34 replies to this topic

[yorkshire]

Hello All

For the BRC we average about 6 weeks from audit to certificate issuing.
Last year's IFS it took 12 weeks. This year I'm up to 11 weeks and counting.......

How long does it take everyone else?

How does this affect people who depend on their certificates for supplier approval?

[Simon]

Hello All

For the BRC we average about 6 weeks from audit to certificate issuing.
Last year's IFS it took 12 weeks. This year I'm up to 11 weeks and counting.......

How long does it take everyone else?

How does this affect people who depend on their certificates for supplier approval?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Because this is such an important topic I've split it off from the IFS thread.

Your dead right Yorky such a delay could cause problems in terms of maintaining supplier approval status. When you consider the hard bit 'corrective actions' must be closed within 28 days (BRC/IOP - I presume the same for BRC and IFS) then such a delay on the certificate is totally unsatisfactory.

I'm not sure whether EN45011 Accreditation specifies any time limits for the Certification Body to issue the audit report and certificate; if it doesn't it really should.

6-12 weeks is just not good enough. I think its time to name and shame the Certification Bodies.

I've added a poll to the thread; unfortunately we can only have one poll. Please vote and also tell us which standard and which certification body.

Regards,
Simon

[yorkshire]

Simon,

As you say BRC requires all non conformances to be closed out withing 28 days of the audit. Some non conformances may take at least this time to sort out and hold up certification. With the BRC you are left details of the non conformances at the end of the audit and no report / certificate is issued until proof of corrective action has been received and reviewed by the audit company.

With the IFS the non conformances do not need to be closed out within 28 days. A corrective action report must be submitted, stating the action to be taken, timescale and person responsible, within 14 days of receiving the preliminary report. At the end of the IFS audit you are only given written details of Major and Critical non conformances and must wait for your preliminary report to know the exact details of other non conformances. In our case the preliminary report was received after 8 weeks by which time we had closed all the non conformances. Our response was sent back the same day as receiving the report but we are still waiting for the certificate.

[Simon]

I know some SDF members work for Certification Bodies. Anyone of you brave enough to tell us what your targets are and how you are performing?

Regards,
Simon

[Charles Chew]

I also like to know and meet up with BRC Registered and IRCA Food Registered (Not QMS) Auditors who can play a role in Asia particularly Malaysia.

Regards
CHalres CHew

[SAM]

I have only been involved in 2 BRC audits, the first audit took place at the start of November, we had our corrective actions, of which there were many, in within the 28 days, mid January, we had a request for further information, we finally got our certificate back mid February.

The second audit had a completely different type of auditor, we had about 6 minor issues, which we answered within the 28 days, and we had our certificate by mid January.

When challenged our certification body said that we should have the audit before it runs out to ensure that we are never without one, but if you go by that you are going to have to be audited every 9 months as the certificate goes by the audit date, not the date of issue.

Just another way of making more money out of us?

Nadine

[Simon]

I say a target of 28 days following receipt of Corrective Action should be easily achievable for the certificate. So far the poll and experience of members doesn't get anywhere near this.

What do other members reckon is a fair target? If we get enough response here we could write to UKAS.

Regards,
Simon

[SAM]

I think that if we are expected to get our corresctive actions completed after 28 days, then they should easily be able to review them in the same amount of time, it's not exactly rocket science is it?

Nadine.

[Simon]

I think that if we are expected to get our corresctive actions completed after 28 days, then they should easily be able to review them in the same amount of time, it's not exactly rocket science is it?

Nadine.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nope.

[yorkshire]

We got this year's IFS certificate after 11 weeks! Timing as follows:

Audit date - audit report 8 weeks
audit report - corrective action report 1 hour
corrective action report - certificate 3 weeks

At the end of the audit we know (unofficially) what non conformances we have but have to wait for the audit report to send our corrective actions through. If the end of audit report was the same as the BRC I believe we could knock 4 - 6 weeks off the certification time.

I have fedback my concerns over timing to HDE (Hauptverband des Deutschen Einzelhandels) . We will see what they think.

[garyandrews]

I think that if we are expected to get our corresctive actions completed after 28 days, then they should easily be able to review them in the same amount of time, it's not exactly rocket science is it?

Nadine.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have usually found it depends on that particular auditor when certification is granted. The longest I had wait was two months, the reason given that the auditor was carrying out a series of audits on the other side of the world and had not time to finish the report. Given the price incurred for an audit surely this timescale is not acceptable.

Regards,

Gary Andrews.

[Simon]

I sent the email below to UKAS this evening; I will post any feedback I get in due course.

I would be grateful if you could forward this email to interested Food Inspection scheme colleagues.  From your web site I believe this to be Prof Alastair Robertson and Pamela Beha.

###

I am the Editor of SaferPak.com a site dedicated to Business Improvement and Food Safety.  A recent discussion on our forums has brought to light a concerning level of service from (unnamed) Certification Bodies Accredited by UKAS to EN45011 for the BRC Global Standard schemes.  The link to the live discussion can be found at the following url: http://www.saferpak....=ST&f=28&t=1242. I have attached a print out of the thread as of today and I would be interested to hear your comments; in addition our members would specifically like to know:

- Is a maximum allowed time for the Certification Body to review corrective action and issue the certificate specified in EN 45011?  If not should this be considered?

- Are Certification Bodies measured on this important service performance indicator?

- If so, are figures available on current levels of performance?

I understand the thread also discusses the IFS Standard and possibly overseas Certification and Accreditation Bodies and I will be taking the same issue up with relevant interested parties separately.  SaferPak members are people who deal with the BRC Global Standards at grass routes and the consensus of opinion is they are very credible Certification Schemes.  I am sure you appreciate we wish them to remain so and this is the reason for informing you of this discussion.

I would be grateful of any feedback you could supply that I may also revert to our members.

[jamesgibb]

I sent the email below to UKAS this evening; I will post any feedback I get in due course.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Simon,

I work for a certification body Global Certification, we don't have UKAS accreditation for BRC but we do issue HACCP certification worldwide. We have an internal target that all visit reports recieved are reviewed and certification issued (provided there are no problems with the audit documentation) within 5 days, currently we average 3 working days for all certification (it is one of our KPI's). The time lag is normally a result of 2 factors

1 - the time taken to translate the audit documentation into English for review. (not a problem for most contributors to this thread)

2 - The time taken to get the corrective actions back from the client and verify actions accordingley.

we use a web based system (similar to FTP) to transfer reports and print the certificates direct from the website at a local office but as far as I know no other CB is this far advaced with IT.

The last HACCP cert issued by Global (today 24th August) was for the assessment on the 23rd July, the finished file was uploaded to Head office on 21st August This cert will arrive at the client in Tehran on Saturday the 27th August.

Typically we expect the certificate to arrive within a month of the assessment.

Any other CB's please feel free to comment.

By the way, don't expect a reply from UKAS until early November, their standard letter responding to requests from us is "we will contact you within 20 working days to deal with your request"

James Gibb My Webpage

[Simon]

Hi James,

It's reassuring that speed of the report/certificate is one of your companies KPI's and you report impressive although 'unverified' performance figures.

we use a web based system (similar to FTP) to transfer reports and print the certificates direct from the website at a local office but as far as I know no other CB is this far advanced with IT.

Excellent - very innovative!

I'll let you know if, what and when I get a reply from UKAS.

By the way the link to your May 05 newsletter is broken on your web site.

Regards,
Simon

[yorkshire]

I sent the email below to UKAS this evening; I will post any feedback I get in due course.

I look forward to their reply.

The contact details for the IFS are on their web site: www.food-care.info. It will be interesting to compare their replies.

Just out of interest on our IFS audit we had a minor non conformance because some of our suppliers BRC certificates had just gone out of date. How do we close this one out without getting the certificates the same day as the audit?

Edited by yorkshire, 25 August 2005 - 08:56 AM.

[jamesgibb]

I look forward to their reply.

The contact details for the IFS are on their web site: www.food-care.info. It will be interesting to compare their replies.

Just out of interest on our IFS audit we had a minor non conformance because some of our suppliers BRC certificates had just gone out of date. How do we close this one out without getting the certificates the same day as the audit?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Global have a link on the website where you can check the validity of a registration number (displayed on the certificates) by putting the number in the link.

I would happily accept this sort of confirmation of registration and most CB's have some sort of validation process either by phone call, web check or e mailing.

This is the same issue as a waste carriers license in the UK, I am happy to accept an e mail from the EA saying that the company is still registered.

This web check has the added benefit that if you suspect there may be a problem but the certificate doesn't expire for another 6 months if the registration has been cancelled (by either party) then the validity check will come back negative.

We are toying with the idea of not giving a hard copy certificate and simply an electronic version that you can verifiy automatically by clicking on an in built link but currently the market still want a piece of paper. (this would also hopefully reduce the time to get your new certificates)

For interest put in 63078232053 in the certificate check screen to see how easy it is to verify
My Webpage


James Gibb

[Charles Chew]

Global have a link on the website where you can check the validity of a registration number

Most CBs have this facility anyway which serves purely as historical information for verifying via an e-certificate. So its either you have it or you don't!

The world of internet technology is simply fantastic

Charles Chew

[Charles Chew]

Yorky,

I would consider either external and/or internal suppliers' audit as a review in reinforcing your Suppliers Assurance Program pending their re-certification.

Meanwhile, doing so, you would be reviewing compliant with external communication within your supply food chain, assuring food safety requirements and reivewing again the legality issues.


Charles Chew

[yorkshire]

Charles,

I think we are digressing from the timing issue slightly.

The non conformance for an out of date BRC certificate was a bit unfair on us. (What about our suppliers which don't have BRC...). If anyone can find a clause, in the IFS, which states that your suppliers need to have a BRC / IFS / ISO etc I'll buy them a pint of Guinness.

The IFS clause on supplier approval "4.6.1 The organisation shall have a system operate for approval and monitoring of its offices and departments and suppliers."

We have a system of supplier approval which not only includes methods such as audit, certification, questionnaire, but also history of supplier performance. Suppliers are continually assessed and any lapse in performance is investigated and a review is triggered. If there is no problem we review the suppliers every 3 years, part of which is the review of any certification and non conformances raised during the last certification audit. Nowhere in company policy does it say that we should hold a current certificate!

When we internally audit this system against the IFS we still don't get a non conformance!

However after 2 long days of auditing sometimes you just want it get home and are willing to accept anything?

[Simon]

The contact details for the IFS are on their web site: www.food-care.info. It will be interesting to compare their replies.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Cheers Yorky, I will contact them later.

[Charles Chew]

Yorky,

Agree with you on all that you had written. Base on your current procedure where you have a continuous assessment program on suppliers, I really do not agree with the issuance of an NCR by the auditor.

Apart from a need (if at all necessary) to ensure survellance over these "suppliers", documented records of assessment should really be good enough to demonstrate actions have been taken.

On my side, I have finally found an IRCA registered food auditor in my country who had just audited two of our companies and we are absolutely thrilled with him. There are not many truly qualified and experienced food auditors around who really understand food management systems.

If what you already have in your current rpocedure/system is not good enough, I will be damned.

CHarles Chew

[yorkshire]

On my side, I have finally found an IRCA registered food auditor in my country who had just audited two of our companies and we are absolutely thrilled with him. There are not many truly qualified and experienced food auditors around who really understand food management systems.

It's good to know that there are some decent auditors out there.

Our BRC auditor is also very good. He is very experienced and does not go over the top. He really does help identify weak spots and make us think about how we can improve our systems.

[Charles Chew]

Our BRC auditor is also very good.

Yes I know BRC Auditors in UK are highly qualified and the high standards and criteria expected before thy can be registered. Its no wonder why most retailers insists that the initial BRC audit in this part of the world has to be performed by an overseas BRC registered auditor.
Perhaps, most "BRC Registered Auditors" in Asian countries have not quite reached the technical level yet BUT we do have some really good ones around.

Great to know you have found one that meets your expectation.

Regards
Charles Chew

[Simon]

Below is the reply I received from UKAS earlier today. A quick and detailed reply. Let's hope it stimulates some action.

Any further comments?

Simon

Dear Simon

Your enquiry to our information desk has been forwarded to me for reply.

EN 45011 sets out the general requirements for bodies operating product certification systems. As such it deals with the general model where certification is continuous but subject to surveillance exercises with, depending on their nature, reasonable time being allowed for addressing nonconformities raised and for verifying the corrective actions taken. Schemes like the BRC ones are different in that there is effectively no surveillance but a complete re-evaluation for a new certificate (with a new re-evaluation date) every year (or other set interval). This obviously sets logistical problems for certification bodies. These schemes allow 28 days for submission of evidence of clearance of nonconformities and, without any time for effective verification and for re-submission of additional evidence, this simplistically means that evaluations have to be brought forward at least one month from the due day year-on-year if there is to be continuity of a valid certificate. This would not please suppliers.

Appreciating certifications bodies' difficulties, the timescales referred to in your discussion fora seem excessive - obviously there could be specific reasons for the delays that are not apparent in the discussions. There is no specific requirement in EN 45011 for turn-round times for processing corrective actions and guidance documents make no specific reference to this. However, specific requirements/guidance should not be needed. Certification bodies should know the needs of their clients and they are required by 45011 to resource their activities suitably and to carry out contract reviews for their work. If the operating protocol for the scheme is simply impractical, certification bodies certification bodies should have recognised this and advised the scheme owner (and potential clients) accordingly.

The timely fashion of all certification processes is covered in our assessments of the certification bodies we accredit but, as I am sure you will appreciate, information we gain during our activities is confidential and is not in any event collated in a way that could provide figures. This may be something that the scheme owner could comment on. Suppliers that are dissatisfied with the delivery of services should complain to the certification body in question and, if they are not happy with the response, complain to the scheme owner or to us.

We very much appreciate your feedback on this matter. The comments will be passed on to the relevant Assessment Managers so that they can be particularly mindful of the experiences of your forum participants when planning and conducting future assessments.

Please contact me again if there are any further issues you wish to bring to our attention.

Regards

John Abbiss
United Kingdom Accreditation Service

[jamesgibb]

Below is the reply I received from UKAS earlier today.  A quick and detailed reply. Let's hope it stimulates some action.

Any further comments?

Simon

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I suppose the solution is simple, if you're not happy with the service use someone else, The thing that always amazes me when carrying out an audit is that the auditee often forgets that they are the customer and as such have the rights afforded any customer.

any written complaint to a CB must be recorded and monitored, although UKAS cannot enforce a timescale on CB's they can raise issues that Corrective actions have not been effective to a number of complaints about late certificates.

We have determined that getting the certificate to the client is key for 2 reasons,

1 - they client often will not pay until they have the certificate so it is a financial pressure.

2 - the certification market (particularly in the far east) is very competitive so if you are not providing a very fast sfficient service you will be at a competitive diadvantage and will not get the re-certification contract.

It sounds as though the complaints being posted are where the auditor is at fault as opposed to the CB management and perhaps add a requirement to the contract that only full time auditors can carry out the audits (or don't let the auditor out of your site until he's typed up the report )