from 100%). This week he came to do our onsite audit, he spoke with one employee our plant supervisor and that was it. He was here two days he did a brief tour of the facility on day and spent the rest of the time in the conference room. We received the announcement we passed “with flying colors”. He was unable to give us a score but said we were almost at level 3 (we were aiming for level 1 and some were worried we would not make that). We are glad we passed, however let down at the same time. Is this how it will continue to be or did we just get a lazy auditor? Any info would be greatly appreciated.

[Simon]

Hi Heather, interesting story and one that strikes a chord with me.

I have a lot of experience with BRC and have seen many auditors of variable ability and work ethic. Some are extremely thorough arriving at 8.30 a.m. and leaving at 6.00 p.m. going through everything with a fine tooth comb finding lots of genuine nonconformities and opportunities for improvement. Some arrive at 10.00 a.m and leave at 3.00 p.m. with a nice long lunch in between. The result of both audits is usually the same e.g. a pass, but in my opinion the value of the former is infinitely higher if the company is serious about food safety and has a mindset of continuous improvement.

Of course we expect variability in everything, but such variability is concerning considering we are talking about auditors who are trained, competent and who operate to strict auditing protocols within an accreditation scheme. I accept companies would prefer the easy audit. If you are not happy complain.

Welcome to the forums.

Regards,
Simon

[HeatherH]

Simon,

Unfortunately I am not in a position to complain. We spoke with the practitioners who feel let down as well. We all just kind of feel as if we worked super hard, did weekend trainings and for what? I spent hours yesterday looking and looking and looking for what was supposed to happen. Every training we had we were told the auditor will not talk to the practitioners he is going to be asking you guys, you guys have to know this stuff. That’s why I wanted to see if anyone had actually been through this type of audit before and did your auditor follow through? There was absolutely NO integrity in this audit whatsoever. Thank you for your information however beings that Wal-mart requires this certificate I doubt anyone that could complain is going to loose sleep over this, it’s unfortunate however reality.

[Cathy]

You really should contact the Certification Body and if they don't respond adequately, contact the Accreditation Body who audits the CB. You have a right to do this. This was not an appropriate audit. 80% of the time is supposed to be in the facility - not an office. This is spelled out in the Criteria for Cerificaion Bodies. If you don't complain - and if one day this CB gets into more trouble - you could lose your certification along with other companies they have registered. Wal-mart might be requiring GFSI audits but you select the CB and that drives the quality of the audit. It seems you may need to select a different one. I conduct SQF Audits - and would never have done it as you have described and the CBs I work for would not allow it either.

This post has been edited by Cathy: 29 July 2010 - 04:06 PM

[HeatherH]

Cathy,
Thank you and that is what I thought. However I can't go around saying "you didn't even audit us" if I am not sure. We were all told (including upper management) that he would be on the floor talking with employees. We are all sitting around going ???????. Have you been through an SQF Audit?

[stsqf]

Thanks for sharing your story HeatherH! It is alarming to think that once a company is "SQF Certified" they are given sort of an "easier ride" with their customers in the fact they have less expectations of you once you are granted that certification - yet in fact, this is the type of audit these companies may have - unacceptable. I will feel completely let down as well if this happened to our company, we too have been working diligently towards this certification and all that hard work for a lazy auditor who doesn't look for anything?

Cathy has a really good point - even though it seems like calling the police to turn yourself in - you as a company will feel more comfort in the long run that you meet the required standards.

It would be nice to hear what happens when you contact the certification body about the issue... whether or not you are put through another audit, lose certification, etc.

[Charles.C]

Dear Heather,

I think you should consider yourself fortunate (I assume level 3 is better than level 1 ). The next audit will quite possibly be a detailed horror story. Are you going to complain about that also ?? The sad reality IMEX is like Simon's post, variability is to be expected.

One BRC auditor who came to do a factory audit for me did not even know that a "Book audit" (not compulsory) had already been done !

Rgds / Charles.C

[Simon]

HeatherH, on 29 July 2010 - 03:40 PM, said:

Simon,

Unfortunately I am not in a position to complain. We spoke with the practitioners who feel let down as well. We all just kind of feel as if we worked super hard, did weekend trainings and for what? I spent hours yesterday looking and looking and looking for what was supposed to happen. Every training we had we were told the auditor will not talk to the practitioners he is going to be asking you guys, you guys have to know this stuff. That’s why I wanted to see if anyone had actually been through this type of audit before and did your auditor follow through? There was absolutely NO integrity in this audit whatsoever. Thank you for your information however beings that Wal-mart requires this certificate I doubt anyone that could complain is going to loose sleep over this, it’s unfortunate however reality.

One thing to remember Heather all of the hard work you put in preparing and training all of the operators is not wasted, far from it.

Yes the auditor did not check it, so you feel that you could not show your hard work, however let's remember what this is all about first and foremost which is to have an effective FSMS that produces safe food products. Your hard work no doubt has increased your ability to do this.

You can complain or at least ask the certification body to clarify the scope of the audit – you can then compare theory with fact and take it from there. By the way you are the customer in this process.

I commend your company’s attitude, if there were more like you then food would be safer.

Regards,
Simon

[stsqf]

HeatherH - Shame on us in this field that have a conscience... We shall someday learn...

I completely agree that all the hard work put into preparing for these audits certainly pays off in the long run, but in the end, all you get is a piece of paper saying you passed. (Similar to a college degree except for they check up on you each year to see that you continue to apply what you learned, and if you don't they take the piece of paper away.)

In the end, money always talks - you pay all the expensive auditor fees in order to have "SQF Certified" tagged with your company name, whether or not you deserve it is at the discretion of each individual auditor.

[Charles.C]

Dear All,

There is a (slightly off-topic) corollary to the last few posts - do we believe that the introduction of the recent plethora of FSMS standards has / will make food safer ??

One reason for asking is that I believe the conclusion on the improvement of food "quality" following the introduction of ISO 9001 family has been negative or, perhaps more politely, unmeasurable. I remember seeing a detailed paper on this about 15 years ago and don't think I have seen any subsequent reports to the contrary.

One argument to dispute the (general) benefit of these safety schemes relates to the degree of randomness in so many causal events leading to major food incidents versus, say, events which can be ascribed to clear failures in GMP, critical points etc. (even the latter often demonstrate the significance of simple human error, practical / theoretical, whatever.)

There are undoubtedly certain well-known food safety failures whose control has been effectively achieved by applying HACCP procedures after the event but as to the preventive objective, I have yet to see any assessment of success or otherwise 30 years on. If one restricts the argument to GMP related logics perhaps the benefit is more apparent but the importance of these was, I think, already well appreciated prior to the introduction of HACCP.

@ Heather, apologies if I hv slightly hijacked yr original post, just seemed like too good an opportunity to resist. I can sympathise with yr frustration at being unable to demonstrate all the efforts which you have had to make to get yr system up and running but, believe me, the opposite case where the auditor goes nutty over items which you consider insignificant can be far worse / embarrassing. And unfortunately, IMO, the likelihood of the latter occurrence becomes ever more probable as time goes on and the requirement of continuous improvement demands the auditor to maintain his fault - finding score.

As you can see, i have considerable reservations regarding the "validity" of auditors.

Rgds / Charles.C

[HeatherH]

To all, I was let down due to the fact that our efforts were not recognized. However my concern is that this was not a "re-certification" and without knowing the areas we need to improved, if come next year we get a picky auditor. . . we will fail.

[tsmith7858]

HeatherH, on 30 July 2010 - 06:03 PM, said:

To all, I was let down due to the fact that our efforts were not recognized. However my concern is that this was not a "re-certification" and without knowing the areas we need to improved, if come next year we get a picky auditor. . . we will fail.

The good thing is, you have a system in place and you should be able to identify your deficiancies by using that system so keep working and improving things. The bad thing is the person you paid to help you through this did not do their job.

You should contact someone in the CB and discuss the issues. Let them know you were dissatified and that you need an explanation. If you don't get a good explanation, you have every right to change your CB before the re-cert.

If you choose to go that path, make sure you explain to the new CB why you are changing and your concerns from the audit. A good CB will be willing to help you get back on track to get your business.

Sorry the process let you down but take it from someone that goes through several 3rd party and customer audits a year, there are good auditors out there!